The four jhānas are incredibly important in most Gelug-derived Buddhisms particularly amongst the Tibetic branches and I am thinking here particularly of in the tantras, so in my experience the statement about jhāna cultivation being considered hīnayāna is incoherent with both vajra and bodhisattvayāna. We already have a disagreement on this issue though so it’s best not to bring that fight here.
2 Likes
I agree with observation that arahant regard jhana as more pleasant than sensual experience,
However, my personal opinion is that they avoid doing sensual activities for sake of sensual pleasure, rather than avoiding them entirely. After all, they still ate food, and talk to each other.
And they can do whatever activity they want, some teach, some meditate, some go to wilderness, and if they have to choose how to pass time between jhana or sensual pleasure, they probably choose jhana
1 Like
If it helps reduce craving, aversion and delusion and is calming… Anything that increases cravings aversion and delusion and agitation must be avoided by a person intent on developing the path, but the same song which is soothing can become something to become attached to.
4 Likes
Sorry that was meant to be senses, not sense.
Have you read much about jhāna? That’s pretty standard I think! I’m a bit busy to find sources just now but did you not notice that jhāna is never talked about regarding anyone doing any movement or any action? It’s always seated in silent meditation. Read up on what jhāna states are (there are articles on it on accesstoinsight website for example, with sources - maybe some here too?) and you will see what the attributes of jhāna are.
One example of the extreme of no sense input is when … the Buddha?.. didn’t even notice that hundreds of wagons had rummbled past him while he was in jhāna.
For many people though, perhaps a loud sound would actually pull them out of jhāna. Jhãna is specifically beyond the sense sphere, so you have to let go of the sense sphere to enter that state.
Not excluded from immersion, or not excluded from jhāna. Because we are talking about jhāna. Find me any example of anyone doing jhāna while walking, in any EBT and I will be extremely surprised.
By studying the doctrine.
Are you willing to provide any evidence of jhāna practice instructions given to any Gelugpa for the purpose of said Gelugpas actually practicing jhāna? And if there is no evidence, then, is there any reason not to abandon this view?
That view is not in line with the quote:
And that was the surprising part for me. Of course I do not assume however that it is surely the opinion/statement of the Buddha.
I had a Theravadin bhikkhuni ask me to play music during her dhamma teachings in India once. I’ve had a few Mahayana teachers do the same but it was the Theravada case that I found interesting, because Tibetans rather famously dismiss much (most?) of the vinaya anyway! Her reasoning was that it was conducive the the dhamma. I expect this was because of the nature of the music, with is suffused with relaxation and concentration, both what we need for meditation. As it happens the music is from a Japanese Buddhist tradition (Fuke Shū) and was used as their main practice, so we believe - we have the music but don’t actually know so much about the life of the members of this school since it was abolished during the Buddhist persecution of the Meiji period.
1 Like
I am very familiar with sitting meditation and for many years led meditation for others. I am also familiar with the receding of the senses with deeper meditation. In fact I meditate sitting with eyes closed. I also am very familiar with Bhante Sujato’s EBT jhana descriptions.
With walking meditation, I enter into the same stillness of sitting meditation simply by closing my eyes and walking slowly. Clearly this is will never be as deep or long as sitting meditation, if only because one might run into a tree or car in the street, so one has to open eyes every now and then to orient. But it is the same stillness as for sitting meditation. Not as deep, but the same quality.
Regarding EBT to corroborate, here is MN4:
I didn’t stand still or sit down or lie down until I had got rid of that fear and dread while walking.
The only way I can get rid of fear and dread is to abide in the stillness I first found in sitting meditation. MN4 discusses lying, standing, walking and sitting. Then it goes on to discuss jhana. In my experience, the stillness found in sitting meditation does dissolve fear and dread while lying, standing, walking and sitting. I actually used that stillness for over a decade unravelling fear and dread in movement. It does work. Sitting did not help this fear and dread because the fear and dread only showed up when moving. Therefore, seeking stillness in movement was the only way to get rid of that fear and dread. Exactly as per MN4.
From this experience, I would really hesitate to say “no jhana in walking”. However, I would quite
agree that walking in stillness is much more difficult than sitting in stillness.
2 Likes
Sorry that was meant to be while walking. Edited the original now.
If by the same, you mean you have no awareness of sense input, then I am surprised you don’t fall over or fall into something.
