Which jhana as a boy

[Gabriel]

@alaber

Everything we know about what happened to the Buddha-to-be to become an Arahat is found in very few suttas in the MN (can someone please confirm that there is no information of this type in the SN AN DN and other collections).

This is an aspect not fully scrutinized yet I feel. The Buddha’s austerities have become a fixed part of the biographical lore, yet they can be found only in MN 12 and MN 36. I’m an expressed skeptic when it comes to the authenticity of the MN and nobody has to share this impression. For me it is a pedagogical collection of composed suttas, put together as a digest of other suttas.

So it strikes me indeed as strange that we don’t find the Buddha’s austerities in the SN or AN.

Here are all the suttas that mention “Before my enlightenment” or “Before his enlightenment”:
MN 4, MN 14, MN 19, MN 26, MN 36, MN 85, MN 100, MN 128
AN 3.103, AN 5.68, AN 5.196, AN 8.64, AN 9.41,
SN 12.4, SN 12.10, SN 12.65, SN 14.31, SN 22.26, SN 35.13, SN 35.14, SN 35.117, SN 36.24, SN 51.11, SN 51.21, SN 54.8

There is a lot to learn from them about the Buddha-to-be’s insights and meditations, but maybe that’s for a separate thread…

[Gabriel_L]

Thanks for pointing AN9.41, its conclusion made my hair stand up!

“Ananda, as long as I had not attained & emerged from these nine step-by-step dwelling-attainments in forward & backward order in this way, I did not claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening.”

It is noteworthy that most of the SN sutras you list have no English translation yet available here. I hope soon we will have translations for those available here. In the mean time interested may find those translated here:

Index of the Vaggas and Their Samyuttas of the Samyutta Nikaya

[Linda]

For anyone interested, an interesting new book will be coming out in the spring:

A Meditator's Life of the Buddha: Based on the Early Discourses: Bhikkhu Analayo: 9781909314993: Amazon.com: Books

[Brother_Joe]

@laurence

Correction - there is nothing to prevent us from searching for it - there is a lot of searching that has gone on and, may continue until the cows come home! The crux of the issue is whether there is anything to find? The Buddha used similes to help us to understand these teachings. There is the simile where he asks: where does the fire go - when it is extinguished? Does it go in any direction? No, it just ‘goes out’ - it is extinguished.

The other ‘telling’ story is the one where he gets the psychic who can tell where beings are reborn - by tapping on their dead skulls - to tap on an Arahants skull. The Buddha gave him a skull that had been on the shoulders of an Arahant - who ‘ceased without remainder’. The psychic could not identify a place where the Arahant had ‘reappeared’.

So, if Nibbana is a thing that we can look for and, find, where is it? Have you found it and, if that is the case, what is it that you have found? We can search - nothing wrong with looking for something - good luck!

We may undertake a noble search for the truth which liberates. In the process we learn how to relax and let go, be content with little. Those who expect nothing are never disappointed, and often, pleasantly surprised! Nibbana is a true cessation not a true acquisition.

Hi Laurence

I’m not really interested in this type of discussion, especially expression of beliefs/opinions as truths. It is against the training I believe the Buddha instigated for us.

I don’t use ‘thing’ in the limited way you seem to, as physical object, or place. I take the Buddha’s teaching as extending the common, superficial, limited way of looking, to a bigger, noble, deeper one. Cessation, Nibbāna and Truth are things to me, with this extended meaning, that can and, I believe, should be sought after.

Contentment (and letting go) is part of the path for me, but clinging to it as the whole path, or the goal, is suffering and imo and experience, limits our progress.

best wishes

[Brother_Joe]

@Pasanna

Hi all,

I am interested in @Brother_Joe’s idea of wrong jhana. There are meditators/teachers at a large, famous, jhana monastery who can practice all 4 jhanas ‘1 hour, 2 hours. 3 hours, no problem’, yet are still puthajjanas. This is not a criticism of that monastery, I’m sure it’s happens enough elsewhere.

Dear Sister Passana

Thanks for your reply.

I would avoid judging who is/might be and who is not/might not be common people, despite their very good efforts. I think that is unwholesome mental behaviour. Judging actions though, I think is necessary and compassionate, though not always (usually) well received, vis right speech: true, useful, beneficial and the right time.

@Pasanna

Maybe what the Buddha is recalling is the self ‘letting go’ through contentment; sammā-sankappa. From seeing the will as a problem he could then formulate DO.

Or maybe that’s not what you meant at all Bhante!

Unfortunately, or not, I don’t follow the popular version of the Buddha’s teaching that ‘letting go’ and contentment is the be all and end all, which sits quite well with the philosophy that ‘the will’ is a problem. That is, for me, the diluting/pollution of the Buddha’s teaching.

For me, that approach lacks discrimination/wisdom/insight and is based on the false understanding of the Four Noble Truths, especially the second, that Desire is the Cause of Suffering. This philosophy is found in various traditions, such as Hindiusm and Taoism that have meditative practice.

For me the Four Noble Truths are:

• Life with clinging is suffering (not: life - the five aggregates- is suffering)
• The cause is ignorance (not desire, which is a later link in DO and has to be understood to be ‘desire conditioned by ignorance -the earlier link’, that is, UNwholesome desire)
• Cessation: End the result by ending the cause
• How to end the cause, the Path (not the traditional, standard, prefabricated, edited Noble Eightfold Path, but the Path could be and has been presented in various detail and lengths: Calm & Insight; Ethics, Meditation & Wisdom etc)

best wishes

[laurence]

see below

[laurence]

OK, fair enough! I am just unclear as to what you have in mind when you refer to Nibbana as some kind of thing.

I don’t use the word ‘thing’ to refer to physical objects - exclusively. Thoughts seem to contain different kinds of things that we can identify? I may see in my ‘minds eye’ a duck, or a chicken, a rock or, a light bulb - different types of things but not physical things.

We could also refer to processes which are not discrete things because they undergo change - they are inconstant. All things are ‘inconstant’ (impermanent) therefore, what we perceive and know, is a vast field of processes of various kinds. I am not sure how Nibbana could refer to any kind of phenomena - things or processses that we perceive?

I think I could have phrased it better - that which you seemed to dislike. I meant to say: absorption - and Nibbana - are not ‘things’ we can find by looking here, there or, anywhere. They are not that kind of discovery. These important discoveries are not to be found outside and they are not hidden somewhere inside. I hope that is a bit clearer.

The other thing you said that I found difficult to understand was: “It is against the training I believe the Buddha instigated for us.” As far as I can tell, there is nothing ‘wrong-headed’ about trying to understand what the spoken teachings of the Buddha actually mean. We do this by studying the written teachings and, by putting them into practice?

If Nibbana is not a ‘thing’ in the conventional sense of the word, but something different then, what kind of thing is it? You said: I don’t use ‘thing’ in the limited way you seem to, as physical object, or place. I take the Buddha’s teaching as extending the common, superficial, limited way of looking, to a bigger, noble, deeper one. Cessation, Nibbāna and Truth are things to me, with this extended meaning, that can and, I believe, should be sought after."

Do you have any idea of what this bigger, noble and deeper version of a thing is? You said: “I’m not really interested in this type of discussion, especially expression of beliefs/opinions as truths.” OK, so how is your idea about the reality of a bigger, noble and deeper version of a ‘thing’ not a belief or opinion?

It seems you have no idea what this bigger, deeper and noble special-thing is, that you refer to, but you hope to find it one day? I hope you find it and it turns out to be what you were looking for! Best wishes, Laurence

[Pasanna]

Thank you @Brother_Joe
I could indeed have phrased that better.

It’s something I’m interested in as there are people who are skilled at Jhana practice yet have not the wisdom to become stream enterers. I would very much like to see them attain this. The world needs more Noble Ones.

Could you elaborate on what you mean by wrong jhana?

[santa100]

@Pasanna

I am interested in @Brother_Joe’s idea of wrong jhana. There are meditators/teachers at a large, famous, jhana monastery who can practice all 4 jhanas ‘1 hour, 2 hours. 3 hours, no problem’, yet are still puthajjanas. This is not a criticism of that monastery, I’m sure it’s happens enough elsewhere.

