SuttaCentral
Perhaps someone with mod privileges can relocate some posts, but I think that what is under discussion is linked to the original topic. When you dig deep you unearth a lot of things you couldn’t see from the surface.
You may have a point here. I don’t have time to investigate further, so I’ll just consider you are probably right in saying that 2 is not clearly connected to 1 and 3.
I don’t really know to be honest.
thanks for the summary in post 207.
i don’t understand how that situation is comparable. the 3rd jhana can be understood on its own, or as a set with the first 3 jhanas.
the examples you cite, as i explained in detail in an earlier post, refers to attainments that are higher than 3rd jhana.
in the context of samadhi, 99% of the references to kāya are clearly referring to anatomical body, there’s no reason to dig for complicated grammatical loop holes unless something doesn’t work. since everyone else besides visuddhimagga and ajahn brahm’s camp translates 3rd jhana kāyena as an anatomical body that experiences happiness, including the EBT agama parallels, that tells me, even with little grammar knowledge, that it’s grammatically sound to take kāyena as the instrumental, as in “he experiences sukha with the anatomical body.”
the burden actually is on Ajahn Brahm to support a differing reading. i’ll do my diligence and examine your grammar arguments carefully in any case.
Chan, how do you take it? I take it simply as passadhi-sambojjhanga being fulfilled, which is prerequisite to samadhi-sambojjhanga.
passadhi-sambojjhanga explicitly involves calming of both citta and kāya.
edit: addition: any of the 4 jhanas can be expressed in terms of 7 bojjhanga. as one of the first few suttas in the bojjhanga samyutta 46 says, just as sariputta uses a simile of a king who can wear any outfit he wants, at any time of the day, one can abide in any of the 7 bojjhanga in any order, as long as they want. The nominal order of the 7 factors is just to show a typical causal relationship.
@Gabriel - I would agree. The conversation was plodding along nicely, until post 27/283, when Frank decided to take potshots at those other issues.
It would actually be quite easy to migrate all those posts initiated by Frank and his respondents into some other thread, without disturbing the continuity of what’s left behind on the original issue. The posts ripe for the migration are -
27 -29, 33 -35, and then downhill all the way from 37 to the most recent posts.
But hey, at least from post 136 onwards, it appears that the discussion had coalesced into the issue of kāya in all it grammatical forms. How’s that for discipline?
Perhaps a moderator could migrate the afore-listed posts to new threads.
Erh… this is not borne out by the usage of kāyena phusati, in the context of touching all the jhanas and formless attainments and Cessation, eg AN 9.43 among others.
Could I trouble you to share with us how you arrived at this statistical conclusion? I believe you would have done your research most thoroughly, but if your count includes recurring pericopes, that clouds the statistical significance of usages that are less formulaic.
But the rules are not complicated or hidden. They are in plain sight to see for those who actually believe that grammar is a important component of reading suttas.
If you look at the more recent posts here, I think you will find that it is the minority that rejects kāyena as adverbial, and treating it as adnominal instead.
In my limited experience with reading the Chinese parallels, the sutras are rendered literally, with no attempt whatsoever to render it into idiomatic Chinese.
But which kāya? It must surely be the kāya in “kāyo passambhati”. That whole series from freedom from remorse, joy, rapture, tranquility/serenity, pleasure and concentration is about the fruits of sense restraint culminating in the fading away of the hindrances and the arising of the bojjhaṅga. This goes back to my point about kāyika and cetasika. These relate to kāyapassaddhi and cittapassaddhi so neatly through the six bases and the faculties respectively. In the AN 11.1 series, the purpose is directed at mental things. Interpreting its kāya as a corporeal body entails the consequence that in Buddhist bhāvanā fails if the physical body is not calmed. That seems such a stretch in interpreting cittabhāvanā, which must surely be the point about AN 11.1 and its like.
This interpretation of kāya as physical body in fact harks back to Saccaka’s own understanding of kāyabhāvanā in MN 36. He was looking at kāyabhāvanā in the same way as you are essentially proposing, ie meditation affects the body. This was Saccaka’s view -
But there are some recluses and brahmins who abide pursuing development of mind, but not development of body. They are touched by mental painful feeling. In the past, when one was touched by mental painful feeling, one’s thighs would become rigid, one’s heart would burst, hot blood would gush from one’s mouth, and one would go mad, go out of one’s mind. So then the body was subservient to the mind, the mind wielded mastery over it.
The Buddha had a completely different take on it. He said -
Then the Blessed One told him: “What you have just spoken of as development of body, Aggivessana, is not development of body according to the Dhamma in the Noble One’s Discipline.
…
How, Aggivessana, is one undeveloped in body and undeveloped in mind? Here, Aggivessana, pleasant feeling arises in an untaught ordinary person. Touched by that pleasant feeling, he lusts after pleasure and continues to lust after pleasure. That pleasant feeling of his ceases. With the cessation of the pleasant feeling, painful feeling arises. Touched by that painful feeling, he sorrows, grieves, and laments, he weeps beating his breast and becomes distraught. When that pleasant feeling has arisen in him, it invades his mind and remains because body is not developed. And when that painful feeling has arisen in him, it invades his mind and remains because mind is not developed. Anyone in whom, in this double manner, arisen pleasant feeling invades his mind and remains because body is not developed, and arisen painful feeling invades his mind and remains because mind is not developed, is thus undeveloped in body because mind is not developed, is thus undeveloped in body and undeveloped in mind.
Can you see this is just another format for MN 148’s kāyika and cetasika feelings?
I think the important question is whether passadhi-sambojjhanga being fulfilled for first jhana leaves us with a physical breath to take as kāyaṃ up to the fourth jhana formula.
And so this is why I would want to take kāyaduṭṭhullānaṃ as a proper subset of MN 44’s kāyasaṅkhāra which ceases in fourth jhana, but the suttas are scarce on what kāyaduṭṭhulla is last I checked. However, the word duṭṭhulla seems to have a meaning like “coarse” or “obscene” when in the context of offensive conduct requiring discipline and such.
But even then MN 64’s expanded first jhana formula is the only such instance, so I’d want to take a look at the Chinese parallel, and further check whether the Chinese for kāyaduṭṭhulla is defined elsewhere.
And looking at MA 205, it looks like the Chinese for kāyaduṭṭhulla is somewhere around here given the occurrence of “初禪” (first jhana) in that sentence. I’d guess that it’s just 身惡 (“shēn:body”, “è:unwholesome”)…
Not a problem, really. And I know it’s difficult to contain topics, especially when the dhamma is so interconnected. It’s just a shame that sometimes great discussions and spin-off contributions don’t get appreciated and followed enough because they don’t have their own thread…
Let’s try 
… @frankk, I think it makes sense to move large parts of the discussion to a new thread with a different title, and since it would involve moving a lot of your input, could you please take it on yourself to contact a moderator with a new title? thanks!
Huh.
This Discourse platform impresses me every day:
I’d be happy to help out in any way as well. One caveat to bear in mind is that comment numbers as shown on the slider on the right hand side don’t always match up with the “internal” comment numbers.
Also, I’d wonder if moving comments to a new thread will automagically change any post number references to that comment so that the link to the comment isn’t dangling…
I think @FrankK’s 27 can be placed in a new Discussion topic eg “Occam’s Jhāna: On hearing sounds and the plurality of kāma” along with the following comments moved over:
I think @dhammarelax1’s 33 might be fodder for a new Discussion topic: “How is perception (saññā) defined in the suttas?”
I think @Sylvester’s 66 might be another good one: “Aggregates simpliciter vs. clinging-aggregates”
And from Frank’s 136 (internal: 140), the discussion turns more fully into “Occam’s Jhāna II: On feeling body”.
I’ll check later whether the remaining 153 comments have other branches.
Perhaps we could also start a wiki post to try and summarize the contents of the discussions about vitakka-vicara. Maybe @Gabriel could do this on the first post of this thread
dear moderators,
i have no problem with any of my posts from this thread being moved to threads of different titles that are more descriptive of the subject.
i will try to incorporate the issues from this current thread relevant to the “can you hear sound and feel body in jhana” wiki and migrate some of it into the wiki.
that’s why sound is a thorn in the jhanas. i’ve seen great meditators not able to attain what they’re normally able to when they’re under severe illness. The buddha himself realized the 6 years of austerities didn’t work, and the plate of milk rice gruel gave him the fuel to attain full awakening that fateful night. now perhaps the great disciples could always enter animitta samadhi or any of the 9 attainments whenever they wanted to , even under deathlike illness, but it’s doubtful it applies to meditators just learning and getting settled in first and second jhana for example, hence the buddha praising those disciples for going into seclusion to escape noise from laypeople, since “sounds are a thorn to jhaanas”.
having limitations of the anatatomical body doesn’t mean buddhist bhaavana fails. your example with saccaka is setting up a straw man.
I’m sorry you feel that way. I don’t think I misapprehend you or misrepresent you, in light of these -
I could go on and on, but the reason why I said -
was simply your very own reliance on MN 36 for parsing kāya passadhi as if this referred to the tranquilisation of the corporeal/anatomical body. The Buddha rejects that, and makes clear that kāyabhāvanā is sense restraint.
Thanks! Could you actually start a new topic and continue there with the non-vitakka-vicara-discussion? I’m sure it would be easier for a mod since you know best the topic you discussed on - relocating then would be easier…
May I try and close a loop here with going back to the original question and summarizing my current understanding?
I started with trying to find a new understanding for vitakka and vicāra by going back to their etymological roots, interpreting the prefix vi- as ‘away from’. I had to give up this interpretation after educated feedback and the following own research, going through the suttas again.
My personal current sutta-based understanding is that
vitakka is a specific ‘thought’, the recollection and conceptual understanding of a dhamma aspect investigated or immersed in during the sitting session. It’s in the context of cittabhāvana almost synonymous with the ‘established sati’ of the jhāna-introduction. Just that sati focuses on bringing up a dhamma-concept-memory, while vitakka focuses on processing that concept-memory in the mind.
vicāra is the repeated mind-movement of striking the vitakka, a pursuit/longing to understand, investigate and fill up the mind with the adhered dhamma-concept.
This is only my personal understanding and other dhamma friends will have different understandings. May I invite the other contributors to share their current understanding on vitakka & vicāra? I realized that I can’t summarize the discussion and hopefully you contributors have enriched your understanding in the meantime as well.
@Sylvester @frankk @silence @chansik_park @Erika_ODonnell @Mkoll @Brahmali @Linda…
Please also, I would like to suggest to as of now outsource every discussion that doesn’t directly touch vitakka and vicāra (i.e. general discussions about jhāna, kāya, hearing sounds in jhāna etc. - everything is connected, but these topics deserve their own seperate discussions)
Thanks everyone!
continued on new thread
There’s a noteworthy section of the Milindapañha where the Venerable Nāgasena answers the question “kiṃlakkhaṇo?” (“what is the characteristic/mark?”) with respect to some fundamental terms (Mil 3.3.8 - Mil 3.3.14). The last two suttas in the section are with regards to vitakka and vicāra:
[Mil 3.3.13 Vitakka-lakkhaṇa-pañha]
It is like the case of a carpenter, great king, who fixes in a joint a well-fashioned piece of wood.
Thus is it that the effecting of an aim (appanā) is the mark of reflection (vitakka).
[Mil 3.3.14 Vicāra-lakkhaṇa-pañha]
It is like the case of the copper vessel, which, when it is being beaten into shape, makes a sound again and again as it gradually gathers shape. The beating into shape is to be regarded as reflection (vitakka), and the sounding again and again as investigation (vicāra).
Thus is it, great king, that threshing out again and again (anumajjana) is the mark of investigation.
Here it’s worth noting that the PTS PED has it that appanā comes from the verb appeti which, given the context, is listed primarily as having the sense of “fitting in” or “putting together”. Anumajjana on the other hand is listed as coming from majjati which is said to have the sense of “wiping” or “polishing” or “cleaning”.
While certainly a grain of salt is in order due to the lateness of these texts, taken together I come away with the sense that vitakka in the context of the term anuvitakketi of SN 46.3 is to piece together disparate statements of the teaching while vicāra in the context of pavicarati is to apply the meaning of those statements to the present situation.
In the context of APS practice, I’d be tempted to designate vitakka as being that with which one fulfils the third step of say the first tetrad and vicāra being that with which one fulfils the fourth. But this is just a bit of musing…
Edited: Added links to the two texts — I could’ve sworn that I saw the auto-linking thing kicking in)
here’s a straight forward EBT-OR (ockham’s razor) reading of the relevant portion of SN 46.3, and how first jhana’s vitakka and vicara map into the 7 bojjhanga.
“Dwelling thus withdrawn, > one recollects that Dhamma and thinks it over. Whenever, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwelling thus withdrawn recollects that Dhamma and thinks it over, [68] on that occasion the enlightenment factor of mindfulness is aroused by the bhikkhu; on that occasion the bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of mindfulness; on that occasion the enlightenment factor of mindfulness comes to fulfilment by development in the bhikkhu.63 "
so sati-bojjhanga, equivalent to samma sati, and the “sato and sampajano” that is explicitly stated in third jhana and thus we infer active in first jhana, along with vitakka of first jhana, (anu-vitakketi in 7sb), had the function of selecting a suitable meditation object from among the 4sp.
