I do think that this is a valid question to raise, the fact is that some suttas in the EBTs describe the buddhas awakening as occurring with the aruppas and some describe it as occurring without. It seems a valid question to ask if one type of narrative is the correct one and the other type a later elaboration, or if not, how this discrepancy can be explained.
@josephzizys I am not sure who you are responding to here. But, since I am the OP, I will reply as if you are addressing me. If you weren’t please feel free to disregard this.
I’m not sure exactly which question you are referring to here.
Yes, sir! In fact, not only “with” them, but, it would sometimes appear, directly dependent on them.
I think so, too. But I don’t think there’s a balanced outlook for most of us: the narrative has already been skewed so that, for the most part, we discuss only how/why wisdom is the catalyst for liberation and why (tranquility) meditation could never be: the converse is rarely even brought up.
Over the last few years, Wynne and Analayo had that ongoing debate. (And, just for the sake of discussion, let’s give them the benefit of the doubt that neither of them is foolish with wrong view.) They argue over the validity of the TPT: the “Two-Path Thesis.” Yet no one is questioning the validity of any OPT because, first of all, there is no such theory to speak of, so that there’s not even the vehicle for such discussion. The result is it’s just not even questioned as if, again, it is so self-evident as to preclude the need. Perhaps. But there will never be balanced dialogue that way. This is the way systematized bias works. And this would seem to be one among traditional Buddhism’s many entrenched biases.
Thanks Knotty! I was in fact responding to the original post. My take is that there do appear to be many points in the EBTs where people who have been liberated by understanding the truth of conditionality or however you want to put it without having the deep meditative attainments that others have had. These liberated one way, liberated both ways seem to me to imply that the buddha, or the EBT’s at least did in fact accept that a person could be liberated through understanding the facts of phenomena, their arising, cessation and the method without having attained to these deep exemplary experiences of same. So I think the EBT’s and quite possibly the buddha took a fairly catholic or inclusive view with regards to this. I suppose for myself I am more intrigued by the jhanas vs aruppas, or rather the jhanas vs jhanas plus aruppas question, and to what extent the whole mass of meditative attainments relate in the early texts. anyway, thanks again for your reply, I am feeling a bit wooly today and not sure I am expressing myself well, or rather I may be expressing myself perfectly and what I am is confused 
LOVE.
1 Like
Very good point. I truly believe Right View is very important in the Path. But then again. But I believe meditation can also bring a conviction in right view.I read from a friend that seems to experiencing good in meditation but many wrong views. And I think that bothers people like a weight so they don’t progress to distinction
1 Like
Thanks for the table Stephen! I just want to point out that DN9 is a sutta where the buddha is in (very sophisticated and philosophical) conversation with a practitioner with another sect, so that may explain, or at least give some context to the presence of the formless attainments - the same Nikaya, DN starts with the repition (12 times) of the jhana formula without the formless attainments as the path of gradual training.
I have been developing the impression recently, and am seriously considering trying to write something up formally, that DN is “early” MN is “middling” and SN and AN are “late” and I note in your table for example that the presence of breathing absent in AN but not in DN or MN is yet another suggestive fact for this argument.
I should elaborate what I mean by “early” - my impression is that the buddha taught for a long time, and would have conversed with many different groups and individuals of many different backgrounds and in many different locations, and that the original recitation traditions probably grew up as a way to keep the teachings for all those months and years that the buddha was elsewhere. so there was probably multiple groups of reciters focusing on differnet groups within the community, reciters for the newbies to learn the basics from, reciters for the advanced students etc, my impression is that DN was for the newbies; lots of forget your braminical nonsense talks and also a very straightforward description of the gradual training… MN has more complex stuff for the advanced students, etc…
Now, the DN we have is obviously not all from the buddhas lifetime, the Mahāparinibbānasutta for example can’t have been, and much textual elaboration must have occured over the years after his death.
However, I still think that the gradual training shows plenty of evidence of being one of he earliest sequences in the whole canon, the lack of the eightfold path, the lack of the immaterial attainments, and so on, make me think that along with the patimokkha this really was the “buddhism 101” given and approved by the buddha when new converts joined the by them already well established sangha.
Now, I think it is also clear, at least to me, that the very well attested 37 aides seems like a genuine or at least very early endorsed curriculum, lending much weight to basically everything in MN and SN as being “budhissm 201, advanced buddhism” teachings, directly from the buddha, for students who had got the patimhokka and the gradual sequence down.
This all brings me to my methodological point; where a doctrine or pericope is well attested in DN, then alterations or elaborations on it that are not explainable by context (like the list in DN9 is) they are suspect (like the absence of breathing in AN is, for both textual and asphixiative reasons)
Anyway, I think that i might need to organise my thoughts about all this more coherently and start a new thread for all this…
LOVE
What about actually Buddha early method of using a death body. It seems that was his focus before. Because monks killing themselves. It seems he started focusing on a gradual path.
I believe it removes lust and was a speedy way to the higher mind but I would think mindful breathing and walking meditation was normal together with it. A sort combination
Sorry to be late to the party, but some kind of grand synthesis sounds intriguing. Care to say more about this idea of a link among the jhanas, viharas, and arupas?
1 Like
Hi @josephzizys
In which Nikaya is a lack of an eightfold path? If DN is early, than there is no lack.
I am referring to the “gradual training” sequence in DN, beginning with
“gone forth, they live restrained in the monastic code, conducting themselves well and seeking alms in suitable places. Seeing danger in the slightest fault, they keep the rules they’ve undertaken. They act skillfully by body and speech. They’re purified in livelihood and accomplished in ethical conduct. They guard the sense doors, have mindfulness and situational awareness, and are content.”
and ending with
"When their mind has become immersed in samādhi like this—purified, bright, flawless, rid of corruptions, pliable, workable, steady, and imperturbable—they extend it and project it toward knowledge of the ending of defilements. They truly understand: ‘This is suffering’ … ‘This is the origin of suffering’ … ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering’. They truly understand: ‘These are defilements’ … ‘This is the origin of defilements’ … ‘This is the cessation of defilements’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of defilements’. Knowing and seeing like this, their mind is freed from the defilements of sensuality, desire to be reborn, and ignorance. When they’re freed, they know they’re freed. They understand: ‘Rebirth is ended, the spiritual journey has been completed, what had to be done has been done, there is no return to any state of existence.’ "
which does not mention the “noble eight fold path”.
Not literally but, i find, you can see in this the noble eightfold Path described. Purified in livelihood is right livelihood. Conducting themselves well, and skilful in body and speech, and accomplished in ethical conduct, can be seen as right action and right speech*. Having mindfulness and situational awareness* (?) as right mindfulness. The last description of jhana as right concentration. Understanding the truths and the defilements, as right view. Seeing danger in slightest faults and living the holy life of renunciation, seeking the end of suffering as right intention. Guarding the senses as right effort.
yes I get that Green, I am talking about the phrase, not the path itself. I guess I am one of those beyond the pale types who thinks they see evidence of pretty significant pedagogical development across the canon, even in the EBT’s, and think that phrases like “just this noble eightfold path…” might be a bit later than the gradual training sequence I gave above. Totally think that it all came from the buddha, and that the 37 aides where a kind of curriculum endorsement the buddha made sure to give before he died, but suspect that the “gradual training” is earlier than “this noble eightfold path” even if it is just earlier in the buddhas teaching career.
I
Oke, i do not have any insight in this. Maybe it is helpful that the noble 8-fold Path in DN is mentioned in DN6, DN8, DN18, DN19, DN22, DN23, DN33, DN34
1 Like
Thank you for the references! I read DN6, which is very interesting and quite hard to understand - first there are 2 groups who visit , Brahmins and licchivis, then the Buddha only speaks to one group, then in the first half of the talk the focus is on psychic powers, and the 8fold path is mentioned while the second half is about the mind body problem and the gradual training sequence is used - but the Buddha is answering a question they where never asked, that seems to have nothing to do with the situation at all… it’s interesting, what are your thoughts Green? Why are the Brahmins in the story when the Buddha doesn’t talk with them? Why is the 8fold path mentioned in relation to developing psychic powers but the gradual training mentioned for understanding the mind body problem? Why is the mind body problem discused at all when Mahali doesn’t ask about it? I would love to hear your insights. I have not hav time to re-read the other DN suttas you reference but we can go through them one by one over the next few days if you like.
LOVE
I couldn’t resist and read. DN8 also, and this one is perhaps even more confusing than the last one! First the Buddha seems to imply 3! Different ways of achieving enlightenment, by loving-kindness meditation, by the 8fold path AND by the gradual training! Now, I think you and I both agree that the 8fold path and the gradual training are synonymous, and so amount to the same thing in all but name, but what about the loving-kindness example the Buddha gives to Kassapa? Once again I would love to hear your thoughts. Let’s leave it at DN6 and DN8 for now tho, I don’t want to bite off more than we can chew!
1 Like
My opinion on this topic has been evolving. I no longer believe that the cessation of perception of feeling is Nibbana (or Parinibbana). Following AN 9.36 , I believe any Jhana or formless state can be used to attain Nibbana. I also believe attempts to “stack” the formless spheres on top of the Jhanas do seem a bit contrived/redactional. Take, for example, the Buddha’s parinibbana — why go through the formless attainments and cessation, then go back down to the 4th Jhana to achieve parinibbana?
2 Likes
I very much agree with you @TheSynergist , however just to play devils advocate, the very next sutta to the one you qoute has:
Reverend, one time I was staying near Sāketa in the deer park in Añjana Wood. Then the nun Jaṭilagāhikā came up to me, bowed, stood to one side, and said to me: ‘Sir, Ānanda, regarding the immersion that does not lean forward or pull back, and is not held in place by forceful suppression. Being free, it’s stable. Being stable, it’s content. Being content, one is not anxious. What did the Buddha say was the fruit of this immersion?’
When she said this, I said to her: ‘Sister, regarding the immersion that does not lean forward or pull back, and is not held in place by forceful suppression. Being free, it’s stable. Being stable, it’s content. Being content, one is not anxious. The Buddha said that the fruit of this immersion is enlightenment.’ One who doesn’t experience that sense-field perceives in this way, too.”
One other thing of interest is the end of the sutta you quote, which has:
And so, mendicants, penetration to enlightenment extends as far as attainments with perception. But the two dimensions that depend on these—the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, and the cessation of perception and feeling—are properly explained by mendicants who are skilled in these attainments and skilled in emerging from them, after they’ve entered them and emerged from them.”
Which is a pretty odd thing for the buddha to say after explaining all the previous attainments in detail, who after all would be more skilled in these attainments than him? although this comment is perhaps more appropriate for the play of formulas thread
2 Likes
Hello, @josephzizys.
AN 9.37 kinda comes across as riddle like. What is the “immersion that does not lean forward or pull back, and is not held in place by forceful suppression”? Could it be any state of Samadhi that has these qualities? It’s not clear. It sounds like it could be any sort of right Samadhi, tbh.I suppose it could also have something to do with the state of perception in AN 11.18-21
As for the end of AN 9.36….yeah, lol, I guess that is kinda funny/abrupt. I just took it to mean that nibbana cannot be realized in those states, but only by one who has emerged from them, since realization of nibbana requires perception.
2 Likes
BTW, if I were to play Devil’s Advocate for my own view, I would point to AN 9.38. In this sutta, the Buddha says one must reach the end of the world to end suffering, and goes on to say that someone meditating in the Jhanas/4 formless states is still included in the world. The “end of the world” does not appear to be reached until the end, after the cessation of P/F is reached:
Furthermore, take a mendicant who, going totally beyond the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, enters and remains in the cessation of perception and feeling. And, having seen with wisdom, their defilements come to an end. This is called a mendicant who, having gone to the end of the world, meditates at the end of the world. And they’ve crossed over clinging to the world.
One could interpret this as meaning that the cessation of P&F is the “end of the world.” However, it’s not clear whether the end of the word is cessation of P&f or the ending of defilements.
SN 36.11 is kinda similar, as is MN 111, and a bunch of stock suttas at AN 9.52-61. So there a number of places where the redactors really want to make the cessation of P&F some sort of “end stage,” yet nonetheless stop short of elaborating on its importance.
2 Likes
yeah, it is interesting, there does seem to be the claim that CofP&F is a kind of attainment that is practically guaranteed to result in enlightenment, but I think that it is still the case that nibbana is a kind of “knowing” not a kind of experience, even in MN111 we have;
And he emerged from that attainment with mindfulness. Then he contemplated the phenomena in that attainment that had passed, ceased, and perished: ‘So it seems that these phenomena, not having been, come to be; and having come to be, they flit away.’ And he meditated without attraction or repulsion for those phenomena; independent, untied, liberated, detached, his mind free of limits. He understood: ‘There is no escape beyond.’ And by repeated practice he knew for sure that there is not.
So it is an understanding, a “knowing” about the experience of CofP&F that is the “nibbana” spoken of, not the experience itself. So if anything I think this re-enforces your original contention, it isn’t the meditative experiences themselves that are liberating, it is that they illustrate certain facts, facts that the full understanding of, the full knowing of constitute nibbana.
I think of it sometimes like a proof in mathematics, especially well illustrated when of a visual kind:
looking at this picture, and really understanding it, should convince you of the truth of the Pythagorean theorem, but the knowledge that the square of the length of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the lengths of the other two sides is not something that you “experience” or need to “see” visually, once you have had enough visual experiences (or mathematical ones) then you KNOW the truth, the image helped convince you, but the certainty you have in the end is not dependant on images, its true knowledge.
2 Likes
-“But ma’am, when a mendicant has emerged from the attainment of the cessation of perception and feeling, how many kinds of contact do they experience?” “They experience three kinds of contact: emptiness, signless, and undirected contacts" (MN44)
I think one in cessation of p&f is in a very direct contact with the nature of the mind, which is empty, does not incline to anything, is without tendencies (anusaya are absent), sees no signs like the attractive, ugly, unpleasant etc. It is mirror-like, just knowing, just reflecting.
One is, as it were, gone beyond the normal human disposition because one has become so deepy inbedded, grounded, as it were, in the nature of mind during cessation.