Buddhaghosa Path of Purification vs Suttas?

[Alex123]

For example -and back to topic- the hindrance of 'sense desire' for me is every movement of the mind towards the 5 senses. All those movements are based on attachment and thus desire towards them. If the mind can't let it go of them, it's hindered. Thus also the 5 hindrances point of view, in my perspective accords with being without 5 sense activity all together. Of course, this is not immediately clear from words, but still I think sense desire is the best wording, because it is exactly that, desire for the senses, albeit a very subtle form.

So an Arahant who has no sense desire, cannot see, cannot hear, cannot smell, cannot taste, cannot feel anything with the body?

[manas]

For example -and back to topic- the hindrance of 'sense desire' for me is every movement of the mind towards the 5 senses. All those movements are based on attachment and thus desire towards them. If the mind can't let it go of them, it's hindered. Thus also the 5 hindrances point of view, in my perspective accords with being without 5 sense activity all together. Of course, this is not immediately clear from words, but still I think sense desire is the best wording, because it is exactly that, desire for the senses, albeit a very subtle form.

So an Arahant who has no sense desire, cannot see, cannot hear, cannot smell, cannot taste, cannot feel anything with the body?

Hi Alex

the contention is relating to whether or not one has totally withdrawn from all five physical senses during jhana, not during ordinary, waking life.

metta

[Alex123]

For example -and back to topic- the hindrance of 'sense desire' for me is every movement of the mind towards the 5 senses. All those movements are based on attachment and thus desire towards them. If the mind can't let it go of them, it's hindered. Thus also the 5 hindrances point of view, in my perspective accords with being without 5 sense activity all together. Of course, this is not immediately clear from words, but still I think sense desire is the best wording, because it is exactly that, desire for the senses, albeit a very subtle form.

So an Arahant who has no sense desire, cannot see, cannot hear, cannot smell, cannot taste, cannot feel anything with the body?

Hi Alex

the contention is relating to whether or not one has totally withdrawn from all five physical senses during jhana, not during ordinary, waking life.

metta

if kāma means 5 sense consciousness rather than lust toward 5 sense consciousness, then an Arahant who has no kāma would have to be blind and deaf...etc...

[manas]

...
if kāma means 5 sense consciousness rather than lust toward 5 sense consciousness, then an Arahant who has no kāma would have to be blind and deaf...etc...

Ah, I see what you mean. Anyway I was just replying on reflection's behalf, because he expressed he did not want to continue, due to the endless nature of these debates. I can understand why, having seen them in operation before...

But I am of the opinion that the five physical senses (well, four of them) lie still and unused as it were, not that they are incapable of operating, during jhana. Because as I understand it, the sense of touch is still in operation. I think that is what the current bone of contention is.

In the anapanasati sutta the breath isn't lost at all. Right through all the (implied?) levels of jhana. 'He breathes in sensitive to rapture...he breathes out sensitive to rapture." And so on. So I wonder how the 'disembodied-jhana' camp can explain that? If you left your body, how would you know if you were taking an in-breath, as opposed to an out-breath?

I might have to start a new topic for this next issue, but I am actually concerned about our Buddhist brothers & sisters who are 'leaving' the physical body during jhana. I do now think it is possible this is happening for some people, but I don't think this is what the Buddha had in mind.

with metta

manas

[Cittasanto]

But friends should be able to disagree without coming to (virtual) blows.

mild tease here sorry & admittedly off topic so sorry again!
if friends cant come to blows and retain respect for one another and stay friends how can any one else?

[reflection]

if kāma means 5 sense consciousness rather than lust toward 5 sense consciousness, then an Arahant who has no kāma would have to be blind and deaf...etc...

That's not what I meant. I didn't say it is all 5 sense consciousness is gone forever, I said it is the (unwanted) movement of the mind to go outward when meditating. An arahant can access the jhanas without any problem partly because (s)he doesn't have this tendency. (S)he is really unattached to the body. In fact that's a non-returners thing but I think you get the idea now. It's really the desire part which is essential, as I also stipulated. So yes, it is lust towards the 5 senses, but a very subtle form of lust, not the coarse one that one would ordinarily describe to it in my opinion.

So, yeah, just to make up for some confusion, I should have added the word 'unwanted' in there. Was thinking about it after I posted, but couldn't bother. Should've though, in hindsight.


Gotta go to bed now, just a quick reply to manas: Thanks for the kind response. I agree that's how Buddhist should be able to discuss, being able to share your view without being attached to it. But for me it's mainly that often these endless discussions didn't really seem to help anyone, not even just to let them vaguely understand another point of view. So if it's of no apparent use to anyone, I don't tend to bother anymore.

But since you seem genuinely interested, to quickly answer your post: The breath also has a mental part to it. It slowly transforms from being coarse and bodily into more subtle mental representations. But in fact the main part of the anapanasati sutta that really tells you to focus directly on the physical breath is the first tetrad. After that it goes into the mental representation and in the third tetrad it even literally says 'remains focussed on the mind'. If we are to develop one pointed attention, surely there can not be both the physical breath and the mind at the same time as I see it.

But anyway, said my thing. If you feel like opening a new thread go ahead, I may or may not repond there. Just telling you already, no need to be concerned!

Much metta!
Reflection

[Sylvester]

if kāma means 5 sense consciousness rather than lust toward 5 sense consciousness, then an Arahant who has no kāma would have to be blind and deaf...etc...

I thought the discussion was not on kāma (singular) but on kāmā (plural) in the 1st Jhana pericope...?

I think MN 28 might be able to shed some light on why Arahants still contact the kāmā, despite having eliminated all kāmāsava. The only question now is whether or not MN 28's tajja samannāhāra (one of the 3 paccaya for contact discussed in MN 28) belongs to the sankhāras which SN 12.51 asserts are impossible in an Arahant.

[Sylvester]

the contention is relating to whether or not one has totally withdrawn from all five physical senses during jhana, not during ordinary, waking life.

metta

Pls do not create a strawman out of nothing.

The debate is over the interpretation of -

vivicceva kāmehi
quite secluded from the kāmā

I don't think anyone has suggested that the 1st jhana pericope reads as -

vivicceva āyatanehi

If you want a fruitful analysis of MN 118's instructions, you might want to consider the explanation given in MN 140 about the place of in-&-out breathing in the rūpa schema. Then you may wish to consult MN 28 on just how broad the sutta concept of rūpa is. Unlike the Abhidhamma method which limits the experience of rūpa to the 5 senses, the suttas have a more "conceptual" conception of rūpa.