Samatha v. vipassana?

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Meditation, e.g. meditation postures, developing a regular sitting practice, skillfully relating to difficulties and hindrances, etc.

Re: Samatha v. vipassana?

Postby Sylvester » Sun Jul 18, 2010 5:47 am

Thanks Geoff.

I can easily identify with the problem of the vacuity of retail therapy. Alas, I'm off to the mall later, but hopefully my purchase this time will yield a more persistent satisfaction. I've languished long enough in our humidity without a fan...

On differentiating perversions from non-perversions with right view, might you be saying that this is done initially on an inferential basis, rather than an experiential one?

With metta
Sylvester
 
Posts: 1500
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Samatha v. vipassana?

Postby Collective » Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:18 am

Forgive me I didn't want to start another thread, and I thought this one would be relevant. I apologise if this is a thread jack, feel free to move it elsewhere.

I have 2 questions:

Is Samatha the meditational practice where you experience the Jhanas, is it the meditation where you focus on the breath to the exclusion of everything else?

Can it awaken a person?

Thank you :namaste:
User avatar
Collective
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 8:12 am

Re: Samatha v. vipassana?

Postby Nyana » Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:05 pm

Collective wrote:Is Samatha the meditational practice where you experience the Jhanas, is it the meditation where you focus on the breath to the exclusion of everything else?

Hi Collective,

Samatha and vipassanā are mental factors. They are both conjoined in jhāna.

One Tool Among Many: The Place of Vipassana in Buddhist Practice by Ven. Ṭhānissaro.

Collective wrote:Can it awaken a person?

The four jhāna-s play an essential role in the development of the noble eightfold path according to the discourses. They are given as the definition of right concentration (sammāsamādhi), the training of heightened mind (adhicittasikkhā), as well as the faculty of concentration (samādhindriya) and the strength of concentration (samādhibala) as practiced by a noble disciple (ariyasāvaka).

According to the sutta-s there can be no awakening without mastery of at least the first jhāna.

All the best,

Geoff
Last edited by Nyana on Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nyana
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Samatha v. vipassana?

Postby Nyana » Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:16 pm

Sylvester wrote:I can easily identify with the problem of the vacuity of retail therapy.

Hi Sylvester,

Indeed. Of course, as I'm sure you're aware, I meant "buyers remorse" in a more figurative sense. That is, whenever there is grasping in any fashion whatsoever.

Sylvester wrote:On differentiating perversions from non-perversions with right view, might you be saying that this is done initially on an inferential basis, rather than an experiential one?

Inference is employed to discern the impermanence, etc., of whatever is not present. Whatever is present is discerned as either arising, altering while persisting, or passing away. AN 3.47:

    Monks, these three are fabricated characteristics of what is fabricated. Which three? Arising is discernible, passing away is discernible, alteration (literally, other-ness) while staying is discernible.

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Samatha v. vipassana?

Postby Collective » Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:28 pm

Thank you for the info
User avatar
Collective
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 8:12 am

Re: Samatha v. vipassana?

Postby bodom » Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:32 pm

Ñāṇa wrote:According to the sutta-s there can be no awakening without mastery of at least the first jhāna.


What level of awakening? Non-returner? Arahantship? Could you provided the sources please? I ask because I dont find this to be consistent with the suttas I have read on requirements for stream entry. No where, as far as im aware, do the discourses stipulate mastery of jhana for stream entry. Of course for the higher levels of awakening jhana is a requirement.

:anjali:
Last edited by bodom on Wed Jul 21, 2010 1:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The heart of the path is SO simple. No need for long explanations. Give up clinging to love and hate, just rest with things as they are. That is all I do in my own practice. Do not try to become anything. Do not make yourself into anything. Do not be a meditator. Do not become enlightened. When you sit, let it be. When you walk, let it be. Grasp at nothing. Resist nothing. Of course, there are dozens of meditation techniques to develop samadhi and many kinds of vipassana. But it all comes back to this - just let it all be. Step over here where it is cool, out of the battle. - Ajahn Chah
User avatar
bodom
 
Posts: 4578
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: Samatha v. vipassana?

Postby Goedert » Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:56 pm

Collective wrote:Forgive me I didn't want to start another thread, and I thought this one would be relevant. I apologise if this is a thread jack, feel free to move it elsewhere.

I have 2 questions:

Is Samatha the meditational practice where you experience the Jhanas, is it the meditation where you focus on the breath to the exclusion of everything else?

Can it awaken a person?

Thank you :namaste:


Suppose you see a great transparent lake.

The is a storm and forceful winds making the lake very turve. So you can't see the fishs, the stones in there, water life, and so on.

When the sotrm ceases and the winds stops, the transparent lake becomes calm, not moving, so you can see everything.

Know you can start your discernement with precision, because you can see a fish as fish, a stone as stone, and so on.

Concentration is the basis for true wisdom.
User avatar
Goedert
 
Posts: 312
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 9:24 pm
Location: SC, Brazil

Re: Samatha v. vipassana?

Postby Nyana » Wed Jul 21, 2010 1:45 pm

bodom wrote: Of course for the higher levels of awakening jhana is a requirement.

Hi Bodom,

Sorry for the confusion. That is what I meant.

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Samatha v. vipassana?

Postby bodom » Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:17 pm

Ñāṇa wrote:
bodom wrote: Of course for the higher levels of awakening jhana is a requirement.

Hi Bodom,

Sorry for the confusion. That is what I meant.

All the best,

Geoff


Hi Geoff

Thanks for clarifying.

:anjali:
The heart of the path is SO simple. No need for long explanations. Give up clinging to love and hate, just rest with things as they are. That is all I do in my own practice. Do not try to become anything. Do not make yourself into anything. Do not be a meditator. Do not become enlightened. When you sit, let it be. When you walk, let it be. Grasp at nothing. Resist nothing. Of course, there are dozens of meditation techniques to develop samadhi and many kinds of vipassana. But it all comes back to this - just let it all be. Step over here where it is cool, out of the battle. - Ajahn Chah
User avatar
bodom
 
Posts: 4578
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: Samatha v. vipassana?

Postby pt1 » Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:29 am

Ñāṇa wrote:Whatever is present is discerned as either arising, altering while persisting, or passing away. AN 3.47:

    Monks, these three are fabricated characteristics of what is fabricated. Which three? Arising is discernible, passing away is discernible, alteration (literally, other-ness) while staying is discernible.

Hi Geoff, would you see the above as the equivalent of the commentarial 3 sub-moments of a dhamma arising, aging and passing away? Thanks.

Best wishes
pt1
 
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:30 am

Re: Samatha v. vipassana?

Postby Nyana » Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:19 pm

pt1 wrote:
Ñāṇa wrote:Whatever is present is discerned as either arising, altering while persisting, or passing away. AN 3.47:

    Monks, these three are fabricated characteristics of what is fabricated. Which three? Arising is discernible, passing away is discernible, alteration (literally, other-ness) while staying is discernible.

Hi Geoff, would you see the above as the equivalent of the commentarial 3 sub-moments of a dhamma arising, aging and passing away? Thanks.

Hi pt1,

I wouldn't (if you're referring to the theory of momentariness that is). I attempted to articulate why in another previous post of this same thread.

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Previous

Return to Theravada Meditation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests