The Abhibhāyatanāni, Vimokkhā, Kasiṇa and Dhātus - A new Perspective

Discussion
1

For quite some time now I have been interested in the Eight Spheres of Mastery (Abhibhāyatanāni), the Eight Liberations (Vimokkhā), the Kasiṇas and the 6 element meditations. Apart from the elements these teachings are quite obscure in the suttas, only appearing a handful of times and with very little information on them. The Theravādin commentaries obviously do give an explanation. There the Kasiṇas are taught to be a mental image that one develops by grasping the sign of an element or colour, either in a disc or a flame or more naturally in the ground, or trees etc. One perfectly remembers the disc (which is for a beginner), which is the learning sign, in one’s mind. This is taken as the meditation object, until a counterpart image appears which fills one’s perception and leads to Jhāna. The Theravādin commentarial tradition then sees the teachings on the Spheres of Mastery and Liberations as being connected to Kasiṇa meditation. In the Atthasālinī Venerable Buddhaghosa says that in terms of the Abhibhāyatanāni and Vimokkhā one is seeing the Kasiṇa by grasping the colour of different body parts (blue of the eye, for example). This is “perceiving form internally, sees form externally”. The limited and unlimited refers to the extension of the sign, whilst beautiful or ugly refers to the colour of the disc or image. The section on seeing blue etc is interpreted as referring back to this. I find this explanation however somewhat lacking. It doesn’t seem to fit well, since the overall thrust of the Abhibhāyatanāni seems to be about controlling our reaction to sense experience and indeed sutta AN 8.119 states that the Spheres of Mastery are for insight into “lust”. The mention of “beautiful or ugly” also reminds us of the insights the Buddha had upon his awakening, where one of his knowledges was how beings pass away and are reborn either “beautiful or ugly”. The mention of the word “limitless” further hints at the 4 brahmavihārās and indeed the Paṭisambhidāmagga makes this connection when discussing the Eight Liberations, where “intent on the beautiful” is interpreted as referring to the culmination of loving-kindness (a view also shared by SN 46.54). Interestingly in the Atthasālinī Venerable Buddhaghosa disagrees with this interpretation. It is also interesting to note that the Atthasālinī states that the Eight Spheres of Mastery and the Eight Liberations are “according to the sutta method” whilst the Kasiṇas, as taught in the commentaries and so the Atthasālinī and Visuddhimagga, are according to the “Abhidhamma method”. I take this to mean that what is stated briefly in the suttas is stated clearly and, of course, more technically in the Abhidhamma and commentaries. It is by taking this view however that I feel the Theravādin tradition has missed the deeper implication of these meditations.

For another point of view, still Abhidharmic, we can look to the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Śāstra which, despite it being claimed to have been written by Venerable Nāgārjuna, possibly instead came from a Sarvāstivāda-Vaibhāṣika monk or nun who converted to Mahāyāna. There we see a more clear link with controlling our reactions to experience. In that text it is stated that Liberations 1-2 and the Spheres of Mastery 1-4 are to do with foulness meditation. Only when we get to Liberation 3 (the beautiful) and Spheres of Mastery dealing with colours do we arrive at Jhāna and the Kasiṇas, which are performed when in the 4th Jhāna. I found this to be a somewhat better explanation, but still there are some issues. If we take the Eight Spheres of Mastery as a whole, the whole thrust seems to relate to, as I said, sense restraint. It seems strange then to jump suddenly to the colour Kasiṇas, and it’s strange that the 4 elemental Kasiṇas aren’t mentioned at all. Could it be then that the colours actually mean something else? Interestingly, the Pāli word used in the text is “vaṇṇa”. Whilst vaṇṇa can mean “colour” it can also mean the colour of one’s skin, appearance or “caste”. Could it be then that the colours in the Spheres of Mastery aren’t actually colours at all, and so aren’t anything to do with colour Kasiṇas, but instead are about different types of people? This would be in-keeping with the view that the practice is about our reactions to people, but is there any basis for this? Well, interestingly enough in Brahminism each of the castes is associated with a certain colour. And guess what? The colours associated with each caste actually matches the colours that we see in the Spheres of Mastery:

“Not perceiving form internally, someone sees visions externally, blue, with blue colour, blue hue, and blue tint…yellow…red…white”

“The Mahabharata, whose final version is estimated to have been completed by the end of the fourth century, discusses the varna system in section 12.181, presenting two models. The first model describes varna as a colour-based system, through a character named Bhrigu, “Brahmins varna was white, Kshatriyas was red, Vaishyas was yellow, and the Shudras’ black”.

Caste system in India - Wikipedia

Black is an exception, but quite close since “blue” in the Spheres of Mastery (nīla) can also mean “dark blue”.

