Jhana Question

The cultivation of calm or tranquility and the development of concentration
Micheal Kush
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 8:47 pm

Re: Jhana Question

Post by Micheal Kush »

suttametta wrote:My practice is a little different than the touch awareness method. I am simply being mindful of the state of my breathing as the sutta says, "I am aware my breath is short," or "I am aware my breath is long." I breathe in, calming the body. I breathe out sensitive to pleasure, etc. By being aware of the breath this way it slows and stops, whereupon I reflect on the nature of senses and the four noble truths. Finally, I perceive the nature of consciousness that is "without surface or feature..." I see this as mindfulness all the way through where the brightness and luminous quality becomes ever purer.
Thanks for the advice and comments everybody. Greatly appreciate it.

However regarding your quote above, this is why i asked whether which method is more correct but now i have verified that each method is safely applicable to accomplished these refined states. I just wanted to make sure, i had the fear that if the tetrads are the only way of achieving jhana then i would have to switch up practice which is a enormous pain.

Are the tetrads a basic instruction of using vipassana and samatha simulatanously?
With metta, mike
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Jhana Question

Post by Nyana »

LonesomeYogurt wrote:One is incapable of speaking or hearing in the first Jhana, according to several different discourses.
Stopping speaking doesn't entail being incapable of speaking. As for hearing, this is only mentioned as such in the Kathāvatthu, and pertains to the placement of attention, not the non-fucntioning of the ear faculty. There are suttas and commentaries which suggest limiting the latter to the formless attainments.
LonesomeYogurt wrote:Applied attention still occurs but it is definitely not conscious thought.
This interpretation isn't supported by the suttas, the Abhidhammapiṭaka, nor by the Peṭakopadesa:
  • Directed thought is like a text-reciter who does his recitation silently. Evaluation is like him simply contemplating it.
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Jhana Question

Post by Nyana »

Micheal Kush wrote:Are the tetrads a basic instruction of using vipassana and samatha simulatanously?
As always, it depends upon whom you ask or where you look for clarification. According to the Paṭisambhidāmagga Ānāpānassatikathā, yes. According to the Visuddhimagga, no.
Micheal Kush
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 8:47 pm

Re: Jhana Question

Post by Micheal Kush »

Ñāṇa wrote:
Micheal Kush wrote:Are the tetrads a basic instruction of using vipassana and samatha simulatanously?
As always, it depends upon whom you ask or where you look for clarification. According to the Paṭisambhidāmagga Ānāpānassatikathā, yes. According to the Visuddhimagga, no.

Ahhh yes, got it!

Thanks for the clairification

With metta, mike
User avatar
manas
Posts: 2678
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Jhana Question

Post by manas »

reflection wrote:
manas wrote:
Personally, I am interested in an inwardly stilled mind, but not one that is incapable of being directed should the need arise (for example, to direct it towards investigation of phenomena).

with metta :anjali:
That's because you are attached to having it 'under control'. But if you look at non-self, who's in control anyway? There never was anyone. So try to let go.
Hi reflection,

have you considered the following passage from the 'jhana sutta'?
"'I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana.' Thus it has been said. In reference to what was it said? There is the case where a monk, secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
Regarding the part I bolded - this doesn't sound like a mind incapable of being directed purposefully. Inwardly stilled? yes. Helplessly *just* watching the show? no.

However I am averse to arguments over jhana, because arguing over jhana increases mental agitation, which is a hindrance to jhana! - and although in this case there won't be any ill-will from either of us, :smile: , if we are not going to be able to agree, we should just 'agree to disagree' and simply wish each other well with our respective practices - with a mind of goodwill :anjali:

metta.
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
User avatar
LonesomeYogurt
Posts: 900
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:24 pm
Location: America

Re: Jhana Question

Post by LonesomeYogurt »

Ñāṇa wrote:Stopping speaking doesn't entail being incapable of speaking. As for hearing, this is only mentioned as such in the Kathāvatthu, and pertains to the placement of attention, not the non-fucntioning of the ear faculty. There are suttas and commentaries which suggest limiting the latter to the formless attainments.
To say that speech has ceased for the first Jhana is to imply that it is impossible. That may be a semantic difference, but the implication is clear that speech and Jhana never occur together. As for hearing, you're correct that hearing may continue up to the fourth Jhana, at which point it is definitely not possible. My mistake.
This interpretation isn't supported by the suttas, the Abhidhammapiṭaka, nor by the Peṭakopadesa:
Cetaso Abhiniropana or "application of mind" is listed as a synonym for vitakka, which implies that vitakka it is not at all a conscious thought process but instead a non-conceptual attention. However, it is correct to say that only the second Jhana fully eliminates even the most subtle of direct mental intention. I guess it depends on how you define thinking.
Gain and loss, status and disgrace,
censure and praise, pleasure and pain:
these conditions among human beings are inconstant,
impermanent, subject to change.

Knowing this, the wise person, mindful,
ponders these changing conditions.
Desirable things don’t charm the mind,
undesirable ones bring no resistance.

