A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by Sylvester »

Ñāṇa wrote:Ven. Brahmavamso's teachings on jhāna are either a non-apperceptive attainment (asaññasamāpatti) or dangerously close to being one. His understanding of mindfulness (sati), full awareness (sampajañña), and apperception (saññā) in the context of jhāna bear no resemblance to how these dhammas are defined and used in the canonical literature.
Let's be very honest here about this sort of misrepresentation of Ajahn Brahm's teaching. As I mentioned here -

http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 60#p120883" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

the accusations have surreptitiously evolved from attacking Ajahn Brahm's kāmasaññanirodha teaching of 1st Jhana (as uncanonical) to become an insinuation that he teaches sabbasaññanirodha for the jhanas. Worse, you now say that he teaches asaññasamāpatti.

In the thread above cited, I have given ample canonical examples where the Buddha extolled the Jhanas as stages of successive cessations of different dhammas that make up our experiential "world". Specifically, in DN 9, the Buddha pointedly mentions that it is "with training one perception arises and with training another perception ceases". This is repeated for all the Jhanas, the Arupa attainments and Nirodha Samapatti.

I keep seeing this slippery misrepresentation of Ajahn Brahm. For the record, the perceptions that Ajahn Brahm mentions disappearing are kāmasañña in 1st Jhana, and that is explicitly sanctioned by the Anupubbanirodha Sutta, besides the standard "vivicc'eva kamehi" pericope. He describes the cessation of different factors through each progression through the Jhanas, which are then replaced by other dhammas. If you actually read his book, you'll find that it is nothing more than an expanded version of DN 9, with details being supplied by other suttas.

Unless, of course, you now reject these suttas' descriptions of the training to attain these successive cessations...
User avatar
legolas
Posts: 235
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:58 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by legolas »

Sylvester wrote:
legolas wrote:How is it even possible to acquire Right Samadhi without having some basis of Right View? Any samadhi gained can hardly be called right.

As to which I would pose this question -

Is it possible to reach Right Samadhi without Right Sankappa?

According to MN 78, unwholesome sankappa ceases without remainder in 1st Jhana, and wholesome sankappa cease without remainder in 2nd Jhana.
No.
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by Sylvester »

legolas wrote:
Sylvester wrote:
legolas wrote:How is it even possible to acquire Right Samadhi without having some basis of Right View? Any samadhi gained can hardly be called right.

As to which I would pose this question -

Is it possible to reach Right Samadhi without Right Sankappa?

According to MN 78, unwholesome sankappa ceases without remainder in 1st Jhana, and wholesome sankappa cease without remainder in 2nd Jhana.
No.

Precisely. If all forms of sankappa, wholesome or otherwise, can cease absolutely in 2nd Jhana, need one carry all the Path Factors together when practising one of the path factors?

MN 117 merely states that Right View is the support and the requisite for Noble Right Concentration. It is impossible to get to Noble Right Concentration without any of the other 7 path factors. But that being said, must all the 8 path factors be present at a time when one practices one path factor? If so, I would never be able to have Right View, since I do not have the jhanas.

"Views" are certainly a form of takka, or vitakka if you prefer. How do these things infiltrate the Jhanic experience in 2nd Jhana?
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by Nyana »

Sylvester wrote:
Ñāṇa wrote:Ven. Brahmavamso's teachings on jhāna are either a non-apperceptive attainment (asaññasamāpatti) or dangerously close to being one. His understanding of mindfulness (sati), full awareness (sampajañña), and apperception (saññā) in the context of jhāna bear no resemblance to how these dhammas are defined and used in the canonical literature.
Let's be very honest here about this sort of misrepresentation of Ajahn Brahm's teaching.
I am being honest Sylvester. Ven. Brahmavamso's use of of mindfulness (sati), full awareness (sampajañña), and apperception (saññā) in the context of jhāna bear no resemblance to how these dhammas are defined and used in the canonical literature. His use of the jhāna factors bear no resemblance to how these dhammas are defined and used in the canonical literature.
Sylvester wrote:the accusations have surreptitiously evolved from attacking Ajahn Brahm's kāmasaññanirodha teaching of 1st Jhana (as uncanonical) to become an insinuation that he teaches sabbasaññanirodha for the jhanas. Worse, you now say that he teaches asaññasamāpatti.
Kāmasaññanirodha doesn't require that "all the five senses are totally shut down." Attending to a mental object (nimitta) in rūpāvacarajjhāna doesn't require that "all the five senses are totally shut down." There is a difference between attending to a mental object via mental consciousness, and the formless attainments wherein the mind is totally isolated from the five sense faculties. In commentarial terms, attending exclusively to a cognitive representation/mental object already occurs at the stage of access samādhi. Thus, the engagement is exclusively that of the apperception of the counterpart representation via mental consciousness. The difference between access samādhi and and the first jhāna is the degree of stability of the jhāna factors. The difference between the first jhāna and the formless attainments is indicated in both the Vimuttimagga and the Visuddhimagga when they discuss the formless attainments and mention Aḷāra Kālāma not seeing or hearing the five-hundred carts passing by when abiding in a formless attainment.

It's quite clear from Ven. Brahmavamso's descriptions of his jhānas that his use of of mindfulness (sati), full awareness (sampajañña), and apperception (saññā) and so on, have no basis in the suttas or abhidhamma. I and others have gone to great length to discuss this. I have no doubt that this doesn't sit well with his devout followers, but I think it's probably worth saying out loud (even if it stirs up a hornets nest of objections from his followers). And I assure you that I get no pleasure from criticizing him. As Dmytro and others have said more than once, this idea of approaching the suttas without reference to the canonical and para-canonical definitions of terms which are not explicitly defined in the suttas is problematic, to say the least. And the qualms you repeatedly raise are red herrings. The suttas simply don't say what you are trying to make them say. This has been demonstrated in great detail, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.

All the best,

Geoff
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by Sylvester »

It's your prerogative to give some convoluted exegetical spin to escape the plain and simple reading of the suttas.

You'll forgive me if I find your claim about Ajahn Brahm's divergence from "canonical literature" dubious. The problem is two-fold -

1. your understanding of the Dhammasangani ignores its textual presentation as being a discussion of 11 iddapaccayata relations, whereas you instead treat it in the Commentarial approach of universals and particulars to each type of citta;

2. your glossing over the rather serious differences between the Abhidhamma approach and the suttanta approach. Lumping Abhidhamma under the "canonical" rubric is of utility only in recognising that the Abhidhamma is treated as canonical, but disguises the fact that Early Theravada is not the same as Abhidhammic Theravada.
Kāmasaññanirodha doesn't require that "all the five senses are totally shut down."
Between giving a full-blown technical analysis as follows -
"Kāmasaññanirodha occurs when there is no tajjo samannāhāro directed at any kāmā and its corresponding indriya, thereby leading to the absence of the arising of the corresponding type of consciousness of any kāmā, which in turn entails the absence of the phassa-s corresponding to the kāmā, and thereby negating the paccaya for kāmasañña, QED - kāmasaññanirodha"
versus
"Kāmasaññanirodha occurs because all the five senses are totally shut down"
, I think a book popularising Samma Samadhi would need to simplify the matter to an extent that would make the matter more accessible. Toe-may-toes, toe-mah-toes.
There is a difference between attending to a mental object via mental consciousness, and the formless attainments wherein the mind is totally isolated from the five sense faculties.
If you still wish to repeat the fallacy of denying the antecedent in interpreting MN 43, I'll simply reiterate the call to demonstrate why your argument is not fallacious.
As Dmytro and others have said more than once, this idea of approaching the suttas without reference to the canonical and para-canonical definitions of terms which are not explicitly defined in the suttas is problematic, to say the least.
And thank goodness the redactors of the suttas gave more than enough examples of kāmā that we do not need to resort to the Vibhanga.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by tiltbillings »

Good stuff.
Image
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by Nyana »

Sylvester wrote:we do not need to resort to the Vibhanga.
Ah yes, the Vibhaṅga must be completely wrong. The Mahāniddesa must be completely wrong. The Peṭakopadesa must be completely wrong. And there can be no possibility of vipassanā while abiding in jhāna. Therefore, the Paṭisambhidāmagga must be completely wrong. The Vibhaṅga must be completely wrong. The Dhammasaṅgaṇī must be completely wrong. The Mahāvibhāṣā must be completely wrong. The Abhidharmakośabhāṣya must be completely wrong. The Tattvasiddhiśāstra must be completely wrong. In short, all of the major Indian Theravāda, Sarvāstivāda, and Sautrāntika exegetical treatises must be completely wrong.