Now there is an interesting sutta on the Eight Bases of Mastery which states the following:

“The best of these dimensions of mastery is when someone, not perceiving form internally, sees forms externally, white, with white colour, white hue, and white tint.” – AN 10.29

Here we see “white” as being the best kind of colour, which matches exactly with the Brahmin caste who, of course, saw themselves as best. This then clearly links the Eight Spheres of Mastery with overcoming our reactions to different types of people. They are about developing loving-kindness or Foulness perceptions in relation to those whom we find attractive or loathsome, to all the different classes or, as it was back then, castes of people we come across in life. This would then tie into the beautiful and formless liberations as the suttas link those with the 4 brahmavihārās. The culmination of metta, through the spheres of mastery and liberations 1 & 2, is “the beautiful” which then leads to compassion and culmination in the sphere of Infinite Space. Now an objection might be raised that we do find the colours amongst the list of the Kasiṇas, but is this a later attribution? Yin Shun argued that the 6 elements are linked with the 4 element Kasiṇas and the 2 lower formless attainments (and that the Sphere of Nothingness and Neither-Perception-Nor-Non-Perception were added onto them to make a neat categorical list). Indeed, if we look at the 6 elements and the Kasiṇas we do see an obvious link. The earth element with the earth Kasiṇa, the space element and conciousness element with Infinite Space and Infinite conciousness. If then the link between the 4 brahmavihārās/foulness meditation was forgotten later on, and the Eight Spheres of Mastery and Eight Liberations was seen through the lens of later Kasiṇa practice by the traditions, then it’s possible the colour Kasiṇas were added to the original set of 6 Kasiṇas. We could further speculate that originally element meditation and Kasiṇa meditation (minus the colours) were linked as one practice, whilst foulness and the 4 brahmavihārās were linked with the Eight Spheres of Mastery and Eight Liberations as a separate practice.

As a final note I should say I haven’t researched this in detail. I’m an amateur, and obviously my argument rests upon something I have read on a Wikipedia article. I think though there are some good grounds for considering what I’ve wrote here and exploring it further.

2 Likes
2

Thank you for starting this discussion; you’ve made some great points!

I asked if the 8 liberations were Brahmanical in this thread. You connecting the colors to the caste system and types of people strengthens this connection in a different way. The Buddha was not in the business of classifying and organizing people into different types of fixed colors, but this type of organization system certainly existed among the brahmins and some sramanas and could have been an understood reference to types of beings.

One question I have about the asubha / brahmavihāra interpretation is how the lower 2 can be ‘vimokkhā.’ Each level has to have a culminating state in which one is ‘liberated.’ I.e. it has to be a stable meditative state, or so it seems. So a plain contemplation doesn’t seem to be enough unless there is something characterizing it in my mind.

Other questions are:

  • Why does one drop the internal and rest on the external? One cannot see real people in secluded meditation. It would make more sense to practice internally/externally, then more just inward for all bodies or something.
  • Why is it stated as if one picks a color and stays with it to culminate in the liberation? If it were meant to be for general people, this seems problematic, especially if it is a classification of caste or souls where one is only focusing on one group of people.

In my opinion, we should see these as types of element / kasina meditations as well. I already discussed this some in my post, but there are more reasons to think so I find.

At SN 14.11, the Buddha lists 7 dhātu, or properties/elements:

The element of light, the element of beauty, the element of the dimension of infinite space, the element of the dimension of infinite consciousness, the element of the dimension of nothingness, the element of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, and the element of the cessation of perception and feeling.

Couple of things to note:

  • This goes from beauty (subha) to infinite space, and then to the exact same list as the 8 liberations
  • Before beauty, it mentions light (ābhā) which is a type of ‘rūpa’ that one can see associated with deep meditation, as mentioned in the 2nd liberation

Personally, I’m thinking that the first liberation is a more coarse elemental meditation, like earth for instance, and associated with one’s own body. Once one has gained stability in this, they move to a more refined and disembodied one, like color (or light generally; color is light). Then they transition into ‘the beautiful’ and then into infinite space and move from there. As I pointed out in my post, there’s an association between ‘white’ and deep jhāna and the apex of kasinas, so I think there may be a gradual progression into a state of stable liberation for each stage.

Also, note that there is a correspondence with DN 15’s stations of consciousness and the 8 liberations. The gods of refulgent beauty (subhakinhā) are right before the station of infinite space. And these are Brahmā deities associated with the brahmavihāras. There is an explicit connection between the brahmavihāras and the formless attainments as you already pointed out, so I think all of this is significant.

Finally, I find it important to remember that ‘kasina’ means totality and is clearly connected to the formless attainments of infinite space, consciousness, etc. I think the elements and colors must be practiced in the same way, and this is part of what allows for the smooth transition into formlessness.

EDIT: Also, at MN 102 there is a potentially earlier(?) description of jhāna-meditation. It goes from the rapture of seclusion, to spiritual bliss, to neutral feeling. So here too we have 3 stages, as in the 8 liberations, before the formless attainments could arise (which traditionally come after fourth jhāna, ‘neutral feeling’).

Just spitballing some here.
Mettā! :slight_smile:

1 Like
3

The Jains had a similar system with their “Leśyā”

I shall deliver in due order the Lecture on Leśyā; hear the nature of the six Leśyās (produced by) Karman. (1) Hear 1. the names, 2. colours, 3. tastes, 4. smells, 5. touches, 6. degrees, 7. character, 8. variety, 9. duration, 10. result, and 11. life of the Leśyās. (2)

  1. They are named in the following order: black, blue, grey, red, yellow, and white. (3)

  2. The black Leśyā has the colour of a rain-cloud, a buffalo’s horn, (the fruit of) Riṣṭaka[1], or the eye of the wagtail. (4)

The blue Leśyā has the colour of the blue Aśoka[2], the tail of the Casha[3], or of lapis lazuli. (5)

The grey Leśyā has the colour of the flower of Atasī[4], the feathers of the Kokila, or the collar of pigeons. (6)

The red Leśyā has the colour of vermilion, the rising sun, or the bill of a parrot. (7)

