What the Jhānas Actually Are by Bhikkhu Anīgha

The Watercooler
22

Oh and a copy of André Bareau’s “The Buddhist Schools of the Small Vehicle” is an absolute must. He states all of the doctrines of the early schools, as far as we can put them together. For example, for the Prajñaptivādins:

According to northern traditions the Prajñaptivādins broke away from the main Mahāsāṃghika tradition immediately after the Bahuśrutīyas. Their name means “the designators”, those who uphold the doctrine of designation. They are said to have still been existence in the 9th and 10th centuries, before dying out.

Texts
Nothing is known about their literature.

Doctrines

  1. Suffering is neither an aggregate nor exists outside of the aggregates.

  2. The 12 ayatana are not finished and complete realities. Since things are merely an accumulation of elements they do not exist, and since their nature varies with time they are not finished realities.

  3. Conditioned things, which evolve interpedently, being mere designations (prajñapti) are suffering.

  4. Suffering is an absolute reality.

  5. A man is not an agent.

  6. There is no untimely death. Previous actions cause death.

  7. All suffering comes from actions.

  8. The Path is not a mental factor.

  9. Because of accumulation of actions, development of the fruit of fruition occurs.

  10. The Noble Path is attained through merit. Virtuous conduct and the merit this entails are the reason why undefiled knowledge is acquired.

  11. The Path cannot be cultivated.

  12. The Path cannot be destroyed. When one has attained the Noble Path, one remains there definitively.

Or the Bahuśrutīyas

There are conflicting accounts of the origin of this school. Mahāsāṃghika sources say they split directly from the main Mahāsāṃghika, whereas Theravādin and Sammatīya say they split from the Gokulikas/Kukkuṭikas. Their name means “those who have heard much”, likely referring to themselves as learned scholars. They seem to have accepted the Mahāyāna sūtras.

Texts
This school had a Vinaya-piṭaka, Sūtra-piṭaka and Abhidharma-piṭaka. They also had a Bodhisattva-piṭaka. The Tattvasiddhi-Śāstra is a surviving text from this school. On the whole this tradition seems to have fused Mahāyāna and “Hīnayāna” doctrines. It’s possible that their Abhidharma was quite similar to the Sarvāstivādins

Doctrines

  1. Five points of the Buddha’s teachings are transcendental (lokottara): impermanence, suffering, emptiness, anatta and nirvāṇa. The remainder of the Buddha’s teachings are worldly - The very sounds by which these transcendental teachings are expressed is their substance (dravya), which makes them transcendental.

  2. Acceptance of Mahādeva’s five theses.

  3. On the emancipatory (niryānika) Path, there is no deliberation (vicāra).

  4. The Truth of Suffering, conventional Truth and the Noble Truths are the Truths.

  5. One enters an attainment by means of the view of the suffering of conditioned things, but not by means of the view of the suffering of suffering or the suffering of formations.

  6. The sangha is transcendental.

  7. There are two truths, a worldly (laukika) or conventional truth and absolute truth (paramārtha).

  8. Everything is concept only (prajñapti) and devoid of real existence.

  9. The person does not really exist, contrary to the Vātsīputrīyas.

  10. The Buddha is not included within the Sangha, as is claimed by the Mahīśāsakas.

  11. A past action which has not ripened into a result exists yet the rest of the past does not exist, contrary to the Kāśyapīyas.

  12. It cannot be said that everything exists, nor that the past and future exist, nor that they do not exist.

  13. It cannot be said that an intermediate existence exists, nor that it does not exist.

  14. It cannot be said that clear comprehension is progressive, nor that it is not so.

  15. It cannot be said that an Arahant can regress, nor that he cannot regress.

  16. It cannot be said that the mind is clear by nature, nor that it is not so.

  17. It cannot be said that the latent tendencies are associated with thought nor dissociated from thought.

  18. Whoever gives a gift to the Buddha or Sangha will generate much merit.

  19. The fetters cannot be abandoned by the worldly path.

  20. There are 10 kinds of emptiness in the sense of anatta.

  21. There are two unconditioned dharmas: nirvāṇa and space.

  22. It cannot be said that unconditioned things really exist, since they are pure absences nor that they do not exist.

2 Likes
23

Truly wonderful answer, though frankly in equal measure overwhelming. Thank you so much!! Sometimes I start to think I’m decently knowledgeable about Buddhism and then someone like you comes and gives a much-needed whoop on the back :smile:

1 Like
24

The Abhidharmakośabhāṣya is a good place to start.

25

You should address the arguments the Bhikkhu has made about this very sutta.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HillsideHermitage/comments/17owo0t/comment/k94pq99/

What does SN 48.9 say in Pali? “Letting go” is Sujato’s choice of translation for what is, as far as I can tell, “renunciation” again.

