Concentration on the signless attained by not giving attention to any sign
"Then, friends, paying no attention to any distinguishing signs, I entered on and dwelt in that concentration of the heart which is without signs. Animitto Sutta: The Signless
Now we have to keep in mind that both signless samadhi and satipattthana are in a sense the path leading to the asankhata
SN 43.4:
And what monks, is the path leading to the not-fabricated? The emptiness samādhi (suññatā samādhi), the signless samādhi (animittā samādhi), the undirected samādhi (appaṇihitā samādhi). This is called the path leading to the not-fabricated.
“And what, bhikkhus, is the path leading to the unconditioned? The four establishments of mindfulness….”
Therefore the straight reading here is that there is one path, the development of satipatthana is in a sense development of signless concentration analogical to four strivings
And what, bhikkhus, is the path leading to the unconditioned? The four right strivings….”
From this we establish that development of satipatthana and development of signless concentration can’t be divorced even tho a difference can be drawn out.
Now the question is what exactly is signless samadhi, is it a perspective on things, is this something akin to contemplation like perception of impermanence or brahmaviharas, or is it an actual meditative attainment where one sees no sign of this world?
So there are four proposed circumstances that fit the expression
a person contemplates the emptiness and signlessness of specific things
a person contemplates general emptiness and signlessness
a person attains a superhuman distinction of some sort which is apprehended as empty & signless
a person recollects & intends on a superhuman distinction, previously attained or unattained
I think most reasonable is the assertion #3 being that it is a samadhi not experienced through allness of the all, the transcending of all feeling states, cessation. Achieved by turning away from the conditioned by developing right strivings aka four satipatthana.
Now it would follow
development of satipatthana culminates in knowing what is not experienced through allness of the all and that samadhi is apprehended as signless.
One could also say that contemplating the drawbacks of seeing signs is one’s right effort for the directing of mind to signless samadhi but this is not yet signless samadhi because at that time one is percepient of signs. So one should differentiate between a mind steadied in signless samadhi and a mind engaged in development conducive to that attainment where the latter would fulful right effort & satipatthana development for it is path.
I think this is most reasonable as it fits these exerpts
“There are two conditions for the attainment of the theme-less awareness-release: lack of attention to all themes and attention to the theme-less property. These are the two conditions for the attainment of the theme-less awareness-release.”
“And how many conditions are there for the persistence of the theme-less awareness-release?”
“There are three conditions for the persistence of the theme-less awareness-release: lack of attention to all themes, attention to the theme-less property, and a prior act of will. These are the three conditions for the persistence of the theme-less awareness-release.”
And if we assert that cessation of attention to signs means transcerding even the giving of attention to the equanimity of neither perception nor non-perception. Then it followd that cessation of giving of attention also entails the stilling of all feeling, perception, form, sankharanirodha as the highest meditative attainment.
Anyway these are my suggested interpretations based on sutta alone.
Unfortunately nobody asked therein whether culmination of satipatthana could be explained as a removal of defilement by attaining cessation of perception & feeling and whether this attainment is a seeing with wisdom described & apprehended as signless samadhi. But this is what the texts appear to imply in as far as i can tell.
If someone has other viable ideas based on the pali sutta i want to hear it.
“There are, bhikkhus, these three kinds of unwholesome thoughts: sensual thought, thought of ill will, thought of harming. And where, bhikkhus, do these three unwholesome thoughts cease without remainder? For one who dwells with a mind well established in the four establishments of mindfulness, or for one who develops the signless concentration. This is reason enough, bhikkhus, to develop the signless concentration. When the signless concentration is developed and cultivated, bhikkhus, it is of great fruit and benefit."
So for the models that do not include the formless jhanas, vitakka and vicara are tantamount to sanna. This explains why Snp 4.2 uses sanna in the quote below:
I am thinking that in Snp 4.2 phassam/contact amounts to the seen, the heard, and the felt and sanna amounts to the known. To completely know contact and sanna is to completely know the seen, the heard, the felt, and known being left with merely the seen, merely the heard, merely the felt, and merely the known. The the connection to Ud 1.10 becomes evident:
In other word, the seen, the heard, the felt, and the known are again contact and merely the seen, merely the heard, merely the felt, and merely the known are rupa.
This appears to also explain “Form is emptiness, emptiness is form”. Contact is not empty. Rupa is empty, in other words, empty of the extras of contact.
One can infer from the texts what is meant by ‘signless’.
There is a signless element
The signless samadi is realized by not giving attention to signs and is based on the signless element
Attention is what makes dhammas come into play
By not giving attention to signs the signs do not come into play
When signs do not come into play, they cease, if one can’t delineate the sign then one can’t delineate the corresponding feeling, consciousness, perception or sankhara.
If there is no sign then there is no sign of this or or the next world and so it is a refence to the unmade ayatana apprehended as the cessation of perception & feeling.
The phrase
not giving attention to signs and giving attention to the signless
It is an analog of saying
one turns away from those things [aggregates] and directs his mind to the deathless element.