His welcoming and rebelling are scattered,
gone to their end,
do not exist.
- Lokavipatti Sutta

Stuff I write about things.
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Jhana Question

Post by Nyana »

LonesomeYogurt wrote:To say that speech has ceased for the first Jhana is to imply that it is impossible.
No, it isn't.
LonesomeYogurt wrote:Cetaso Abhiniropana or "application of mind" is listed as a synonym for vitakka, which implies that vitakka it is not at all a conscious thought process but instead a non-conceptual attention.
The Dhammasaṅgaṇī gives the following two registers for vitakka and vicāra (the English equivalents here are those offered by Lance Cousins, who's done an exhaustive survey of all relevant Pāli sources):
  • vitakka:

    1. takka 2. vitakka 3. saṅkappa 4. appanā 5. byappanā 6. cetaso abhiniropanā 7. sammāsaṅkappa

    1. speculation 2. thought 3. thought formation 4. fixing 5. firm fixing 6. applying the mind 7. right thought formation.

    vicāra:

    1. cāra 2. vicāra 3. anuvicāra 4. upavicāra 5. cittassa anusandhānatā 6. anupekkhanatā

    1. wandering 2. wandering about 3. repeated wandering about 4. frequenting 5. explorativeness of mind 6. constant examination.
These registers of terms present a spectrum of mental qualities and a range of meaning. What this implies is that there is no need to restrict definitions beyond this inclusive range of terms which correlate to a spectrum of skillful qualities relevant to sammāsamādhi.

Moreover, Sarvāstivāda, Sautrāntika, and Yogācāra commentators consistently define vitakka & vicāra as two types of "mental discourse" (manojalpa, lit: "mind-talk"). For example, Vasubandhu defines vitakka as "mental discourse which investigates" (paryeṣako manojalpa) and vicāra as "mental discourse which reflects" (pratyavekṣako manojalpa). Vitakka is considered to be coarse (cittsyaudārikatā) and vicāra comparatively more subtle (cittsyasūkṣmatā). These definitions accord well with early Pāli sources such as the Peṭakopadesa, etc.
User avatar
LonesomeYogurt
Posts: 900
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:24 pm
Location: America

Re: Jhana Question

Post by LonesomeYogurt »

Ñāṇa wrote:No, it isn't.
I can say, "One stops being single when they get married." Logically it follows that it is impossible for someone to be single while being married. Speech and Jhana do not go together; you cannot have both at the same time. If a defining feature of the first Jhana is the lack of speech, then ontologically, speech is not possible in Jhana, just as bachelorhood is not possible in marriage.
The Dhammasaṅgaṇī gives the following two registers for vitakka and vicāra (the English equivalents here are those offered by Lance Cousins, who's done an exhaustive survey of all relevant Pāli sources):
  • vitakka:

    1. takka 2. vitakka 3. saṅkappa 4. appanā 5. byappanā 6. cetaso abhiniropanā 7. sammāsaṅkappa

    1. speculation 2. thought 3. thought formation 4. fixing 5. firm fixing 6. applying the mind 7. right thought formation.

    vicāra:

    1. cāra 2. vicāra 3. anuvicāra 4. upavicāra 5. cittassa anusandhānatā 6. anupekkhanatā

    1. wandering 2. wandering about 3. repeated wandering about 4. frequenting 5. explorativeness of mind 6. constant examination.
These registers of terms present a spectrum of mental qualities and a range of meaning. What this implies is that there is no need to restrict definitions beyond this inclusive range of terms which correlate to a spectrum of skillful qualities relevant to sammāsamādhi.

Moreover, Sarvāstivāda, Sautrāntika, and Yogācāra commentators consistently define vitakka & vicāra as two types of "mental discourse" (manojalpa, lit: "mind-talk"). For example, Vasubandhu defines vitakka as "mental discourse which investigates" (paryeṣako manojalpa) and vicāra as "mental discourse which reflects" (pratyavekṣako manojalpa). Vitakka is considered to be coarse (cittsyaudārikatā) and vicāra comparatively more subtle (cittsyasūkṣmatā). These definitions accord well with early Pāli sources such as the Peṭakopadesa, etc.
I think it's clear that the vitakka and vicara of Jhana are not "everyday" thoughts or concepts. However, you're probably right that to say they are completely non-conceptual is a somewhat restrictive definition. However, it is definitely the falling away of any thought that characterizes the second Jhana, correct? You seem to be more knowledgeable than I!
Gain and loss, status and disgrace,
censure and praise, pleasure and pain:
these conditions among human beings are inconstant,
impermanent, subject to change.

Knowing this, the wise person, mindful,
ponders these changing conditions.
Desirable things don’t charm the mind,
undesirable ones bring no resistance.