Not wrong jhana, more like wrong concentration/MicchaSamadhi ( MN 8 ). For example, it’d take utmost focus for a fighter pilot in a dogfight to lock on to a target, track it, and sense the perfect time and range for the kill. Concentration is definitely there but so is the intention to kill, hence the term “miccha”. Now regarding the puthujjana meditator in jhana, it’s not that his jhana is wrong, it just lacks the insight component needed to propel him into the stream. Sort of like a jet plane only has sufficient fuel to fly at very high altitude. But it’d require much more quantity and better fuel grade to propel it beyond the grip of atmospheric gravity and into boundless space.

[laurence]

Its a wonderful and illuminating verse: AN9.41

I think that pretty well demolishes the views of practitioners who emphasise Vipassana over Samatta!

[Brother_Joe]

@Pasanna

Thank you @Brother_Joe

I could indeed have phrased that better.

It’s something I’m interested in as there are people who are skilled at Jhana practice yet have not the wisdom to become stream enterers. I would very much like to see them attain this. The world needs more Noble Ones.

Dear sister Pasanna

you’re welcome

I’d like to suggest it is not simply a matter of misphrasing, but is more likely an expression of a negative mental tendency of judging, which has come out again, but in a more diplomatic form in: ‘there are people who are skilled at Jhana practice yet have not the wisdom to become stream enterers’.

Please avoid judging who is a SE and who is not and how much wisdom people supposedly have or have not. It is a strong feature of later Buddhism, and an unwholesome (egotistic, suffering creating/maintaining) process, imo.

@Pasanna

Could you elaborate on what you mean by wrong jhana?

For me, after extensive research, I believe there has been semantic change in core Pali Dhamma terms. There still seems to be evidence of older usage in the Pali texts. In this case, sati and jhaana.

The question arose for me: why does the Buddha speak so much of jhaana and so little of sati? Sati can be found with the earlier meaning, of ‘memory’ in the Pali texts. The last words of the Buddha use ap-pamaada, not a-sati. The First Discourse would not seem to refer to ‘sati’ (or only very briefly). There is a whole tradition that names itself from jhaana (Zen-Chan-Jhaana) and they seem to emphasise aware living. The story of him as a boy, seemed to say, jhaana is the Middle Way, not just one factor of the way/path. There is a simpler definition of right concentration as: any concentration with the previous path factors.

I have done in-depth comparison of various versions/presentations of the path. I have also studied the jhaana formula carefully, finding 11-13 factors not the 5 from Sariputta or Buddhaghosa. So I tested the hypothesis that jhaana might be another presentation of the whole path, by comparing the 11-13 factors with other versions of the path and came to the conclusion: the jhaana doctrine has probably been corrupted by the tradition and it is another presentation of the whole path, but the tradition substituted it for the simpler definition, with the intention of trying to make the texts clearer.

My various studies can be found here: https://independentresearcher.academia.edu/BrotherJoeSmith

Now I understand jhaana to mean ‘awareness’ or ‘mindfulness’ and sati to mean memory. Texts that use sati with the former meaning, are for me, later texts or texts modified with the later, changed meaning.

To me, the four jhana map to everyday experience thus:
1 - study, research, analysis, development of a hypothesis
2 - testing the hypothesis in experience
3 - experiencing the results of testing
4 - awareness of breathing in the whole body in motionless meditation

Whether any of this is wholesome or not, right practice or not, would depend on them being based on Right or Wrong View.

best wishes

[Brother_Joe]

@laurence

OK, fair enough! I am just unclear as to what you have in mind when you refer to Nibbana as some kind of thing. I don’t use the word ‘thing’ to refer to physical objects - exclusively. Thoughts seem to contain different kinds of things that we can identify? I may see in my ‘minds eye’ a duck, or a chicken, a rock or, a light bulb - different types of things but not physical things.

I doubt we can have a meaningful discussion on this topic, because our frames of reference/paradigms seem to be so different.

I follow the Buddha’s explanation of the Five Aggregates (and the Five Clung-to Aggregates), not the traditional one, which has the physical and mental dichotomy. To me, the physical/mental line of thought and the Buddha’s explanation of the Five Aggregates are incompatible.

Having studied carefully the 11 fields of each of the Five Aggregates, I see the scope the Buddha gave them, which is incompatible with the physical/mental dichotomy, which is so popular in worldly/common philosophy.