Besides, giving motor commands and so on, it not a state of one-pointedness.
I believe the trouble is that you have experienced some sense of stilness, and then seem to believe that that stillnss is jhāna. And so when you feel that stillness while walking, you apparently believe you are in jhāna. I would suggest that your assumption may not be in accordance with what jhāna means in the EBT’s.
I’m not sure it’s useful for me to fill up this thread with this same conversation so I might leave it at that regarding your definition of jhāna - I don’t mean to be rude, just it’s taking too much time and I doubt it is useful to many people.
3 Likes
Actually, in the other thread, my sources revolved around a Nyingmapa source. Unfortunately you did not see the link in time to read it, it seems. I was unemployed when I was able to assemble those various extensive documentations that did not impress you. I don’t have the same time now, unfortunately.
I will see if any of my old contacts at the Tendai Buddhist Institute in New York can write to you personally. I offered this initially in our disagreement on the other thread but you didn’t seem to want such contact. It seems apparent to me that you believe Mahāyānika to be liars generally, from your posts earlier above and in our past contact, so I don’t know what good this would do, but I really don’t know what could possibly convince you of this obvious fact other than an authentic teacher reaching out to you.
We can have it on the record here that we have a severe disagreement and leave it at that. No need to go back into it. I’m sure the last dialogue was at least as frustrating and pointless for you as it was for me.
1 Like
Indeed, not only ‘more difficult’ but actually impossible! Walking is definitely not stillness. And what you’re describing is not jhana either. Sorry! 
5 Likes
I would agree that stillness isn’t jhana. However jhana is used for the blissful state after attaining to a jhana, as well, it seems, in the EBTs. While walking in the state of abiding-in, which is jhana is impossible, walking in the state after arising from jhana, is possible, and this is one possibility…
1 Like
Good effort! That is definitely worth a quick link . Am I right in assuming that it is this:
This is an important point. This idea of a movement away from ‘agitation’ towards ‘calm’. In this way we can see that a mind which is highly agitated can be made calm using a piece of music and a mind that is very calm can be agitated by the same piece of music. As is often the case, the correct course of action is conditional on the current state of mind.
You are probably right that I do not understand what the term jhana means - I come from a different tradition and we slice up states of being (or states of consciousness, or realms of existence, or whatever) in a different way. But if the term jhana means what is on the other side of (what I believe is referred to as) nimitta, then my understanding of the term jhana coincides with your understanding in that there is clearly no walking, talking or awareness of the five senses in jhana. Regardless of this agreement with you, my statement stands.
Having said that, maybe I would now put it in a somewhat different way and expand on what I said. Maybe I would suggest that the natural, default state of mind is jhana and that the movement of mind away from that still state is an aberration. The mind of a non-arahant is often moved away from jhana by craving, whereas the mind of the (living) arahant is only moved away from jhana by such things as compassion (to teach, and in order to do that: to feed and exercise the body, etc…) and never by craving
I think it is incumbent on those who can recollect these deeper states free from the five senses to tell those who have forgotten them that these states are your home, your birthright - normal, natural and the default state of the unagitated mind.
Just some thoughts from a non-buddhist. 
No way! Really? Is that your experience? Is there anything about this in the EBT’s? The mind can toggle quite fast in and out of (my naive and crude understanding of the term) jhana, but the senses have gone whilst one is actually in jhana, surely? If a yogi were to hear a sound, then at that moment they are surely going to be this side of jhana?
Yes. Even in first jhana the mind isn’t completely still is it? In first jhana there’s still a little … ummm … ‘bounciness’? Is that right? - Just trying to hone my understanding of what the term jhana (and it’s subdivisions) means.
1 Like
Here the Buddha describes that while his mind is established on a higher theme, he can also be in any of the four bodily postures.
AN.3.63
“But, Master Gotama, what is the celestial high and luxurious bed that at present you gain at will, without trouble or difficulty?”
“Here, brahmin, when I am dwelling in dependence on a village or town, in the morning I dress, take my bowl and robe, and enter that village or town for alms. After the meal, when I have returned from the alms round, I enter a grove. I collect some grass or leaves that I find there into a pile and then sit down. Having folded my legs crosswise and straightened my body, I establish mindfulness in front of me. Then, secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, I enter and dwell in the first jhāna, …
Then, brahmin, when I am in such a state, if I walk back and forth, on that occasion my walking back and forth is celestial. If I am standing, on that occasion my standing is celestial. If I am sitting, on that occasion my sitting is celestial. If I lie down, on that occasion this is my celestial high and luxurious bed. This is that celestial high and luxurious bed that at present I can gain at will, without trouble or difficulty.”
1 Like
In the @sujato translation, the line that you highlighted says: “When I’m practicing like this …” rather than “when I am in such a state …”, maybe suggesting that these two activities are part of a larger retreat.
I also find it curious that in the first paragraph, the Buddha says:
I collect some grass or leaves that I find there into a pile and then sit down.
and in the second paragraph he says:
if I walk back and forth
You can’t sit down and walk at the same time.
1 Like
Sorry which thread? It seems I only get notifications if I’m tagged or directly replied to, but not when someone just replies like how Facebook works. If you wouldn’t mind tagging me, that would be awesome.
I myself found one Nyingma source, so I wonder if it’s the same. It was just one instruction from one person to one student, and it’s the only single reference I have ever found for any Tibetan being instructed to do jhāna practice. Whereas I have seen many examples in writing and from directly questioniong Tibetan Lamas where jhāna practice is very specifically rejected.
If you have no Gelug sources, why are you convinced that they practice jhāna?
I’m genuinely open to the possiblity that some Tibetans practice jhāna. Which is why I try to follow up such claims. But all the years I’ve been asking, all my sources bar that one teaching from an old text of one person being instructed, is the only single source that goes against the common thread I have found throughout Tibetan Buddhism of explicitely rejecting jhāna practice. And often accompanied by explicit reasoning as to why, also.
This also makes me curious as the what the reasoning was for any rare pro-jhāna Tibetans. I would be very interested in that!
I wonder if you know Alan Wallace. I’ve been on one of his retreats, and talked in depth with him on this subject. He specialises as a samatha teacher. He has led many… 3 month I think… samatha retreats. He’s published many samatha books. He was a Gelugpa monk and used to translate for the Dalai Lama when he came to teach in Europe. He has been a disciple of the Dalai Lama for many years and done samatha retreats under his guidance. And he is heavily into Nyingma, having translated several books for his Nyingmapa guru.
And he insists that Tibetan Buddhism rejects jhāna categorically, and insists that the peak of samatha in Tibetan Buddhism, is what Theravadins call ‘access concentration’ - the stage immediately preceeding jhāna - no further.
He is only one of my many sources. But since he is an extreme insider of Gelug and Nyingma, and a samatha specialist, both doctrinally and in practice, he would seem to be a highly qualified source.
That would be wonderful. Please do tag me if any of this comes, I’d be very interested. I have found it so hard to find any genuine practice of jhāna in Mahayana, but it does seem that there is some, albeit apparently extremely rare.
And if you do contact them, and if they do indeed practice jhāna or know that it is practiced in Tendai, then could you perhaps ask them if they know the reasoning against the Mahayana claim that jhāna practice can end you up becoming a stream enterer or even arahant, which are of course terrible traps according to Mahayana, and even stream entry destroys their path since their number of lives will be thereby limited to 7 more, and they will be unable to complete the bodhisattva path since they need to wait until there is no Buddhism in a world system, in order for them to become a buddha (each world system has maximum capacity for only one buddha, and even that one cannot appear in a world system that still has any Buddhist teachings in it). I believe that is a significant reason behind the general rejection of jhāna in Mahayana.
Sorry about that, I am quite disorganised, it’s possible that I got distracted into other things and never came back to this site to read new comments…? But if you do provide that information, I will be very eager to read it.
Not sure if I think like that! I would say that there’s a large amount of cognitive dissonance among Mahayanists - there is a wealth of evidence to demonstrate that their sutras are not authentic, in terms of their authorship and claimed age. And they generally seem to bury their heads in the sand in light of all of this evidence, choosing instead to have blind faith in what their teachers say about those texts. That doesn’t amount to lying, rather, a strong kind of ignorance.
But certainly some of them will lie. There is a lot of lying about attainments and experience, often lying to say they have no attainments, no experience and so on. That is definitely a strong tradition, which I find in the context of the West massively decreases the efficiency of teaching, just as if a music teacher were telling their students that they cannot understand music theory well, cannot perform well, just passing on things their teachers told them etc.