3“Dwelling thus mindfully, he discriminates that Dhamma with wisdom, examines it, makes an investigation of it. Whenever, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwelling thus mindfully discriminates that Dhamma with wisdom, examines it, makes an investigation of it, on that occasion the enlightenment factor of discrimination of states is aroused by the bhikkhu; on that occasion the bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of discrimination of states; on that occasion the enlightenment factor of discrimination of states comes to fulfilment by development in the bhikkhu.
in dhamma-vicaya-bojjhanga, (vicaya and pa-vicarati are having the same function here), work just as the vicara of first jhana in “evaluating” the meditation subject we selected from sati-bojjhanga above.
and if one pursues this relentlessly, viriya-sambojjhanga (same as samma vayamo), and becomes glad and enraptured (pa-mojja and piiti) as a result of purifying the mind, then piti-bojjhanga happens, and then the 5th happens, body and mind deeply relaxed (passadhi), and then BOOM! the 6th one samadhi-bojjhanga happens, we’ve happily landed in samma samadhi’s first jhana.
it’s just that simple and straightforward, once you sort out the various moving parts and synonymous pali terms pointing to the same activity.
if you look at the first 10 suttas in satipatthana samyutta, SN 47, especially the one about the cook, and SN 47.10 and 47.8 I think, you’ll see again where vitakka and vicara act in the same way as i described above for SN 46.3. That is, vitakka and vicara mean thinking and evaluation as we normally understand it in first jhana, restricted to skillful and wholesome thoughts related to the dhamma and our meditation object.
later this year i’ll to a detailed break down of those suttas i mentioned in the previous paragraph, along with other suttas, in pali and english. but it’s better if you study those suttas yourself and see what conclusion you come to. I’d like to confirm other interested parties read those same suttas and draw the same straightforward conclusions I did, without reading my take on it.
here’s an exercise you can do for yourself. take any meditation subject that can produce first jhāna, and try to map it into the 7sb (satta bojjhanga).
for example, doing brahma-vihara, 16 APS (anapansati), 31asubha (31 body parts), are 3 common meditation topics.
so here’s an example.
i start with metta meditation. this is vitakka of first jhana, equivalent to samma sati and sati-sambojjhanga selecting metta as the topic.
then i start radiating metta in different spatial directions. this is vicara of first jhana, and the dhamma-vicaya-sambojjhanga in action.
i’m starting to get real high and happy, mentally and physically, i decide to switch to 16 APS. So vitakka of first jhana did the task of switching channels from metta to 16 APS. Now vicara of first jhana can evaluate qualities of the breath as it feels in my anatomical body. qualities such as piti, sukha, comfort, leg discomfort, heavinesss, percpetions of earth-element, etc.
if i know how to deeply relax and enjoy body and mind, i can ride this into jhana, or samadhi-sambojjhanga quickly in sequence of the 7sb. If i havne’t figured how to deeply relax, fulfilling passadhi-sambojjhanga, then i’m stuck doing satipatthana and dhamma-vicaya-sambojjhanga without getting into jhana.
if i’m already very experienced at getting into first jhana, 2nd jhana, the buddha talks about doing an undirected type of samadhi development (somewhere in SN 46 bojjhanga samyutta), as opposed to the directed type, which is what SN 46.3, SN 46.2, the cook sutta in SN 47, etc.
so in the undirected samadhi development, you can basically jump right into samadhi-bojjhanga, which has attention to samatha-nimittam (sign of stillness) and abyagga-nimittam (sign of non-distraction) as the main fuel source.
what vism. and ajahn brahm’s explanation for vitakka and vicara of first jhana is more applicable to this undirected samadhi development for one already skilled in samadhi. The Buddha, on the other hand, is trying to lay out a detailed gradual training in samadhi.
First jhana in this regard is particularly important, because it’s training you how to use your mind in the right way, in a skillful way, to see hindrances, the causes, and with skill and practice learn how to overcome them. With a sufficient amount of physical and mental passadhi, that skill can take you all the way into the fourth jhana.
Hey Frank,
Good of you to offer an explanation in practical terms and I’d certainly look forward to what you have to say about those two suttas from the Satipatthana Samyutta in the same terms. I just want to point out a few things:
To clarify here I would propose that the sense of “piecing different things together” that comes from the Milindapañha subsumes the sense of “selecting an object”.
You’ve bolded this in the second excerpt you quoted, and I just want to point out that this is actually a rendering of the verb pari-vīmaṃsa’m-āpajjati rather than pavicarati.
And I’m not sure if you’re saying here that vicaya and pavicarati come from the same roots, but just in case you are, according to the PTS PED, vicaya comes from vicinati which is translated as “discrimination”, but might be literally understood as “dis-assembly”.
But yes, otherwise, being part of the “waxing syllable” series of verbs for dhammavicaya, pavicinati and pavicarati would be serving the same function.
Here’s that particular clause for clarity:
[SN 46.3]
taṃ dhammaṃ paññāya pa-vicinati pa-vicarati pari-vīmaṃsa’m-āpajjati
he discriminates that Dhamma with wisdom, examines it, makes an investigation of it.