Where in the EBT is sammā samādhi defined as 4 jhānas?

[Sylvester]

Absolutely.

[Sylvester]

@samseva

Of central importance here is the presence of right view, as the forerunner of the whole path, without whose implementation concentration can never be reckoned sammā.

I think those who dislike MN 117 on account of its apparent “lateness” can also draw the same conclusion from SN 45.8. This centrality, inseperability of and absolute dependance of Right Concentration on Right View in the Path may not be so obvious in the Pali SN 45.8, but if we look at the Chinese parallels, it would appear that orginally, the analysis in SN 45.8 was part of a longer set of discourses.

I think the SA preserve this framework better, given that the purpose of the Noble Eightfold Path is set out in SA 783 (the parallel to SN 45.5), and the analysis of the factors follows right after in SA 784 (parallel to SN 45.8). The settings of the narratives do not matter that much to me.

Even more explicit in this connection is SN 45.1 (= SA 749), which requires Right View to enable its sequelae to arise.

There’s much to be commended in the suggestion made by others in this thread that perhaps the sense carried by Right Concentration is best understood in the context of its occurrence. If it is in the context of the Noble Eightfold Path, it should be understood as part of an integrated totality and not be divorced from the Third Noble Reality. This would resolve those situations where the Jhanas are attained by worldlings (eg AN 4.123) and why in those circumstances, the Jhanas attained in those contexts would not qualify as sammā due to the absence of Right View.

[frankk]

That’s a good find

@samseva

the qualification sammā, ‘right’, which literally means “togetherness”, or to be “connected in one”. This thus indicates that the criterion for describing concentration as sammā, as ‘right’, is whether it is developed ‘together’ with the other factors of the noble eightfold path. Of central importance here is the presence of right view, as the forerunner of the whole path, without whose implementation concentration can never be reckoned sammā.

Along with MN 117 (and a few other passages), where samma samadhi is defined as ekagga citta + the other 7 factors in 8aam (noble eightfold path), this resolves that dilemma with the ordinary 4j (jhanas).

However.

The point of the thread, my original reason for probing into this, is because the human mind takes short cuts in trying to quickly make sense of our perceptions of the world. Again and again when we read enough suttas, we constantly see 4j formula followed by nibbida, viraga, … nirvana. With the SN 45.8 definition that samma samadhi = 4j, when we see 4j on its own (without being explicitly defined), we make that connection in our mind, and we treat as a complete comprehensive definition as samma samadhi. It is not. It is a big part of it, but it’s not the whole thing. So the point of the thread is, when I actually looked through every single reference to samma samadhi in the suttas (rough estimate 400), only in 4 suttas is it explicitly defined as 4j. The point of the thread is for other people to share passages I may have missed, other EBT parallels. If you want to broaden the search and see where samadhi is expilcitly tied to 4j, (and not just samma samadhi), be my guest.

samadhi-sam-bojjhanga, compared to samma samadhi, is clear and explicit that samadhi, is a factor that leads to awakening (bojjhanga = bodhi + anga), and Buddha is a conjugated form of bodhi. As far as I know samadhi sambojjhanga never is explicitly tied to 4j, and I have looked at every passage I an find. In that sense, like samadhi-indriya, that’s excellent because the non definitive-ness makes it clear to the student to stay alert and not assume samadhi is only 4j.

samma samadhi, the samma on its own, doesn’t make that reinforcement so obvious. One has to think about it, and make connections with other suttas to see that 4j on its own is not samma samadhi.

[samseva]

@frankk

Again and again when we read enough suttas, we constantly see 4j formula followed by nibbida, viraga, … nirvana. With the SN 45.8 definition that samma samadhi = 4j, when we see 4j on its own (without being explicitly defined), we make that connection in our mind, and we treat as a complete comprehensive definition as samma samadhi. It is not. It is a big part of it, but it’s not the whole thing. So the point of the thread is, when I actually looked through every single reference to samma samadhi in the suttas (rough estimate 400), only in 4 suttas is it explicitly defined as 4j. The point of the thread is for other people to share passages I may have missed, other EBT parallels. If you want to broaden the search and see where samadhi is expilcitly tied to 4j, (and not just samma samadhi), be my guest.

I fully agree. Sammā-samādhi is usually defined as the 4 jhānas and this never made total sense to me. How can someone work on the full Eightfold Path when his meditation is not yet developed enough to reach jhāna? Before one reaches jhāna, the factor of sammā-samādhi is left “in the air” and undeveloped?

Good non-jhānic concentration is without a doubt important to develop insight regarding the teachings and one’s own mind, as well as basic composure; whether one has reached jhāna or not. Surely there are other wholesome and beneficial—as well as important—levels of concentration other than jhāna.

Note: Full jhāna is still a large portion of sammā-samādhi, as well as being highly important and beneficial.

[samseva]

While jhāna does have other benefits, it is still predominantly a means to an end, being to develop wisdom (paññā) and the factor of Right View (sammā-diṭṭhi). Jhāna not connected to the other factors is just pleasant sensations (and one doesn’t even have to be Buddhist to develop jhāna). More so, if jhāna is only used and developed for the resulting pleasant states (and not to develop wisdom), then it is an unwholesome attachement like attachement to any other type of sense object (being sense-objects of the mind, rather than of touch, taste, etc.).

[chinjo83]

hi frankk,
do you have the english translation for SA 784 ,785 ?

Thank you

chinjo

[elisabetta]

Hello and welcome @chinjo83 . On behalf of the moderators, we hope that this forum is of benefit to you on your path. Should you need any assistance, please don’t hesitate to ask by sending a PM to @moderators.

With metta.