But when it comes to jhāna, sure some Mahayana teachers do claim their school teaches jhāna, especially if it’s an outsider asking. One lama told that to me, and his brother, who is a teacher of mine, told me the opposite. I heard that same lama say a number of other things which were factually untrue. That was about saving face, or not disturbing the faith of the other people there, who knew almost onthing of detailed doctrine. They would have been confused if he had answered truthfully, that they reject the Buddha’s own meditation practice.
And some others make kind of ‘soft’ lies, in that they insist their school practices jhāna, when they actually don’t know what they’re talking about. Like for example when you examine their claim, and it turns out they don’t know what jhāna even is, and the practices they are referring to have nothing to do with jhāna, and are actually states where the mind is open to the sense realm, not the form realm. We have a good example right here in this thread of someone claiming to practice jhāna, but it turns out on deeper inspection that they are claiming they are doing that while walking. This is a rather perfect example of why you can’t believe someone is practicing jhāna just because they say so. Further questioning can often reveal there is no jhāna there.
So, for sure I never take a claim at face value without investigating it in detail, to establish wherer the actual state we ae talking about is the same. The main issue here is the fact that the term dhyāna has evolved over the centuries in Mahayana, and even ended up with multiple meanings. So it’s easy to be thinking you’re talking about the same thing, when you’re just using the same term to refer to totally different practices.
That’s why whenever I’m asking Tibetan lamas about this, I never say jhāna or dhyāna, I specifically say the 4 jhānas, and I give the Tibetan term, and I give the context, i.e. whihc kind of texts I’m referring to for these practices. This makes it clear enough for a Tibetan with extensive doctrinal knowledge to understand the precise topic, otherwise their answer may be unreliable.
Sure, I will not force any reply! And, only just rad this part as I’ve been going through step by step, so, hope you don’t mind my above responses.
1 Like
AN3.107
“Singing is regarded as wailing in the training of the noble one.
Dancing is regarded as madness.”
How could sounds or music develop ones mind in Understanding/wisdom? How can it help in renunciation?
Even in terms of “natural” sounds?
If he delighted, it was in dispassion, because why would the Buddha be calmed and delighted in the screams and cries of insects or animals?
Birds and insects don’t really sing for us or for wholesome reasons ,they shout to maintain their territory, the call for a mate, they try to protect their young with alarming chirps. In fact most of the insect sounds are about survival, sex and defending themselves.
It’s a pretty rough world for animals and insects.
It obviously sounds better than drunken screams in a village, but it’s still a type of screaming. 
Sure, a larger retreat being ones lifestyle.
Yes, but If he chooses to walk, he walks in that same state which he has developed.
A person who has developed jhana i.e can practice it at will, can be said to have a strong mind, a mind which overwhelms things and does not get overwhelmed by things, therefore if changing your bodily postures overwhelms your mind to the extent that the jhana-strength falls apart…you were not in jhana and you have not developed strength of mind.
Jhana equals resilience.
AN8.30
"When you reflect upon these eight thoughts of a great person and gain at will … these four jhānas … then, while you dwell contentedly, your dwelling place at the foot of a tree will seem to you as a house with a peaked roof, plastered inside and out, draft-free, with bolts fastened and shutters closed, seems to a householder or a householder’s son; and it will serve for your delight, relief, and ease, and for entering upon nibbāna…etc "
AN4.11
Whether walking or standing,
sitting or lying down,
one who thinks bad thoughts
connected with the household life
has entered upon a dire path,
infatuated by delusive things:
such a bhikkhu cannot reach
the highest enlightenment.
But one who, whether walking,
standing, sitting, or lying down,
has calmed his thoughts
and delights in the stilling of thought:
a bhikkhu such as this can reach
the highest enlightenment.
4 Likes
Wow, you are quite the sleuth, Media! Yes, the West Riding “My Wyoming Within” album is my release. If you check the detailed liner notes, you can see I actually recorded part of it “at the roots of trees” post-meditation, and used a sample of my local Thai Forest teachers (LP Pasanno, Viradhammo, and Ajahn Sudanto) leading the PFOD sangha in the Morning Chanting from the Amaravati/Abayaghiri book. Thanks for the link.
1 Like
Abhsamayalamkara outlines the correspondences between the 4 people of the path and the 10 bodhisattva stages. A bodhisattva stream-entrant with cultivated bodhicitta is on the first bhūmi. So I think we are dealing with different Mahāyāna Buddhisms here. Even so, if the stream-entrant experienced a break up in his bodhicitta, he would enter into the Lotus Vault samādhi and receive instruction from the Buddha outside of the threefold world (Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśaḥ T1509.714a9) to perfect his Buddhahood.
So we are coming from very different Mahāyānika angles.
Also, I am using a descriptive definition of dhyāna, and you a prescriptive one. The act of “practising dhyāna” in my view is not synonymous with “achieving dhyāna”. That is to say, regardless of efficacy, the act of " practising dhyāna", to me, is the act of “trying to access dhyāna”. In light of that my earlier statements concerning dhyāna in the dispensation of Venerable Nichiren can be taken as, they practice dhyāna, but do they achieve it with those methods?
The Mahāyānika redefining of dhyāna IMO finds itself rooted in texts like the apocryphal Platform Sūtra (and when Mahāyāna calls something apocryphal that means it’s really, really, really apocryphal). I can’t remember the exact quote but it goes something like “The unified heart is the mother of all dhyānāni.” This unified heart being a translation of one-pointed mind. The quote can be interpreted in two ways, one in-line with earlier descriptions of dhyāna and one that is supersessionist and replaces older models with an abbreviated model focused on strictly observation and questing for single-pointedness rather than any other element of dhyāna.
I will get back to you later via PM or a new thread concerning other things brought up.
2 Likes
Venerable @Thaniyo_Bhikkhu ,
Regarding your use of AN3.63, although some people seem to think this sutta is clear proof that jhana can be experienced in walking meditation, it should be pointed out, however, that this is hardly a universally accepted view. Firstly and most importantly, it would make this the only sutta in the canon that mentions a walking jhana, and as sutta scholars always point out, it is much safer to look at the overwhelming general trend in all the suttas than rely on a single sutta that stands out to prove a doctrinal point.
Certainly, the commentaries disagreed about whether this sutta describes a walking jhana, and attempted to make sense of it, as Bhikkhu Bodhi, whose translation is used above, points out in his notes on this sutta:
Mp says that his walking back and forth is celestial when, having entered the four jhānas, he walks back and forth; and his walking back and forth is celestial when, after emerging from the four jhānas, he walks back and forth. This seems to imply that walking can occur even with the mind in jhāna. This, however, is contradicted by the dominant understanding that jhāna is a state of uninterrupted absorption in an object, in which case intentional movements like walking would not be possible. Mp-ṭ explains the first case of Mp (walking after entering the jhānas) to mean that he walks back and forth immediately after emerging from the jhāna, while the second case (walking after emerging) to mean that he walks back and forth after having emerged some time earlier .
There is a variety of activities mentioned in the Sutta and the sequence of events is not explictly made clear, but we can use our common sense to see that it refers to different activities not simultaneous activities. As you said in response to @Media point about this being clearly part of a retreat, it’s an indication of “a lifestyle” not activities done in meditation… When we look at this sutta as a whole, it is given to a community of lay people who were brahmins (i.e. not practicing bhikkhus). Using the metaphor of a comfortable bed, the Buddha describes jhana meditation states through allegorical imagery:
There are, brahmin, these three high and luxurious beds that I get these days when I want, without trouble or difficulty…
The Buddha is not literally resting in a luxurious bed during meditation. It is a metaphor. Similarly when describing the four postures, he uses an image than the Brahmins would understand and find appealing:
When I’m practicing like this, if I walk meditation, at that time I walk like Brahmā…
He is not literally saying that he is Brahma, (or ‘celestial’ as BBodhi has it) instead it is an image used for the purpose of illustrating a point in a conversation that has already had several allegories. Given this, it would seem unwise to interpret the description of four postures as literally describing jhana states. We should not neglect the allegorical context here when selectively quoting from this sutta in a very literal way.