The yellow Leśyā has the colour of orpiment, turmeric, or the flowers of Śaṇa[5] and Asana[6]. (8)

The white Leśyā has the colour of a conch-shell, the aṅka-stone[7], Kunda-flowers[8], flowing milk, silver, or a necklace of pearls. (9)

Notes regarding Leśyā:
[Note: The leśyās (‘adhyavasāya viśeṣāḥ’) are different conditions produced in the soul by the influence of different Karman; they are therefore not dependent on the nature of the soul, but on the Karman which accompanies the soul, and are, as it were, the reflection of the Karman on the soul, as stated in the following verse from the Avacūri:

kṛṣṇādidravyasācivyāt pariṇāmo ya ātmanaḥ |
spaṭikasyeva tatrāyaṃ leśyāśabdaḥ pravartate ||

“The alteration produced on the soul, just as on a crystal by the presence of black things, &c., is denoted by the word leśyā.”

The leśyā, or, according to the above explanation, what produces Leśyā, is a subtile substance accompanying the soul; to it are attributed the qualities described in this lecture.—The word lesā is derived from kleśa; this etymology appears rather fanciful, but I think it may be right. For the leśyā seem to be the kleśas, which affect the soul, conceived as a kind of substance. The Sanskrit term leśyā is of course a hybrid word. It must, however, be stated that lesā occurs also in the meaning “colour”, e.g. Sūtrakṛt. I, 6, 13, and that the Prākṛt of klesa is kileśa.]

We also see this in a sutta, ascribed to Pūraṇa Kassapa

Sir, Pūraṇa Kassapa describes six classes of rebirth: black, blue, red, yellow, white, and ultimate white.

AN 6.57

So here colours are assigned to different people based on their levels of virtue. This could also be linked to how we react to said people, lust or hate etc.

I’ll respond to the rest of your post soon :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like
4

Classifying people via way of colours seems to have been quite common to both Brahminism and Jainism, and we could infer that it was quite common to the other samaṇa traditions too. That the Abhibhāyatanāni occur most often in the AN is quite telling I think, since the AN was aimed more at popular teachings. If this is how most people understood things, it makes sense to see it more there.

One question I have about the asubha / brahmavihāra interpretation is how the lower 2 can be ‘vimokkhā.’ Each level has to have a culminating state in which one is ‘liberated.’ I.e. it has to be a stable meditative state, or so it seems. So a plain contemplation doesn’t seem to be enough unless there is something characterizing it in my mind.

Other questions are:

  • Why does one drop the internal and rest on the external? One cannot see real people in secluded meditation. It would make more sense to practice internally/externally, then more just inward for all bodies or something.
  • Why is it stated as if one picks a color and stays with it to culminate in the liberation? If it were meant to be for general people, this seems problematic, especially if it is a classification of caste or souls where one is only focusing on one group of people.

I think it helps if we start with the formless liberations. With Infinite Conciousness one is free from (liberated from) notions of Infinite Space. With Infinite Space one is free from notions of form. This gives us a basis for attempting to work out liberations 1-3. If one is liberated from form for Infinite Space, then “being intent on the beautiful” must refer to the rūpa realm, i.e. the Jhānas. Now we also know that the “beautiful” can refer to the 3rd Jhāna, based on the cosmology and other statements in the suttas. Interestingly, in DN 24 the beautiful liberation is mentioned

He says, “When one enters and remains in the liberation of the beautiful, at that time one only perceives what is ugly.”’

But I don’t say that. I say this: ‘When one enters and remains in the liberation of the beautiful, at that time one only perceives what is beautiful.’”

So we could deduce that the 3rd liberation is the 3rd Jhāna, and in this Jhāna one no longer sees what is “ugly” (or foul) but only what is “beautiful”. I think perhaps “foul” here doesn’t refer to corpses and the like, but rather hostile people. This takes us back to loving-kindness. It’s also interesting to note that in the 3rd Jhāna there is only sukha and equanimity, both of which could be said to be “beautiful” mental qualities. Sukha of course in Jhāna being non-material (not based on delightful sounds, tastes, sights etc) in nature as per SN 36.31 (the same for rapture). It would be easy to see then how loving-kindness, a non-material feeling or notion, can be tied up with non-material rapture and sukha. This would then mean that liberations 1 & 2 are to do with the 1st and 2nd Jhāna, as are all of the Spheres of Mastery. The Sarvāstivādin-Vaibhāṣikas also had this view, as outlined in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Śāstra

In general, the vimokṣas are the gateway into the abhibus, which in turn are the gateway into the kṛtsnas. The vimokṣas are ‘complete emancipation’ (vimokṣamātra) from the object. The abhibhus exert a twofold mastery (abhibhavana) over the object, entailing the view of the object as one wishes it (yatheṣṭam adhimokṣaḥ) and the absence of the negative emotion provoked by the object (kleśānutpatti). The kṛtsnas embrace the object without a gap and in its totality (nirantarakṛtsnaspharaṇa). All are derived from the dhyānas and the samāpattis.

A. Vimokṣas 1–3, eight abhibhus and kṛtsnas 1–8.

  1. In nature they are the five skandhas and they have as object the visibles of kāmadhātu.

  2. Vimokṣas 1–2 and abhibhus 1–4 are contemplations of the horrible (aśubhabhāvana), i.e., of the decomposing corpse, and are practiced in the 1st and 2nd dhyānas. When practiced in the first, they counteract attachment to color (varṇarāga) of kāmadhātu; when practiced in the second, they counteract attachment to color of the first dhyāna.

