Hi dave
daverupa wrote:
Hmm. Well, considering that we define jhana as the cessation of certain processes and the arising and/or continuation of other processes, I see "within" as referring to work done concomitant with a constellation of processes which conform thereby. I do not see any clear reason to suggest that there is a substantive change between the arising of jhana and the direction of attention as instructed.
It's simply a question of whether or not we -
1. pay heed to the grammatical construction of the locative absolute used in that pericope; and
2. accept DN 9 as a genuine record of the Buddha's teaching of the cessation of volition in the Jhanas.
The transition to second jhana can be seen as the habituation of satipatthana, but before this happens there is work to be done.
AN 9.36 shows something of this with its metaphor (although here again there are some formless intrusions; nevertheless they do not detract from the point. "He regards" may not be a matter of will so much as a matter of wisdom, but it becomes a semantic argument when the effort to see clearly with wisdom is nowhere described as 'just happening', as though simply a fortuitous reward for wallowing in jhana).
This is more complex, and I will raise several points for your consideration -
A. Is the verb "he regards" (
samanupassati) a discursive verb or a non-discursive verb?
A quick scan of the suttas shows this popping up not just in the Jhana passages, but in passages describing ordinary worldling formation of self-views, eg SN 22.100, MN 148. You also find this verb appear in the Hindrances formula which portray a monk regarding the Hindrances as a debt etc, eg in DN 11, MN 39. Unlike the
anupassati encountered in
satipaṭṭhāna (which admits of a bare awareness connotation),
samanupassati suggests a much more analytical and discursive character.
B. This brings immediately 2 doctrinal problems. How does this discursive activity square with DN 9? Even if one rejects DN 9, there is also the problem that
samanupassati occurs in the 2nd to 4th Jhanas in AN 9.36. I know you will probably argue that
samanupassati is possible in 1st Jhana, owing to the presence to the
vacīsaṅkhāra. However, this would disturb the standard way in which suttas employ sets or series which are defined by common denominators. Such an argument would mean that
samanupassati means discursive contemplation in 1st Jhana, but the same verb would mean non-discursive contemplation in 2nd to 4th Jhanas.
C. The perennial present tense problem. If you take a look at the grammars, Pali present tenses just don't function in the way that English present tenses function, unlike what Ven T likes us to believe. Take a look at Warder, where the Pali present tense is described as -
- describing the indefinite present
- proxy for the past tense (which explains the gradual loss of the aorist from the Canon with formalisation)
- describing eternal truths
- an imperative
- compartmentalizing a verb's duration
- describing a future event.
Pali simply uses other grammatical devices to indicate contemporaneity of verbs, such as the genitive absolute. This really needs to be said, as Ven T's Jhana model extracts undue mileage from the unfamiliar range of Pali present tense verbs.