Further, many people unfortunately get caught up on the various english translations of this passage (rendered as ‘celestial’; ‘like gods’; ‘like brahma’, to mention a few) but getting stuck on a translated word is a dangerously erroneous way to go about interpretation, as translation is far from an exact science. We need to rely on other contexts for more certainty. There is also much uncertainty of the original textual terms and how the meaning should be constructed. You can see the types of complexity in some of the more exasperated posts in forums like this one:
This Sutta has also been discussed here previously.
this thread
I think I recall some wit there pointed out the difficulty of walking in 4th jhana when breathing has ceased. It seems a fair point!
AN8.30 is really about contentment. Jhana is samadhi, immersion, stillness etc . Resilience is the capacity to quickly recover from difficulties, so I’m not sure how you came to the create this sloganistic:
But for this to be true, resilience would also have to equal jhana… so I think to define it like that is an unusual oversimplification that might mislead readers here.
(Edited for clarity)
5 Likes
Sure. The majority do not accept it but I do not see that as a reason to reject it.
If there was a single sutta which stated that the Buddha said sensuality was wholesome ( or similar), then since it would be contradicting all other suttas, I would certainly reject it because it’s obviously very strange.
However this sutta which indicates that walking is possible in jhana does not seem to be strange or DANGEROUS and in fact, extends the jhana practice to include all postures( within reason of course).
Why would accepting the possibility of walking within a state of jhana be a problem?
Why is that idea, that one can move from a seated position into a walking position and still maintain 'withdrawal from sensual pleasures and unwholesome states, so controversial?
So the sutta contradicts the dominant understanding, which again is not a good enough reason to reject it.
Is the majority always right?
What is more likely, a few people understanding what jhana is or many people?
Just because an idea is popular doesn’t make it right.
As you say above, Bhante Bodhi attempts to make sense of it in accordance with the popular belief which is also his belief, so instead of attempting to upgrade his view of jhana to include this sutta he attempts to explain it in way which fits into the view that pleases him.
Again, why not just accept that it is possible to change postures in jhana? It doesn’t take away the SEATED position, it only upgrades ones knowledge of the extent of possibilities of jhana.
It’s an upgrade.
The majority say jhana is only possible while seated;
The minority say that jhana is possible in all postures.
The minority view describes a state of mind which is more formidable, more resilient, more immovable than the majorities view.
What can one lose in upgrading ones view to include this sutta? If you can do jhana seated…great, now try it standing etc.
He is comparing his actual literal state of mind (jhanas)to the idea of brahma and then saying that he literally walks meditation while his mind is like Brahma.
The same with the second, he compares his actual mind state (of brahmaviharas) to the idea of ‘heavens’ and says that he can be in any posture while that mind state is present.( would his state of brahmaviharas, fall apart when meeting other people? Or is brahmaviharas only possible while seated?)
The same with the third, he compares his state of mind (which is free from greed, hatred and delusion) with the idea of The NOBLE, and again says he can abide in that state in all postures. (Does he lose his nobility if he changes his postures?)
The uncertainty should leave one open to the possibility that ones or the majorities interpretation is wrong.
Also, for example, the word ‘viharati’, found in the jhana description and many other places/contexts, which is usually translated as ‘dwells , abides or remains’ can also be translated as ‘lives’. One could interpret ‘viharati’ as a mystical absorption that one gets immersed into and is incompatible with other mundane bodily postures or it can be interpreted as a state of mind that one lives with while one lives ones life.
A mind that develops restraint, and then abandons hindrances can be said to be quite strong and resilient, let alone a mind which has developed jhana, which can stand the pressure from the pull of the senses and unwholesome states, a mind which does not give into unwholesomeness can easily be described as resilient i.e no matter the pressure exerted from the senses, one remains withdrawn from them.
So thus the slogan , ‘jhana equals resilience’, but it is indeed not only resilient…DN2
When their mind has become composed (on acccont of development of restraint, abandoning of hindrances and development of jhana) like this—purified, bright, flawless, rid of corruptions, pliable/RESILIENT, workable, steady, and imperturbable—they extend it and project it toward knowledge and vision.
So evaṃ samāhite citte parisuddhe pariyodāte anaṅgaṇe vigatūpakkilese mudubhūte kammaniye ṭhite āneñjappatte ñāṇadassanāya cittaṃ abhinīharati abhininnāmeti. "
I might have oversimplified the description of jhana by using only the one-word ‘resilience’, but it came from my interpretation of being able to LIVE in jhana, which is an upgrade to the popular view that ‘jhana equals only sitting’ i.e not resilient.
Someone who thinks they have a steady jhanic mind when sitting, but loses that steady jhanic mind when they move around, should upgrade their understanding of what jhana is because its not that simple, and as you say…
2 Likes
Venerable, Your talk of “upgrading” jhana seems to me to be actually diminishing jhana. But I think we won’t make any progress in discussing it further.
Best wishes for your practice.
2 Likes
I know. It’s amazing right? I’m afraid I don’t know the answer - I’m not sure that anyone understands the mechanism in detail, but as a first stab, in brief, it may be something like:
hearing → listening → understanding
It seems quite improbable right? And yet two and a half thousand years ago a lion roared near Benares, in the deer park at Isipatana.
And in response: the earth gods raised the cry: “Near Benares, in the deer park at Isipatana, the Buddha has rolled forth the supreme Wheel of Dhamma. And that wheel cannot be rolled back by any ascetic or brahmin or god or Māra or Brahmā or by anyone in the world.” Hearing the cry of the Earth Gods, the Gods of the Four Great Kings … the Gods of the Thirty-Three … the Yāma Gods … the Joyful Gods … the Gods Who Love to Create … the Gods Who Control the Creations of Others … the Gods of Brahmā’s Host raised the cry: “Near Benares, in the deer park at Isipatana, the Buddha has rolled forth the supreme Wheel of Dhamma. And that wheel cannot be rolled back by any ascetic or brahmin or god or Māra or Brahmā or by anyone in the world.”
And so at that moment, in that instant, the cry soared up to the Brahmā realm. And this galaxy shook and rocked and trembled. And an immeasurable, magnificent light appeared in the world, surpassing the glory of the gods.
Then the Buddha was inspired to exclaim: “Koṇḍañña has really understood! Koṇḍañña has really understood!” And that’s how Venerable Koṇḍañña came to be known as “Koṇḍañña Who Understood”.
And that lion’s roar and the sounds that emanated from the Buddha for the next 45 years have echoed down the ages to us today. The sāvaka tradition is truly wonderful.
I guess what I’ve been exploring recently is what sonic environment is helpful and what sonic environment is a hindrance to the practice. We have greater opportunities to influence our sonic environment these days than the Buddha had. We now have ubiquitous recording and playback machines and other sonic manipulation technologies. Given this there is possibly some opportunities (to engage people and enhance their abilities in the practices ) that were unmentioned by the Buddha, but can possibly be informed by by the utterances of the Buddha.
For me personally, I have a history of setting up little (christian) meditation groups. Often these are situated in cities, and sometimes they are within residential buildings owned by the church. Now when we set these up we try to locate them somewhere quiet rather than say next to a flat where the tenants are often play ‘banging techno’ during our planned meditation times.
I think you might be suggesting that it doesn’t matter what the sonic environment one is in with regard to the practice? Whether one is in an anechoic chamber, a forest or a side room in a nightclub makes no difference. Is that right? Is this what you are suggesting?
If this is the case then I think that maybe you have a point. Another person (in real life, not in this thread) directed me to this dhamma talk by Ajahn Chah which is very neat:
Here is a simple comparison: suppose you go and sit in the middle of a freeway with the cars and trucks charging down at you. You can’t get angry at the cars, shouting, ‘‘Don’t drive over here! Don’t drive over here!’’ It’s a freeway, you can’t tell them that. So what can you do? You get off the road! The road is the place where cars run, if you don’t want the cars to be there, you suffer.
It’s the same with sankhāras . We say they disturb us, like when we sit in meditation and hear a sound. We think, ‘‘Oh, that sound’s bothering me.’’ If we understand that the sound bothers us then we suffer accordingly. If we investigate a little deeper, we will see that it’s we who go out and disturb the sound! The sound is simply sound. If we understand like this then there’s nothing more to it, we leave it be. We see that the sound is one thing, we are another. One who understands that the sound comes to disturb him is one who doesn’t see himself. He really doesn’t! Once you see yourself, then you’re at ease. The sound is just sound, why should you go and grab it? You see that actually it was you who went out and disturbed the sound.
Having said that, I’m guessing that this talk was given to some fairly experienced yogi’s. We might not get very many newbies to our city meditation sessions if we located it in a club and then gave them this as their first teaching! 
At least we can agree that we can delight in the stilling of thought. 