@laurence

Do you have any idea of what this bigger, noble and deeper version of a thing is?

yes, by applying the scope the Buddha gave of ruupa.

best wishes

[Brother_Joe]

@laurence

As far as I can tell, there is nothing ‘wrong-headed’ about trying to understand what the spoken teachings of the Buddha actually mean.

Trying to do with without knowing and following the advice the Buddha gave for his teaching, is wrong headed, imo.

@laurence

We do this by studying the written teachings and, by putting them into practice?

I guess that was supposed to be a statement, not a question. If so, I’d agree, but studying the way the Buddha advised. I collected those instructions: (PDF) The Method of Studying Buddha-Dhamma | Joe Smith - Academia.edu and I would be very interested to hear if anyone knows of more instructions on the topic from him.

best wishes

[Pasanna]

Dear @Brother_Joe
Thank you for your elaboration. I look forward to reading you papers. I too have considered the memory aspect of sati.

@Brother_Joe

To me, the four jhana map to everyday experience thus:

1 - study, research, analysis, development of a hypothesis

2 - testing the hypothesis in experience

3 - experiencing the results of testing

4 - awareness of breathing in the whole body in motionless meditation

In my reference to people who have solid jhana practice, I was referring to people who have said ‘I am a puthujjana’ or who’s teachers have said they have had students who had strong jhana practice but were not SE. It’s as a result of these conversations that my questions came up. I can see how this could still be perceived as speculative. Though I am trying to consider this from the perspective of causality, rather than related to specific people.

My reference to wisdom was on reflection too narrow. As there are many factors outside of what you have in your 4th step; sitting and breathing.

I won’t bother you with more questions until I get a chance to read some of your articles.

With mettā

[laurence]

The five aggregates are: body, feeling, perception, conception and, consciousness. One physical and four mental aggregates. I did not say that I ascribe to a traditional understanding: “which has the physical and mental dichotomy.” When talking about the explanation of the five aggregates we are talking about body/mind phenomena. What else do they refer to? You seem to be insisting that the only way to contemplate the Dhamma is if someone reads your study:https://www.academia.edu/6315964/The_Method_of_Studying_Buddha-Dhamma or, comes to the same conclusions? Apparently, it is your way or the highway! I have had noble and gifted Dhamma teachers over many years and fortunately they have not been as inflexible in their certainties as you seem to be. I can see that the only people you would not argue with are people who agree with everything you have to say. I hope this serves you well - somehow.

[Brother_Joe]

@laurence

I hope this serves you well - somehow.

this says to me you take your suspicion of my approach as truth

goodbye

[Brother_Joe]

@Pasanna

In my reference to people who have solid jhana practice, I was referring to people who have said ‘I am a puthujjana’ or who’s teachers have said they have had students who had strong jhana practice but were not SE. It’s as a result of these conversations that my questions came up. I can see how this could still be perceived as speculative. Though I am trying to consider this from the perspective of causality, rather than related to specific people.

Dear sister Pasanna, thanks so much for clarifying. That’s a relief.

@Pasanna

My reference to wisdom was on reflection too narrow. As there are many factors outside of what you have in your 4th step; sitting and breathing.

actually, I did not say ‘sitting and breathing’, but motionless meditation, which also includes: standing still and lying down, basically I see the 4th as resting from wholesome occupations/projects

best wishes

[laurence]

No, brother, I don’t have suspicion of your approach - it is probably fine. It is your suspicion of my approach that created the dissonance. You opened by accusing me of arrogance because of your suspicion of my approach. You have been consistently critical in your comments and prone to argue. I have not said anything that has not been explained - as best I can. You have consistently misunderstood what I have said and projected meanings on what I have said - that are not there. Clearly, there must be many things that I have said that you simply disagree with for reasons entirely of your own making. I guess you just need to listen a bit more carefully and with an open mind. You may not have all the answers and neither do I. We discuss our love of the Dhamma in this forum. We don’t have to have consensus around your perspective and interpretations or anyone elses. Only friendly conversations among friends and family. Its called pluralism!

[Aminah]

Hello folks, “friendly conversations among friends” is very much what we’re aiming for on the forum. With that goal in mind, perhaps it would be good to take a little break and let the thread cool down.

[Brother_Joe]

@laurence

No, brother, I don’t have suspicion of your approach - it is probably fine. It is your suspicion of my approach that created the dissonance.

thanks for your reply.

best wishes