  3. In vimokṣaṣ 1 and abhibhus 1–2, the ascetic still has the notion of inner visibles, those of his own body; in vimokṣa 2 and abhibhus 3–4, he no longer has them. But in all cases, he contemplates unpleasant outer visibles (amanojñā), less numerous (parītta) in abhibhus 1 and 3, numerous (mahodgata or paramāna) in abhibhus 2 and 4.

  4. Vimokṣa 3, abhibhus 5–8 and kṛtsnas 1–8 are contemplations on the beautiful (śubhabhāvana) and are practiced exclusively in the 4th dhyāna. No longer having the notion of inner visibles, the ascetic contemplates the outer pleasant visibles (manojñā) of kāmadhātu: in vimokṣa 3, the beautiful (śubha) in general, which he actualizes (kāyena sākādātkaroti); in abhibhus 5–8 and kṛtsnas 5–8, the four pure colors (blue, yellow, red and white); in kṛtsnas 1–4, the four great elements (earth, water, fire and wind).

Preliminary note to liberations, masteries and totalities (wisdomlib.org)

Of course, this requires that we put aside the view that the Jhānas are states of being completely absorbed into one perception. The Sarvāstivādin tradition, depending on the source, takes contradictory views on this but from the perspective of whomever wrote the above, whilst in Jhāna one can still have notions of one’s own body and of externals. This would also tie things in with statements in the suttas/sutras regarding contemplating “internally and externally”. It seems then that Liberation 1 and Spheres of Mastery 1-2 are performed whilst in the 1st Jhāna. One examines oneself and what is external (people) via vitakka-vicāra. Given that vitakka-vicāra can be synonymous with saṅkappa, which places them closer to intentions, and given that Sammā-Saṅkappa involves the wholesome thoughts/intentions of renunciation, freedom from ill will and harmlessness we can see another clear connection here with loving-kindness. Based on this interpretation Liberation 1 and Spheres of Mastery 1-2 would be where one is developing loving-kindness by way of vitakka-vicāra both towards oneself and others (internally and externally). Liberation 2 and Spheres of Mastery 3-4 then would be when vitakka-vicāra is dropped, and instead of comparing oneself to others with loving-kindness there simply remains limitless loving-kindness where the barriers between self and other, internal and external, have broken down. This naturally then moves to “the beautiful” where all that is left is pure mettā and mental bliss. What then of the colours? Well, in my OP I don’t think they refer to colour Kasiṇas but rather different classes of people. Each colour represents a different caste, 4 in total. What is the aim of loving-kindness meditation? To spread good-will to people in all the directions. I think this is what the colours are about in the Spheres of Mastery.

Personally, I’m thinking that the first liberation is a more coarse elemental meditation, like earth for instance, and associated with one’s own body. Once one has gained stability in this, they move to a more refined and disembodied one, like color (or light generally; color is light). Then they transition into ‘the beautiful’ and then into infinite space and move from there. As I pointed out in my post, there’s an association between ‘white’ and deep jhāna and the apex of kasinas, so I think there may be a gradual progression into a state of stable liberation for each stage.

I think you could possibly make this work with element meditation and the original 6 Kasiṇas. You analyse your own body in terms of the elements both internally and externally, whilst in the 1st Jhāna (Liberation 1, SoM 1-2). With the fading of vitakka-vicāra the internal/external distinction is removed, leaving only “earth element”. This then becomes the earth Kasiṇa in the 3rd or 4th Jhāna. A note on this. I’m beginning to think that rather than gazing upon a disc, or a mound of earth, to develop an eidetic memory of said object the earth Kasiṇa is instead about non-attention to what is already present, and so is expansive but in a different way. MN 121 heavily suggests this. There, to obtain the earth Kasiṇa one stops paying attention to anything else that is around them except the earth element. To bring this back to the topic then, in Liberation 2 and SoM 3-4 whilst in the 2nd Jhāna the distinction between us and others is removed, leaving only “earth element”. In Liberation 3 and SoM 5-8 this is extended everywhere, to everything we see or people we meet, leading to the earth Kasiṇa. From this we can then stop paying attention to even the earth element and so forms, and enter into Infinite Space by instead paying attention to the space in which the forms are contained. Next, we stop paying attention to Infinite Space by instead paying attention to the Conciousness in which Space is contained. Support for seeing this both in terms of the brahmavihārās or element meditation, or even foulness meditation can be found in AN 6.41:

“Friends, if he wanted to, a monk with psychic power, having attained mastery of his mind, could will that wood pile to be nothing but earth. Why is that? There is earth-property in that wood pile, in dependence on which he could will that wood pile to be nothing but earth.

“If he wanted to, a monk with psychic power, having attained mastery of his mind, could will that wood pile to be nothing but water… fire… wind… beautiful… unattractive. Why is that? There is the property of the unattractive in that wood pile, in dependence on which he could will that wood pile to be nothing but unattractive.”

So here we have an external object which, due to a mastery of the mind, one can perceive in anyway one likes. Elements, beautiful or foul. This is what the Liberations, Spheres of Mastery and Kasiṇas are all about. When one can do this at will, then they have developed the following spiritual power:

“Monks, from time to time it is good for a monk to dwell perceiving the non-repulsive as repulsive. Monks, from time to time it is good for a monk to dwell perceiving the repulsive as non-repulsive. Monks, from time to time it is good for a monk to dwell perceiving both non-repulsive and repulsive as repulsive. Monks, from time to time it is good for a monk to dwell perceiving both repulsive and non-repulsive as non-repulsive. Monks, from time to time it is good for a monk to circumvent both repulsive and non-repulsive and dwell equanimous, mindful, and clearly aware.

Perhaps even the above is just another formulation of the Liberations and SoM.

At SN 14.11, the Buddha lists 7 dhātu, or properties/elements:

The element of light, the element of beauty, the element of the dimension of infinite space, the element of the dimension of infinite consciousness, the element of the dimension of nothingness, the element of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, and the element of the cessation of perception and feeling.

I think we could also view these in light of the above. The element of light comes to be due to darkness. What are the hindrances? Obstructers of vision, or darkness. The “light” then is the 1st two Jhānas, beauty is the 3rd and 4th and then we have the formless.

1 Like
5

This also gives us an idea of what the difference is between the 3 realms. At the level of the Kāmaloka there is no mastery of the mind, no mastery of one’s perceptions. Here beings only perceive what they desire which obstructs their vision. They are bound to it. However when the hindrances are overcome and Jhāna begins then beings can see form as they wish be that in terms of pure elements, or in terms of their good aspects or foulness, since desire no longer dominates their mind and clouds their vision. This is the Rūpaloka. Here one still sees external forms, but they can see them as they wish. Finally, with said mastery over perception and with increasing equanimity, one can cease paying attention to forms altogether and enter the Arūpaloka.

1 Like
6

I remember this being a mystery to me before, and I had read it as a support for the traditional Theravādin view of Jhāna, but could we see it another way?

There are sentient beings that are diverse in body and diverse in perception, such as human beings, some gods, and some beings in the underworld.

Beings in this realm are in the Kāmaloka. Here desire rules. There are diverse people, good and bad, and diverse feelings such as lust or ill-will.

There are sentient beings that are diverse in body and unified in perception, such as the gods reborn in Brahmā’s Host through the first absorption.

With the abandoning of the hindrances one develops loving-kindness (unified perception) in regards to oneself and others (diverse in body). Being free from the darkness of the hindrances, one begins to see form as one wishes. One is becoming a master of perception and the mind.

There are sentient beings that are unified in body and diverse in perception, such as the gods of streaming radiance.

With the abandoning of vitakka-vicāra there is no longer a distinction between oneself and others (unified in body), but there is a diverse perception of loving-kindness to all the different forms (beings) one meets. One has now completely mastery over seeing forms in whatever way one likes.

There are sentient beings that are unified in body and unified in perception, such as the gods replete with glory.

Entry with the abandoning of rapture one enters into the 3rd and 4th Jhāna. Here there is still no distinction between self and other (unified in body) nor is there a distinction between forms (unified in perception). Instead one simply sees everything as beauty, or as earth, or water. One doesn’t pay attention to anything else except beauty (mettā) or an element. Loving-kindness is completely boundless, everywhere or the earth element or water element is completely boundless, everywhere. For those meditating based on the elements, the 4 elemental Kasiṇas come to be.

There are sentient beings that have gone totally beyond perceptions of form. With the ending of perceptions of impingement, not focusing on perceptions of diversity, aware that ‘space is infinite’, they have been reborn in the dimension of infinite space.

With total mastery of perception and with highly developed equanimity, one ceases paying attention to beauty or the totality of the earth and instead pays attention exclusively to the space which contains everything.

There are sentient beings that have gone totally beyond the dimension of infinite space. Aware that ‘consciousness is infinite’, they have been reborn in the dimension of infinite consciousness.

Here one now shifts attention away from space and to the conciousness which contains space.

On the final two formless attainments, I’m unsure if they are part of the original set or a later addition.

I think we can say that all of these practices are Brahmin in origin, and they all involve a high degree of control over one’s attention and perceptions. All of this makes me think though, where does mindfulness of breathing fit into all this? Was this Brahmin in origin as well? How does mindfulness of breathing involve a control over perception, of contemplating internally and externally, like these other practices? Is it a different way of practicing altogether?

1 Like
7

Yes, I think this much is undebatable for all kinds of grounds across the suttas. What’s interesting of course is that the 3rd jhāna is not usually the state one transitions to the formless states from. But it does make sense. Considering the 4th jhāna is qualitatively the same as the formless states in terms of neutral feeling and equanimity, the only difference between the 4th jhāna and the āyatana of infinite space is the perception. Either way one must make the transition to equanimity/neutral feeling. So considering all of this, I think that it makes the most sense to equate the beautiful with the 3rd jhāna, or something akin to it qualitatively (sukha feeling in the rūpa realm-like consciousness).

I think it’s important to remember the distinction the suttas make between these two states just as their connection is relevant.

Being intent on the beautiful (subha) is said to be the culmination of mettā meditation/cetovimutti. They are not said to be the same. We can know this when we look at the other culminations: the culmination of karuṇā is the domain of infinite space. We all agree that compassion meditation and the domain of infinite space are not the same. The point then is that the liberation of the mind via compassion culminates in that state, and the same is true of mettā. Suffice to say, we cannot equate the 3rd vimokkhā with mettā cetovimutti; we can only establish that mettā practice can lead there.

Yes, I find this likely as well. I think it’s significant that they aren’t described in the same way as the jhānas as a side note, almost certainly due to their non-Buddhist origins IMO. The de-mystified analysis of consciousness and mental states in various stages of refinement (jhāna) is very Buddhist. Being intent on the element of beauty or light is more reminiscent of practices explicitly connected to the divine, as in Brahmanism. The Buddha doesn’t deny the connection, he just tends to describe it analytically.

Anyway,

This is an interesting note. I find this convincing. I don’t think it would be phrased this way in Early Buddhism (liberation from an object), but the gradual refinement/cessation of perceptions and consciousness is certainly a major meditative theme, and the objects or perceptions in meditation are directly related.

Good connection!

To be honest, I find this a little bit of a stretch for my mind, but I also recognize it’s 100% possible. It makes a lot of sense, but it’s also just very removed from the normal approach to Buddhist praxis in some sense. Of course this would be explained by the pre-Buddhist origins of these we’ve discussed.

But I feel like the visualization of different people is a bit odd. My instinctual way to relate to these is via the element kasinas, say earth. One’s body has the earth element, as does the outside world. So one begins meditation by focusing on this element (which is rūpa) internally/externally. Then one dissolves the barrier into the totality (kasina) of the earth element completely, removing the idea of the meditator ‘being possessed of form’ and instead just perceiving ‘earth.’ Then one focuses on the bliss and beautiful experience of samādhi in the 2nd liberation to enter the refined beautiful liberation. You essentially described the same ideas below.

I do recognize that this misses the connection with mettā though that we would expect. So maybe you’re right, and it is a mettā/brahmavihāra practice as you described: aware of oneself (internally) and other beings (externally) one cultivates mettā; one refines that into the pure radiation (light!) of mettā without distinction; then one focuses solely on the beautiful qualities of mind and samādhi to drop that perception and be intent on the beautiful; then one calms even that pleasant feeling / perception into just infinite space with no form and neutral feeling.

Good reference again! Yes, I think that we have both realized this can work with elements, colors, or the brahmavihāras (incl. potentially asubha). And no surprise, we find all of these practices intricately related in unspoken ways. Also, the approach of all of these practices is so different from the standard Buddhist one with e.g. the satipatthānas, the bojjhangā, the jhānas, etc., and yet it remains the same in many other ways. So I find all of the background context helps solidify what we’ve described as very likely.

Agreed! And I agree that this must be related to the stock passage on the repulsive/unrepulsive etc. I think we’ve gotten to the bottom of it!

Yeah, this makes sense. I also think the ‘light’ is clearly related to actual visual light as well, as in the stock phrase of ‘obhāsa’ and ‘rūpa’ going together — light and forms. Rūpa is also the word for appearance or a sight (the object of the eye). Many Vedic scholars understand it as the visual shape/appearance of something, as is often the case in Buddhism (and hence the translation ‘form’).

I think the unification of perception is that one sees all beings equally with e.g. mettā, but there are still distinct beings (rūpā), i.e. the internal-external split which is found in 1st jhāna as well with vitakka-vicāra.

Your explanations do make sense as well though. It may not map perfectly 1-1 in only one way. But I think you’ve captured the general sentiment!

I think they fit right in.

From conscious awareness, one realizes that even that perception of self-aware consciousness is a perception. So one drops that, leaving the percept of nothing at all (perceiving ‘there is nothing’). Some, like Ālāra Kālāma, would take this to be the final goal because there is nothing left—it is before consciousness itself and thus the most primordial state. Others recognized there was still perception there, but due to their attachments to identity and awareness on a very subtle level, reached neither-perception-nor-non-perception, which has only a residue of conditioned phenomena (mentioned in the 7 element sutta) and is not even a full station of consciousness. The Buddha could relinquish everything and got to cessation, so saññāvedayitanirodha is certainly his addition.

It would make sense if the latter two before cessation were not always there considering some teachers had not reached such high states. But I imagine they existed in some circles the Buddha was familiar with.

Ajahn Brahm talks about mindfulness of breathing in a very similar way. He talks about first perceiving the breath, then perceiving the beautiful breath, then dropping the breath by sinking only into the beauty, then refining the mind to completely absorb into that and gradually refine its perception.

When we read the Ānāpānasati Sutta as a gradual process from the above lense, it makes a lot of sense to me. There may be different variations in interpretation, but the general idea is very similar. It is a much more internal process than a complex one of beings and universal perceptions, but it is cultivating the same qualities and refinement of consciousness in my mind, into the jhānas.

One big distinction though is better understood when we contextualize the Brahmanical practices IMO. They were using meditation to dig into the metaphysical make-up of the universe and consciousness to get to a primordial, pre-creative state and merge their consciousness with it. This has lots of benefits in terms of qualities of mind and control of perception, but other down sides in terms of view/philosophy. Mindfulness of breathing captures the former advantages and removes the fluff: it focuses only on using a tool (the breath) to establish mindfulness and cultivate the awakening factors / see the gradual refinement of consciousness.

Mettā!

1 Like
8

Oh, but by the way: I do think the correspondence between the stations of consciousness / their perception and the eight liberations is essential. I think that the gradual refinement and liberation of perception is what defines them and differentiates them from describing normal jhāna practice.

The reason being that these appear primarily in DN 15 to distinguish two types of arahant: the paññāvimutta and ubhatobhāgavimutta arahant. The paññāvimutta arahant also needs jhāna though, so the fact that they don’t attain the 8 liberations is to point out of course the formless stations but also specifically the stages of perception and consciousness that are what the different beings experience. The ubhatobhāgavimutta arahant has direct personal experience with the actual types of consciousness via the 8 liberations; the paññāvimutta arahant has insight into all of them via insight into dependent origination finalized with the jhānas / awakening factors. For the wisdom-based liberation, perception is secondary to wisdom from samādhi.

So finding these correspondences is an important exercise in relation to the context of DN 15 I think.

It seems that understanding this as meaning freedom and control over perception makes sense for meditation benefits, but it doesn’t align much with the stations of consciousness to me? How does one go from mettā towards all beings (one perception, different bodies) to no distinction in beings and yet differentiated perception (unified in body, different perceptions)? To choose between and alter perceptions is indicative of a less still state of mind rather than a more steadied, still, collected one in a finer jhāna. I still don’t quite grasp what these descriptions of the beings are getting at exactly.

Maybe the point is not that they have a perception of several or one thing, but rather if they have different types of perception between the beings, like with the body. So not all humans look alike, and not all humans have the same kinds of perceptions of the world; not all lower Brahmās look alike, but they have the same types of perceptions; all the brahmās of streaming radiance look alike, but they can have a diversity, or differences, of perceptions among them. Some may perceive different beings with the radiance of their (divine) eye, some may perceive pure bliss or light, etc. Then the gods of refulgent glory all look alike and they perceive the same thing: pure beauty (subha). In terms of the 8 liberations, this could mean:

  • First: Different beings, oneself and others, but you perceive them all equally
  • Second: All distinction between beings lost, and you can turn to any of the chosen kasiṇas/themes, be it radiating pure mettā, pure light, one of the elements, etc.
  • Third: Staying with that unity in body, no matter what the difference in perception/meditation object is, all turn to the same beautiful aspects of it (mental joy, bliss, etc.) and thus merge into the same type of appearance and perception: the beautiful.

This ends up being pretty similar to your original structure, just minus the separate bodies of beings in the 2nd liberation maybe? But considering my edit below and the possibility of light / radiance relating to the divine eye, there could be room for that as well.

EDIT: Oh, and I also forgot to mention another connection between mettā and light. The Ābhāsara brahmās being at the same stage as the 2nd liberation and before the third (beauty), this also aligns with the element of light (ābhādhātu) before the element of beauty.

I recall Anuruddha (e.g. at MN 127, and related somewhat to MN 128 where the phrase for forms/lights relates to the divine eye at AN 8.64) discussing using the boundless mind of the brahmavihāras to develop boundless shining light in all directions to see different forms, related to the divine eye. Maybe these are meant to literally be states where one sees forms externally via the divine eye and radiating light? There are times where suttas mention light as a form of meditation for ñānadassana. It seems out there, but maybe not? It would also make sense for radiant brahmā deities to see the various beings externally with their shining light, perhaps, explaining their diversity in perception.

Mettā

1 Like
9

I would agree. It seems to me that the difference between the 4th Jhāna and the formless is slight. The equanimity is the same, but how it’s being used is different.

I think it’s important to remember the distinction the suttas make between these two states just as their connection is relevant.

Being intent on the beautiful (subha) is said to be the culmination of mettā meditation/cetovimutti. They are not said to be the same. We can know this when we look at the other culminations: the culmination of karuṇā is the domain of infinite space. We all agree that compassion meditation and the domain of infinite space are not the same. The point then is that the liberation of the mind via compassion culminates in that state, and the same is true of mettā. Suffice to say, we cannot equate the 3rd vimokkhā with mettā cetovimutti; we can only establish that mettā practice can lead there.

That is a very good observation. Thank you.

To be honest, I find this a little bit of a stretch for my mind, but I also recognize it’s 100% possible. It makes a lot of sense, but it’s also just very removed from the normal approach to Buddhist praxis in some sense. Of course this would be explained by the pre-Buddhist origins of these we’ve discussed.

I don’t think it is too far removed. If we think of this in terms of sense-restraint, I think the connection is clearer. Sense-restraint is about controlling our reactions, our intentions and so perceptions, to sense experience. That is exactly what we find here in the Spheres of Mastery. It’s interesting that in MN 28 and MN 62 element meditation is put forward as a means to control one’s reactions so that unwholesome dhammas do not arise in one. The parallel to MN 28 is even more interesting as it includes both element meditation and loving-kindess and compassion too. MN 62 also does this

Rāhula, meditate like the earth. For when you meditate like the earth, pleasant and unpleasant contacts will not occupy your mind. Suppose they were to toss both clean and unclean things on the earth, like feces, urine, spit, pus, and blood. The earth isn’t horrified, repelled, and disgusted because of this. In the same way, meditate like the earth. For when you meditate like the earth, pleasant and unpleasant contacts will not occupy your mind.

Meditate like water. For when you meditate like water, pleasant and unpleasant contacts will not occupy your mind. Suppose they were to wash both clean and unclean things in the water, like feces, urine, spit, pus, and blood. The water isn’t horrified, repelled, and disgusted because of this. In the same way, meditate like water. For when you meditate like water, pleasant and unpleasant contacts will not occupy your mind.

Meditate like fire. For when you meditate like fire, pleasant and unpleasant contacts will not occupy your mind. Suppose a fire were to burn both clean and unclean things, like feces, urine, spit, pus, and blood. The fire isn’t horrified, repelled, and disgusted because of this. In the same way, meditate like fire. For when you meditate like fire, pleasant and unpleasant contacts will not occupy your mind.