And not only the Indian treatises. Ven. Ṭhānissaro who is a translator monk, and Ven. Gunaratana who wrote a doctoral dissertation on Theravāda jhāna, and Ven. Bodhi who is one of the best modern translators and and is also a scholar monk; these venerables are all completely wrong. In his anthology of translated discourses, In the Buddha's Words, Ven. Bodhi states:
  • The commentarial method of explanation stipulates that the meditator emerges from the jhāna attainment and practices insight contemplation with a mind made sharp and supple by the jhāna. However, the suttas themselves say nothing about emerging from the jhāna. If one reads the suttas alone, without the commentaries, it seems as if the meditator examines the factors within the jhāna itself.
And the commentarial method of attaining the noble path via momentary samādhi (khaṇikasamādhi), access samādhi (upacārasamādhi), or prepatory stage samādhi (anāgamya-samādhi, which is the Sarvāstivāda equivalent of access samādhi) must also be completely wrong. Therefore, every single Theravāda, Sarvāstivāda, and Sautrāntika commentator, ancient or modern, must be completely wrong. Ven. Brahmavamso and Ven. Sujato have miraculously rediscovered the Buddhadhamma after 2500 years, and their teachings must be right even though they are contradicted by almost every other scholar, translator, or commentator, ancient or modern, Theravāda or Sarvāstivāda or Sautrāntika or Yogācāra.

Sorry, but I don't buy it. :shock:

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by Nyana »

Sylvester wrote:1. your understanding of the Dhammasangani ignores its textual presentation as being a discussion of 11 iddapaccayata relations, whereas you instead treat it in the Commentarial approach of universals and particulars to each type of citta.
From the Vibhaṅga Satipaṭṭhānavibhaṅga:
  • And how does a monk dwell contemplating the body in the body?

    Here a monk, at whatever time, develops supramundane jhāna, which leads on, which goes to decrease (of rebirth), to abandonment of wrong views, to the attainment of the first ground, (where) quite secluded from sense desires, secluded from unwholesome things, having thinking, reflection, and the happiness and rapture born of seclusion, he dwells, having attained the first jhāna, and with painful practice and slow deepening of knowledge, and at that time: there is contact, there is feeling, there is perception, there is intention, there is thought, there is thinking, there is reflection, there is joyful interest, there is happiness, there is one-pointedness, there is the faculty of faith, there is the faculty of energy, there is the faculty of mindfulness, there is the faculty of concentration, there is the faculty of wisdom, there is the mind-faculty, there is the joy-faculty, there is the life-faculty, there is right view, there is right intention, there is right endeavour, there is right mindfulness, there is right concentration, there is the strength of faith, there is the strength of energy, there is the strength of mindfulness, there is the strength of concentration, there is the strength of wisdom, there is the strength of conscience, there is the strength of shame, there is no greed, there is no hate, there is no delusion, there is no avarice, there is no ill-will, there is right view, there is conscience, there is shame, there is bodily calm, there is mental calm, there is bodily lightness, there is mental lightness, there is bodily plasticity, there is mental plasticity, there is bodily workableness, there is mental workableness, there is bodily proficiency, there is mental proficiency, there is bodily uprightness, there is mental uprightness, there is mindfulness, there is full awareness, there is samatha, there is vipassanā, there is support, there is balance: these are wholesome things.
It's quite nonsensical to insist that a corresponding reading cannot be applied to the Dhammasaṅgaṇī's treatment of rūpāvacarajjhāna associated with gnosis.

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by Nyana »

Sylvester wrote:2. your glossing over the rather serious differences between the Abhidhamma approach and the suttanta approach. Lumping Abhidhamma under the "canonical" rubric is of utility only in recognising that the Abhidhamma is treated as canonical, but disguises the fact that Early Theravada is not the same as Abhidhammic Theravada.
The Theravāda is a Three Piṭaka Abhidhamma school. There is no early Theravāda which can be differentiated from the Theravāda monastics who redacted the Pāḷi Tipiṭaka. Early Buddhism was not Theravāda any more than it was Sarvāstivāda or Mahāsāṃghika.

All the best,

Geoff
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by Sylvester »

Ñāṇa wrote:Sorry, but I don't buy it. :shock:
After that long tirade, it can best be summed up as this -

Geoff is making an emotional appeal and refusing to consider the texts.

Sorry, appeals to authority, as if I disagree with every authority are just a red herring. :popcorn:
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by Sylvester »

Ñāṇa wrote:
Sylvester wrote:It's quite nonsensical to insist that a corresponding reading cannot be applied to the Dhammasaṅgaṇī's treatment of rūpāvacarajjhāna associated with gnosis.
In case it's not occured to you, if the aforesaid lokuttara jhana presentation were applicable to the lokiya jhana discussion, they would not have put it only in the lokuttara discussion.