I do not think this is disputed by the Bhikkhu. I think he agrees there can be a long time period, but I could be mistaken.

The Anapanasati sutta seems to imply the breathing is always discernible.

The Bhikkhu has discussed Anapanasati, and I do not think the Bhikkhu has said that as soon as sensual thoughts stop this is jhana. Did you read the entire book? (I have read most but not all of it.) From what I gather, the Bhikkhu agrees there is a transition period between thinking wholesome thoughts and jhana, he just disagrees this transition period consists of deliberately concentrating on one object .

You said that he makes jhana sound very mundane and ordinary, and I replied that he did not, so I think what I wrote there is directly related to what you posted.

Elder bhikkhus disagree about the nature of jhana. Bhikkhu Anigha is another one with a different view!

I think Bhikkhu Anigha is aware of this sutta, and his understanding of jhana can be rendered consistent with this sutta.

Well, bhikkhus are forbidden from declaring they have attained jhana, but many write books about jhana in which it is clearly implied they have attained it. The elder bhikkhus whose interpretation of jhana you seem to agree with have done this as well. The same thing is occuring here.

I do not understand this.

On the whole: I agree there are some strong arguments to make against the HH interpretation. But these arguments should be presented fairly, without accusations of evilness, and should entirely engage the viewpoint of the accused. Many of the suttas you have referenced have been directly discussed by HH.

4 Likes
26

See Ajahn Thanissaro’s response in the essay ‘Thinking About Jhāna’ here…

27

But with excessive thinking and pondering I might tire my body, and when the body is tired, the mind becomes strained, and when the mind is strained, it is far from concentration.

(Ven. Bodhi)

In this translation of MN 19 by Ven. Bodhi, we see that it is the excess of thought that is denounced. But even in other translations, it is thinking “for too long” that is denounced. It doesn’t say that the mere fact of thinking is necessarily a problem. In fact, right after this, the Buddha explains how to produce effective positive thoughts for meditation.

1 Like
28

@Green While the monkey mind is an obstacle to meditation, it is not the real reason why people, these days, find it difficult to progress. The real reason is, these days, people are just not smart enough to find clever strategies to overcome the hindrances.

In the time of the Buddha, some people could become enlightened (never mind Jhana) just by listening to a talk. That is because they understood not just the words but the reality that underpinned them. How many people do you hear about today that are enlightened in this way. Come to think of it, how many people do we know that are enlightened via any means? These days, we could not have 2,500 Arahants coming together in the same place. We would be lucky to get 2 Arahants in the same place.

The lack of smart strategies is a refined aspect of sloth and torpor. To overcome it one has to develop wisdom, even if that wisdom is of the mundane type, and energy.

29

Just saying(not an expert in Pali or English or anything)

Regarding standard Jhana formulas, I think there are certain pariyaya at play. For example even if words like ekaggata, ekodibhāva etc are used in isolation, it should be understood this is talking about nature of mind, ekodibhāva of mind. (Actually it should be said Jhana sanna, manasikara, vitakka, vicara etc all dhammas are ekodibhūtā)

In the same way, vitakka is also talking about nature of mind. Abhiniropita nature, abhiniropita nature of mind, ekaggabhāvena abhiniropita nature of mind is called vitakka in the first Jhana.

Can usual senses of the word ‘thought’ be used to express nature of Jhana? I don’t know. May be with poetic licence - one profound expansive(mahaggata) thought etc.

30

These schools/interpretations that you mention, how long after the Buddha were they formed?

31

From the article:

Jhāna Needed for Stream-Entry?

What’s been said so far will also serve to shed some light on a familiar controversy among modern Buddhists, which is whether jhāna is necessary for the attainment of stream-entry, given that a sotāpanna is said to possess sammāsamādhi, which is defined as the four jhānas. The solution to the seeming conundrum is that a stream-enterer, due to having first and foremost seen the danger in sensuality (see AN 6.73 above & MN 14) on account of seeing the origin of dukkha, and furthermore due to being able to recognize the hints of their mind (cittassa nimitta), which is the basis for any mind-development as per SN 47.8, has the faculty to meditate on the nature of sensuality correctly, in its full extent, and no longer confuses playing around with ideas and right reflection. Such a person has developed the concrete thinking described earlier, which is essentially the enlightenment factor of dhammavicaya12. Hence, when they reflect on the nature of sensuality and unwholesome states, or on the fundamental truths they understood, they are practicing jhāna, even if they’re still not aware of it and have not obtained the wholesome pleasure of detachment from sensuality yet, which can take a while (AN 3.94, MN 14).

So poor sotāpannas are practicing jhāna, but they’re still not aware of it. Fortunately for them, there is venerable author who can clarify for them their misunderstanding of their own experience :smiling_face: