The Noble Eightfold Path is the Jhāna Path!

Discussion
21

Thank you.

Do you mean to say, then, that the path to liberation culminates in wisdom? I know this is a very widespread view–so much so, in fact, that it is hardly, if ever, questioned–but I would think that a key question with respect to the present discussion is whether or not (or to what extent) that view is text-supported.

Just to be clear, by “path” I meant the jhānic path. So my question would be: Do you (or does anyone in this forum) see “wisdom” as something substantially different from and/or which lies outside of jhāna/samādhi/samatha?

22

Just FYI, Jhanas have been discussed on the forum - a lot, and there is much good stuff here. Have a browse through some of these topics using the search function, there are some real gems here :pray:

https://discourse.suttacentral.net/search?q=jhana

1 Like
23

Thank you. I will do that.

1 Like
24

Could you elaborate on this? What are wide-spread ‘definitions’ or descriptions of sammasamadhi in the SA (or agamas in general)?

25

I looked through the Anguttara as well, and while there are a few interesting details and variations I can cut the long story short:

Neither the Samyutta nor the Anguttara provide a consistent, well spread definition of samma-samadhi.

So, if we assume that it represents the culmination of the Buddhist path, we don’t know what it is, and what it consists of. If you like to pick individual suttas, sure, you can find some answer, but that speaks more for the desire to find an answer and does not express what the texts consistently tell us - namely that samma-samadhi has not been well defined at the time when the suttas were compiled.

1 Like
26

On that note, this seems like I good time to chime in with a question I thought to ask in a previous post, then held back on because I felt it might just confuse the issue, but which, in light of @Gabriel 's post, now seems rather appropriate: other than the sheer ubiquity of a particular pericope, do we have any reason to take the four jhāna paradigm as the default definition of jhāna–meaning, the object of jhāyati and the course of practice of a jhāyaka? Might jhāna and its cognates, like samādhi, point to something a little less well-defined?

27

A differentiated examimation would be quite arduous, but my impression is that the 4-jhana-formula is so exceptionally well spread over the Nikayas that you would have to build a very good case for a broader or different default definition.

For example you could pick what you regard as the oldest texts and say “I’m only looking at the verse sections of SN 1 & 2, and at Suttanipata 4 & 5. There jhana and jhayati is in the context of x”.

1 Like
28

These texts from the SA have descriptions, and are translated:

Nothing necessarily widespread in this collection, from what I can see.

1 Like
29

As far as I know there is no separate path as jhānic path because there is only one N8FP. jhānas are a part and parcel of that path.
Where do you get this notion from? Is it from the discourses or is it some abstract idea.?
With Metta

2 Likes
30

I did some personal research on samādhi and jhāna recently and began to summarize what I found (not for future publication, but just to clarify it in my own mind). One of the questions I posed was “What is samādhi, according to the early discourses?” I hope it’s not too presumptuous of me to post this longish excerpt, but I thought it might be pertinent here:

Samādhi

The Pāli word samādhi is composed of sam- (together); ā- (toward); and -dhi (to put or place), giving it the meaning of “putting together”, “collecting”, or “gathering”. It implies a collectedness of mind, a gathering of attention.

In MN 44 (at MN I, 301) the lay follower Visākha asks the bhikkhunī Dhammadinnā, “What is samādhi?” She answers by saying that samādhi is cittassa ekaggatā. Cittassa is straightforward, meaning “of the mind”. Ekaggatā can be broken into its component parts: eka- (one, single); agga- (peak, meeting place, point of convergence); and tā, a suffix meaning “-ness”. So ekaggatā is often translated as “one-pointedness” or “unification”.

This has often been interpreted to mean a fixed, unwavering attention on a single object, free from thought or mental explorations. Bucknell (2019, p. 398), referring to ekaggatā, states: “’(Mental) one-pointedness’ implies absence of thinking”. Anālayo (2014, p. 79) suggests that “conceptual thought” would be “somewhat in contrast to the … quality of mental unification”, also in reference to ekaggatā.

However, in AN 5.151 at AN III, 175 the Buddha lists five recommended qualities one should have when listening to the Dhamma, the fourth of which is ekaggacitto. As it would be difficult to comprehend a Dhamma discourse without conceptual thought, this seems to indicate that the mental unification denoted by cittekaggatā or ekaggacitto instead implies that one’s whole mind, including attention and conceptual thoughts, is fully engrossed in a particular subject.

Further support for this interpretation can be found in the Theravāda Vinaya, where ekaggacittā is used to describe how monastics should listen to the recitation of the Pāṭimokkha—with full attention, with undistracted minds (Mv.II.3.5). Again, conceptual thought would be necessary for understanding the meaning of the reciter’s words.

Thus, it seems likely that samādhi, and by extension cittassa ekaggatā, refers to an undistracted, unscattered mind, one whose thoughts and explorations are only concerned with the matter at hand.

Sammā Samādhi

In the context of the eightfold path, samādhi is distinguished further as sammā samādhi, or “right” samādhi (i.e., the right kind of samādhi for progress toward awakening). Although sammā samādhi is widely equated with the four jhānas in many modern Buddhist circles, Venerable Anālayo (2019) has pointed out that defining them this way appears in only four discourses of the Pāli Canon (DN 22, MN 141, SN 45.8, and AN 5.28). The majority of these discourses lack parallels, thus weakening the assertion that early Buddhism defined sammā samādhi exclusively as the four jhānas.

Several discourses instead define sammā samādhi as unification of mind (cittassa ekaggatā) integrated with the other seven aspects of the eightfold path, with no mention of jhāna (DN 18, MN 117, SN 45.28, and AN 7.42). This definition also further supports a broader interpretation of citassa ekaggatā as meaning “undistracted mind” rather than implying a fixed, immobile attention free from any thought. However, two of these discourses lack parallels, making it more difficult to be certain that this definition is what the Buddha meant by “right samādhi”.

The Samādhi Indriya

The discourses also define samādhi in discussions of the five indriyā, qualities or abilities required for successful practice of the path, of which samādhi is one. SN 48.8 (at SN V, 196), while not explicitly equating the indriya of samādhi with the four jhānas, states that this indriya is “seen in the four jhānas”. Three other discourses in the same collection (SN 48.9, SN 48.11, and SN 48.50) define this indriya as when a “noble disciple gains concentration, gains one-pointedness of mind (cittassa ekaggataṃ), having made release the object.” SN 48.10 (at SN V, 198) combines the latter definition with the standard detailed description of the four jhānas.

Although it can’t be stated conclusively that the indriya of samādhi is equated with the four jhānas, it seems to have a stronger connection with them in the discourses than sammā samādhi does.

Regarding the difference between samādhi and jhāna, it seems to me that samādhi is a quality of mind from which the jhānas can be developed (and from which many other things can be developed too, as evidenced by the many different types of samādhi described in the discourses). One main difference between descriptions of samādhi and descriptions of jhāna is that jhāna descriptions emphasize seclusion, perhaps signifying a deeper, more cocooned mind state.

5 Likes
31

An interesting topic!

Something that seemed curious to me for awhile now. So everyone here knows of Devadatta and his not so eternal vacay in hell. He was supposed to be a very adept meditator. You know, jhanas, psychic powers, etc and yet he still is so deluded to try and kill?

To me this is quite perplexing. So much so I might even guess Devadatta didn’t exist or his qualities were way overstated. Too bad SC doesn’t give out heretic awards! :smiley:

Ajahn Brahm talks about jhana and it’s paralleled insight. It’s quite mind blowing to think someone that’s “let go” so much to have jhana i.e. Devadatta and still try and kill? Especially since samma samadhi is predicated upon the other factors and, in turn, supports them.

1 Like
32

It seems, then, based on points made by @Gabriel and @Christopher (among others) that the statement

“the Noble Eightfold Path is the jhāna path”

is not wholly accurate and should instead be emended to

“the Noble Eightfold Path is the samādhi path.”

I consider the question answered. Thank you to all who were kind enough to contribute; this was very beneficial: I learned a lot.

As for my question regarding whether or not the four-jhāna formula should be the default definition for jhāna in the EBTs, I think this is an entirely separate question. @Gabriel is probably right in saying that “a differentiated examination would be quite arduous”; I will start with the links to previous threads which @Viveka was kind enough to share.

Yes, indeed. But I am recently re-considering the viability of the “majority rules” methodology. It seems like most everyone goes by it, but I am just not as convinced anymore that this is the absolute standard for evaluating what is or isn’t EBT doctrine. But the jury is still out; so, if anyone has thoughts either way, I’d love to hear them.

@Christopher , could you give the title of Anālayo citation above? Thank you.

2 Likes
33

Perhaps this is the Analayo’s paper cited by @Christopher above:

“Definitions of Right Concentration in Comparative Perspective”, Singaporean Journal of Buddhist Studies, 2019, 5: 9–39. (PDF)

4 Likes
34

Jhana alone is not samma samadhi. What Devadatta lacked was right thoughts, right speech, right action. He has thoughts of ill-will, cruelty, of wanting to gain to the the replacement for the Buddha as the leader of the sangha.

Samma samadhi as said above, means together with the other 7 factors of the path.

2 Likes
35

It would seem the other factors have to have a strong presence to be able to relinquish the 5 hindrances.

36

To be clear, the 5 hindrances are present when not in Jhanas. Typically, after Jhanic attainments, one can be freed from the 5 hindrances for some period of time. However, they can easily come back. Hence, a non returner who eradicated ill-will and greed has 2 less hindrances compared to a stream winner to attain to Jhanas, thus non-returners can attain to Jhanas easier compared to stream winners.

Also, in many texts, the 5 hindrances has to be quelled down first for Jhanas to arise. (via the other gradual training practises).

2 Likes
37

A short time ago I read that the Deavdatta story differs quite a bit in one other school’s texts. It was one of the Buddhist schools that died out long ago, and so the text that we have (which I think was preserved in the Chinese) stopped being altered hundreds (or maybe a thousand) of years ago. I forget which school of Buddhism it was, but Devadata was only mentioned in passing, and was not made out to be the monster he’s portrayed as in the Pali texts. In fact, I believe Devadatta has an entry in the Pali cannon’s Theragatha. So, even in the Pali we’re presented with conflicting views of Devadatta. The author of the book I read mentioned this, as well as some other evidence, to back up his claim. Just offering that as food for thought.

38

Yes, this is the article. Thanks, Seniya.

1 Like
39

Another relevant sutta would be MN 113 where it describes all four jhanas and four immaterial attainments as a possible basis for an “untrue man” (Bodhi translation) or “bad person” (Sujato translation) to look down on others without such attainments. The cessation of feeling and perception is excluded from this distinction (only a “good person” is described as attaining this). The MA 85 parallel mirrors most of this; though, interestingly, this makes no mention of the cessation of feeling and perception or this distinction.

2 Likes
40

Among the 37 dharmas conducive to Bodhi, one of the most common formulations is simply that mindfulness leads to samadhi. This can be seen in the Noble Eightfold Path, Seven Factors of Bodhi, and the Five Roots / Five Powers. Rather than focusing primarily on the result that people want to get, why not focus on the cause that leads to that result?

3 Likes