You're essentially asking an Abhidhammika to read the preceding lokiya passages to include the lokuttara text as a peyyala into the lokiya passages. Wow! A redefinition of how peyyalas work! I don't think the Abhidhammikas would have been so schizophrenic as to contradict themselves by conjoining their lokiya iddapaccayata lists of conditioned relations with the list of lokuttara dhammas. Most innovative.

If this is your only evidence that the Dhammasangani allows for vipassana in rupavacara jhanas, try harder.

You're still evading the elephant in the room on how you can possibly vipassati without dhamma-vicaya.

In my estimation, the "path" that you present has merely 6 Enlightenment Factors, since your avitakka-avicara dhamma-vicaya is an oxymoron. I don't propose to populate Theravada with such unicorns.
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by Nyana »

Sylvester wrote:In my estimation, the "path" that you present has merely 6 Enlightenment Factors, since your avitakka-avicara dhamma-vicaya is an oxymoron.
Ah yes, all the rest of us have got it wrong, and Ven. Brahmavamso and Ven. Sujato and their modern sect have rediscovered the Buddhadhamma....

Utter nonsense.
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2106
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by Assaji »

Sylvester wrote:After that long tirade, it can best be summed up as this -

Geoff is making an emotional appeal and refusing to consider the texts.

Sorry, appeals to authority, as if I disagree with every authority are just a red herring. :popcorn:
And Sylvester makes his favourite arguments - non sequitur and ad hominem :)
morning mist
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 3:31 pm

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by morning mist »

Hi Nana,
Ñāṇa wrote:Vipassanā doesn't require vitakka and/or vicāra. It requires apperception (saññā), which is functional in all four jhānas.
The third noble is The Cessation of Dukkha. Pecerption of ideas ( dhamma sanna) are among the things to be abandoned for the " complete fading-away and cessation of this craving (asesa-viraga-nirodho), its renunciation and abandonment, liberation from it, letting go of it. " Perception of ideas is not something to cling to or to be dependent on. We can't cling to our perception ( sanna) and consider it as insight.


"And what is the Noble Truth of the Cessation of Dukkha ( dukkhanirodham ariyasaccam) ? It is the complete fading-away and cessation of this craving (asesa-viraga-nirodho), its renunciation and abandonment, liberation from it, letting go of it.

"And where , when being abandoned , is this craving abandoned? And where, when dissolving, does it cease? Whatever is agreeable & alluring in terms of the world: that is where, when being abandoned, this craving is abandoned. That is where, when dissolving, it ceases.

"And what is agreeable & alluring in terms of the world?

"Perception of forms ( rupa sanna) ... Perception of sounds... Perception of smells... Perception of tastes... Perception of touch ... PERCEPTION OF IDEAS ( dhamma sanna) is agreeable & alluring in terms of the world. That is where, when being abandoned, this craving is abandoned. That is where, when dissolving, it ceases."- Mahaparinibbana Sutta


Also According to the Anattalakhana Sutta, perception leads to affliction. Any perception whatsoever should not be identified with:

“Perception is not self. If perception were self, perception would not lead to affliction. It would be possible to say regarding perception, ‘Let perception be like this. Let perception not be like that.’ However, since perception is not self, perception leads to affliction. And it is not possible to say regarding perception, ‘Let perception be like this. Let perception not be like that.’


“What do you think, monks? Is perception permanent or impermanent?” 
“Impermanent, Venerable sir.”
“Is that which is impermanent pleasant or unpleasant?” 
“Unpleasant, Venerable sir.”
“Is it fitting to regard what is impermanent, unpleasant, subject to change as: ‘This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am’?” 
“No, Venerable sir.”


“Any perception whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; gross or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near: every perception is to be seen as it really is with wisdom as: ‘This is not mine. This is not my self. I am not this.’- Anattalakhana Sutta

With metta,
Last edited by morning mist on Tue Mar 08, 2011 6:51 pm, edited 3 times in total.
with metta,
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: A Critique of Brahmavamso’s “The Jhanas”

Post by Sylvester »

Yum, Yum! The silence on the elephant in the room is deafening.

Since, Geoff, the Dhammasangani seems to be your flavour of the moment for your "concomitant vipassana and jhana" theory, here's what the Dhammasangani has to say about your "vipassana"-
Katamā tasmiṃ samaye vipassanā hoti? Yā tasmiṃ samaye paññā pajānanā vicayo pavicayo dhammavicayo sallakkhaṇā upalakkhaṇā paccupalakkhaṇā paṇḍiccaṃ kosallaṃ nepuññaṃ vebhabyā cintā upaparikkhā bhūrī medhā pariṇāyikā vipassanā sampajaññaṃ patodo paññā paññindriyaṃ paññābalaṃ paññāsatthaṃ paññāpāsādo paññāāloko paññāobhāso paññāpajjoto paññāratanaṃ amoho dhammavicayo sammādiṭṭhi— ayaṃ tasmiṃ samaye vipassanā hoti.
Dhamma-vicayo (investigation/discrimination of states) is a hallmark of vipassana. I can find no better explanation of dhamma-vicaya apart from what our good friend Dmytro has posted on dhamma-vicaya in the Pali thread http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=5582" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and I'll just borrow his entry -
Hello Pali friends,

First, 'dhamma-vicaya' is connected to discrimination, examination, investigation and wisdom:

“Yadapi, bhikkhave, ajjhatta.m dhammesu pa~n~naaya pavicinati pavicarati pariviima.msam aapajjati tadapi dhammavicayasambojjha’ngo, yadapi bahiddhaa dhammesu pa~n~naaya pavicinati pavicarati pariviima.msamaapajjati tadapi dhammavicayasambojjha’ngo. (S 5.111)

Whatever discriminates, examines, applies investigation by means of wisdom among dhammas that are within, this is the awakening-factor of dhamma-discrimination. Whatever discriminates, examines, applies investigation by means of wisdom among dhammas that are without, this is the awakening-factor of dhamma-discrimination.

(translation by Rupert Gethin in his book "The Buddhist Path to Awakening", p. 147)

Similarly, SN 46.3 says this about the bojjhangas of Sati and Dhamma-vicaya -
Dwelling thus withdrawn, one recollects that Dhamma and thinks it over. Whenever, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwelling thus withdrawn recollects that Dhamma and thinks it over, on that occassion the enlightenment factor of mindfulness is aroused by the bhikkhu; on that occassion the bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of mindfulness; on that occassion the enlightenment factor of mindfulness comes to fulfilment by development in the bhikkhu.

Dwelling thus mindfully, he discrimates that Dhamma with wisdom, examines it, makes an investigation of it. Whenever, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwelling thus mindfully discriminates that Dhamma with wisdom, examines it, makes an investigation of it, on that occassion the enlightenment factor of discrimination of states is aroused by the bhikkhu; on that occassion the bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of discrimination of states; on that occassion the enlightenment factor of discrimination of states comes to fulfilment by development in the bhikkhu.
(per BB)

So tathā vūpakaṭṭho viharanto taṃ dhammaṃ anussarati anuvitakketi. Yasmiṃ samaye, bhikkhave, bhikkhu tathā vūpakaṭṭho viharanto taṃ dhammaṃ anussarati anuvitakketi, satisambojjhaṅgo tasmiṃ samaye bhikkhuno āraddho hoti; satisambojjhaṅgaṃ tasmiṃ samaye bhikkhu bhāveti; satisambojjhaṅgo tasmiṃ samaye bhikkhuno bhāvanāpāripūriṃ gacchati.

So tathā sato viharanto taṃ dhammaṃ paññāya pavicinati pavicarati parivīmaṃsamāpajjati. Yasmiṃ samaye, bhikkhave, bhikkhu tathā sato viharanto taṃ dhammaṃ paññāya pavicinati pavicarati parivīmaṃsamāpajjati, dhammavicayasambojjhaṅgo tasmiṃ samaye bhikkhuno āraddho hoti; dhammavicayasambojjhaṅgaṃ tasmiṃ samaye bhikkhu bhāveti; dhammavicayasambojjhaṅgo tasmiṃ samaye bhikkhuno bhāvanāpāripūriṃ gacchati.
Anuvitakketi = anu + vitakketi, the present verb form of vitakka
Pavicarati = pa + vicarati, the present verb form of vicara

As MN 44 explains, you can only vitakketi and vicarati when you have vitakka and vicara respectively.

So, it looks like your model of vipassana within jhanas is indeed truly an oxymoron. You've essentially created an avitakka avicara dhamma-vicaya, all in the service of your discursive jhana model.
Ah yes, all the rest of us have got it wrong, and Ven. Brahmavamso and Ven. Sujato and their modern sect have rediscovered the Buddhadhamma....

Utter nonsense.
I don't have to show or plead that Ajahn Brahm and Ajahn Sujato have re-discovered Buddhadhamma. Demonstrating how nonsensical your reading of the Dhammasangani and the suttas as above is sufficient. Based on your oxymoronic avitakka avicara dhamma-vicaya, I have to revise my assessment and respectfully suggest that your model is short of both the sati bojjhanga and the dhamma-vicaya bojjhanga.
Post Reply