Words to live by Tilt.tiltbillings wrote:It is, however, best not to take ourselves too seriously.
Thanks
Words to live by Tilt.tiltbillings wrote:It is, however, best not to take ourselves too seriously.
Moggalana wrote:Thanks for those links, marc108
Be careful, sutta commentaries can be misleading for some topics. IMO it's better to rely only on the Suttas.marc108 wrote: I really really enjoyed the talks on Jhana by Richard Shankman. He really gives an extremely detailed and precise description of the Visuddhimagga Jhanas vs the Sutta Jhanas both from their respective texts and his own experience. There is probably somewhere to the tune of 25 hours of talks on this subject alone.
This is not an uncommon sentiment here; however, one can also easily mislead oneself by relying on the suttas. The commentaries are tools, and like any set of of tools, some work well and others not so much.ignobleone wrote:Be careful, sutta commentaries can be misleading for some topics. IMO it's better to rely only on the Suttas.marc108 wrote: I really really enjoyed the talks on Jhana by Richard Shankman. He really gives an extremely detailed and precise description of the Visuddhimagga Jhanas vs the Sutta Jhanas both from their respective texts and his own experience. There is probably somewhere to the tune of 25 hours of talks on this subject alone.
I agree, these are reasons why relying exclusively on the suttas is probably unwise.tiltbillings wrote:If you are only to rely on the suttas, then I would suppose that you have mastered Pali and all its idiomatic quirks, so that you do not have to rely on translators' interpretations and biases in their interpretations, and that you have a good working understanding of early Buddhist history, so as to understand the context of many of the teachings so as to understand better what is being said, and I would think that you would have a really strong grounding in actual practice, and I would also think you would always being willing to entertain the possibility in whatever interpretation you might come to you could be wrong, and I would think that you would recognize that whatever meditative/insight experience you might have is one more thing to let go.
To assert validity, the Buddha taught two principles: logical inference (common sense) and factual reason (based on reality or real experience). I don't rely on sutta commentaries and at least it's backed by those reasons.Spiny O'Norman wrote: I agree, these are reasons why relying exclusively on the suttas is probably unwise.
Spiny
AN 2.30:ignobleone wrote:the terms Samatha and Vipassana are none to be found in the main Nikayas
...and so forth."These two qualities have a share in clear knowing. Which two? Tranquillity (samatha) & insight (vipassana).
"When tranquillity is developed, what purpose does it serve? The mind is developed. And when the mind is developed, what purpose does it serve? Passion is abandoned.
"When insight is developed, what purpose does it serve? Discernment is developed. And when discernment is developed, what purpose does it serve? Ignorance is abandoned.
"Defiled by passion, the mind is not released. Defiled by ignorance, discernment does not develop. Thus from the fading of passion is there awareness-release. From the fading of ignorance is there discernment-release."
...and so forth.[/quote]daverupa wrote:"These two qualities have a share in clear knowing. Which two? Tranquillity (samatha) & insight (vipassana).
"When tranquillity is developed, what purpose does it serve? The mind is developed. And when the mind is developed, what purpose does it serve? Passion is abandoned.
"When insight is developed, what purpose does it serve? Discernment is developed. And when discernment is developed, what purpose does it serve? Ignorance is abandoned.
"Defiled by passion, the mind is not released. Defiled by ignorance, discernment does not develop. Thus from the fading of passion is there awareness-release. From the fading of ignorance is there discernment-release."
He mentioned about that in a talk. I vaguely recall him saying he believes that what Sayadaw U Pandita calls "vipassanā jhāna" is the "sutta jhāna". I suggest that you search for the talk: http://www.google.com/search?q=shankman+jhana+mp3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;tiltbillings wrote:It is a good book, but it is disappointing that he does not talk about U Pandita's notion of the vipassana jhanas.Ñāṇa wrote: The Experience of Samādhi: An In-depth Exploration of Buddhist Meditation by Richard Shankman. He contrasts the teaching methods of a diverse number of contemporary teachers with what is presented in the suttas.
This was way back on the first page, but with your explanation you have clarified and put into words something I have been pondering on and trying to sort out for quite a while; my thanks to you.nyana wrote:There are a couple of points worth mentioning here. Firstly, these five strands of sensual pleasure are all external sensory objects. As such, they correspond to objects within the five external sensory spheres (bāhirāyatanā). Thus, these five sensory objects do not include in-and-out breathing, which is considered internal, nor the internal felt-sense of the body. The strands of sensual pleasure also do not include the apperception of foulness with regard to the thirty-one parts of the body and the nine stages of corpse decomposition. Apperception of foulness is a mental phenomenon.
Secondly, these five strands of sensual pleasure are those external sensory objects that are considered to be desirable, lovely, agreeable, endearing, sensually enticing, and tantalizing. And so it isn’t all sensory objects whatsoever that the meditator need to withdraw from. The meditator needs to withdraw from those external sensory objects which are sensually enticing and tantalizing, as stated here. This withdrawal is facilitated by removing oneself from inappropriate environments for meditation and by abandoning the hindrance of desire for sensual pleasure (kāmacchanda). Both are necessary prerequisites for entering the first jhāna.
There is a possibility that a huge storm with rain should come from the east, from the west, ... re ... from the north, ... re ... from the south. They will arouse waves in the pond. In like manner, a certain person secluded from sensual desires ... re ... attains to the fourth higher state of mind (catutthaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati). Thinking I am the gainer of the fourth higher state of mindhe mixes up with the bhikkhus, bhikkhunis, lay disciples male and female. kings and the ministers of kings, with those of other faiths and their disciples. Abiding with that association, diffused and engaged in talk, the mind touched with greed and corrupted he would give up the holy life and come to low life. - AN6.60 Hatthisāriputtasuttaṃ
when a bhikkhu is developing and cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness, kings or royal ministers, friends or colleagues, relatives or kinsmen, might invite him to accept wealth, saying: ‘Come, good man, why let these saffron robes weigh you down? Why roam around with a shaven head and begging bowl? Come, having returned to the lower life, enjoy wealth and do meritorious deeds.’ Indeed, friends, when that bhikkhu is developing and cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness, it is impossible that he will give up the training and return to the lower life. For what reason? Because for a long time his mind has flowed towards seclusion, sloped towards seclusion, inclined towards seclusion. Thus it is impossible that he will give up the training and return to the lower life. SN52.8 (8) The Salaḷa-tree Hut BB Trans
Hi Alex,Alex123 wrote:In Pāḷi Nikāyas, such as AN6.60 , Jhāna is temporary state that does not destroy defilements.
The anapanasati section of the satipatthana sutta does seem to lead in that direction, imho (was that what you meant?) But taking it further - as I understand it, the Path to Nibbana is eightfold, meaning that we need both satipatthana (samma sati) and the jhanas (samma samadhi), just as we also need samma ditthi, samma sankappa, samma vaca, ... etc. I don't know why Buddhists sometimes argue over 'satipatthana vs jhana' as if there is actually any conflict...we need both, don't we?Zom wrote:Satipatthana actually leads to jhana ,)