Meditate like wind. For when you meditate like wind, pleasant and unpleasant contacts will not occupy your mind. Suppose the wind were to blow on both clean and unclean things, like feces, urine, spit, pus, and blood. The wind isn’t horrified, repelled, and disgusted because of this. In the same way, meditate like the wind. For when you meditate like wind, pleasant and unpleasant contacts will not occupy your mind.

Meditate like space. For when you meditate like space, pleasant and unpleasant contacts will not occupy your mind. Just as space is not established anywhere, in the same way, meditate like space. For when you meditate like space, pleasant and unpleasant contacts will not occupy your mind.

Meditate on love. For when you meditate on love any ill will will be given up.

Meditate on compassion. For when you meditate on compassion any cruelty will be given up.

Meditate on rejoicing. For when you meditate on rejoicing any discontent will be given up.

Meditate on equanimity. For when you meditate on equanimity any repulsion will be given up.

Meditate on ugliness. For when you meditate on ugliness any lust will be given up.

These then are all means of guarding the sense faculties, of Right Energy and samādhi through the diminishing of the hindrances.

Good reference again! Yes, I think that we have both realized this can work with elements, colors, or the brahmavihāras (incl. potentially asubha). And no surprise, we find all of these practices intricately related in unspoken ways. Also, the approach of all of these practices is so different from the standard Buddhist one with e.g. the satipatthānas, the bojjhangā, the jhānas, etc., and yet it remains the same in many other ways. So I find all of the background context helps solidify what we’ve described as very likely.

Interesting to note though that the sutta omits seeing the wood pile in terms of colours. If colours actually meant the different castes, and so the colour Kasiṇas are a later addition, then it makes sense for it to do so. Regarding the satipatthānas and the bojjhangā etc I don’t think they are that different. Other ascetics practiced the bojjhangā and jhānas, so they aren’t distinctly Buddhist. It seems to me that the ability to see things as one wishes is the outcome of having developed the bojjhangā and jhānas.

From conscious awareness, one realizes that even that perception of self-aware consciousness is a perception. So one drops that, leaving the percept of nothing at all (perceiving ‘there is nothing’). Some, like Ālāra Kālāma, would take this to be the final goal because there is nothing left—it is before consciousness itself and thus the most primordial state. Others recognized there was still perception there, but due to their attachments to identity and awareness on a very subtle level, reached neither-perception-nor-non-perception, which has only a residue of conditioned phenomena (mentioned in the 7 element sutta) and is not even a full station of consciousness. The Buddha could relinquish everything and got to cessation, so saññāvedayitanirodha is certainly his addition.

A side note on this. Whilst an argument can be made that Āḷāra Kālāma & Uddaka Rāmaputta were Brahmins in the Upanishadic tradition, I think it’s possible they were annihilationists instead. The suttas themselves link the formless attainments with annihilationism, and it’s interesting that the Buddha thought Āḷāra Kālāma & Uddaka Rāmaputta would easily understand his teachings. Its interesting because the Buddha said of the annihilationists that they were closest to what he was teaching. We even have a sutra which heavily suggests Uddaka Rāmaputta was one

"Uddaka Rāmaputta had this view and taught like this, “Existence is an illness, a tumour, a thorn. Those who advocate nonperception are foolish. Those who have realized [know]: this is tranquil, this is sublime, namely attaining the sphere of neither-perception-nor-nonperception.” - MĀ 114

Rather than being an inevitable state that comes with death, it seems that the annihilation of the self was something to be worked towards for the annihilationists. Ajita Kesakambali being the exception.

Yes i’ve seen this connection before, between the breath and the brahmavihārās. I’m not sure if it has any basis in the suttas or the parallels though. The Satipaṭṭhāna are interesting in all of this. I think Sujato has made a good case that the Satipaṭṭhāna are a means to obtain Jhāna, and that one starts with the body be it in terms of body parts or elements. What’s interesting though is how the brahmavihārās fit into all this. It’s clear that the brahmavihārās result in Jhāna, but it’s hard to see how they match the Satipaṭṭhāna. We could say that compassion matches with feelings, sympathetic joy with mind and equanimity with dhammas but what about loving-kindness with the body? I did say earlier that the Spheres of Mastery and the 1st Jhāna involves thinking and pondering good thoughts (loving-kindness) to yourself and others. Perhaps this fits with the 1st Satipaṭṭhāna, or do you think that is a bit forced? If we look at AN 8.63 we have the 4 brahmavihārās being practiced with Jhāna after which one then practices the Satipaṭṭhāna with Jhāna. This suggests that one develops Jhāna first, and that Satipaṭṭhāna isn’t a basis for Jhāna but rather is something you do with Jhāna. The parallel however has it reversed. First you do Satipaṭṭhāna to remove the hindrances and develop Jhāna and only then do you practice boundless loving-kindness etc. This supports the view that Satipaṭṭhāna is there to develop Jhāna, and so boundless loving-kindness etc are something done whilst or emerging from (whichever your take is) Jhāna. We could say the same for the Kasiṇas too but, as we have discussed, based on the Liberations and SoM this seems to occur in at least the 2nd Jhāna onwards. Incidentally, do you know of any suttas where other ascetics are said to also practice Satipaṭṭhāna?