His welcoming and rebelling are scattered,
gone to their end,
do not exist.
- Lokavipatti Sutta

Stuff I write about things.
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Jhana Question

Post by Nyana »

LonesomeYogurt wrote:If a defining feature of the first Jhana is the lack of speech, then ontologically, speech is not possible in Jhana, just as bachelorhood is not possible in marriage.
Well, there's a difference between ceasing to speak for a period of time and being unable to speak for a period of time. IMO the cessation in question is the former kind, as the latter is unnecessarily restrictive with regard to possible mental states correlating with sammāsamādhi and jhāna.
LonesomeYogurt wrote:I think it's clear that the vitakka and vicara of Jhana are not "everyday" thoughts or concepts.
Right. The Peṭakopadesa lists the jhāna factor of vitakka as pertaining to the thought of renunciation, the thought of non-aversion, and the thought of harmlessness. Cf. MN 19.
LonesomeYogurt wrote:However, you're probably right that to say they are completely non-conceptual is a somewhat restrictive definition. However, it is definitely the falling away of any thought that characterizes the second Jhana, correct?
Yes, again the Peṭakopadesa informs us that it's with the second jhāna that one if free from the weariness induced by vitakka & vicāra. This explanation is also likely derived from MN 19.
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Jhana Question

Post by Sylvester »

LonesomeYogurt wrote:
Ñāṇa wrote:Stopping speaking doesn't entail being incapable of speaking. As for hearing, this is only mentioned as such in the Kathāvatthu, and pertains to the placement of attention, not the non-fucntioning of the ear faculty. There are suttas and commentaries which suggest limiting the latter to the formless attainments.
To say that speech has ceased for the first Jhana is to imply that it is impossible. That may be a semantic difference, but the implication is clear that speech and Jhana never occur together. As for hearing, you're correct that hearing may continue up to the fourth Jhana, at which point it is definitely not possible. My mistake.
This interpretation isn't supported by the suttas, the Abhidhammapiṭaka, nor by the Peṭakopadesa:
Cetaso Abhiniropana or "application of mind" is listed as a synonym for vitakka, which implies that vitakka it is not at all a conscious thought process but instead a non-conceptual attention. However, it is correct to say that only the second Jhana fully eliminates even the most subtle of direct mental intention. I guess it depends on how you define thinking.
Hmm. How about AN 10.72 on sound being a thorn in 1st jhana?

One needs to be careful also with back reading Abhidhammic concepts into the suttas. The Abhidhamma takes the position that the 5 internal ayatanas are of rupa. This is not a position advanced in the suttas.
User avatar
reflection
Posts: 1116
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:27 pm

Re: Jhana Question

Post by reflection »

manas wrote:
Hi reflection,

have you considered the following passage from the 'jhana sutta'?
"'I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana.' Thus it has been said. In reference to what was it said? There is the case where a monk, secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
Regarding the part I bolded - this doesn't sound like a mind incapable of being directed purposefully. Inwardly stilled? yes. Helplessly *just* watching the show? no.

However I am averse to arguments over jhana, because arguing over jhana increases mental agitation, which is a hindrance to jhana! - and although in this case there won't be any ill-will from either of us, :smile: , if we are not going to be able to agree, we should just 'agree to disagree' and simply wish each other well with our respective practices - with a mind of goodwill :anjali:

metta.
I have seen this sutta and similar quotes, but it can't convince me. To me it's like a step by step thing and the turning away of he mind is done after jhana. This to me is clearer when you see the same thing is repeated for the all the jhanas and the arupas where vitakka/vicara is not even present. But I don't think the entire debate that's somewhere else on this forum needs to be repeated here again, so indeed let's agree to disagree.

:anjali:
dharmagoat
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 4:41 am
Location: Gone Bush

Re: Jhana Question

Post by dharmagoat »

LonesomeYogurt wrote:To say that speech has ceased for the first Jhana is to imply that it is impossible. That may be a semantic difference, but the implication is clear that speech and Jhana never occur together.
Experience shows that speech is possible in the first Jhana, but that upon speaking the state of Jhana is easily lost. Is that what is meant here?
User avatar
LonesomeYogurt
Posts: 900
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:24 pm
Location: America

Re: Jhana Question

Post by LonesomeYogurt »

dharmagoat wrote:Experience shows that speech is possible in the first Jhana, but that upon speaking the state of Jhana is easily lost. Is that what is meant here?
Upon speaking, one is no longer in jhana. Just like upon divorcing, one is no longer married. The divorce does not take place "in" the marriage.
Gain and loss, status and disgrace,
censure and praise, pleasure and pain:
these conditions among human beings are inconstant,
impermanent, subject to change.

Knowing this, the wise person, mindful,
ponders these changing conditions.
Desirable things don’t charm the mind,
undesirable ones bring no resistance.

His welcoming and rebelling are scattered,
gone to their end,
do not exist.
- Lokavipatti Sutta

Stuff I write about things.
User avatar
manas
Posts: 2678
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Jhana Question

Post by manas »

sorry, upon reflection decided to extinguish this post

metta
Last edited by manas on Sun Jul 22, 2012 4:27 am, edited 2 times in total.
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
dharmagoat
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 4:41 am
Location: Gone Bush

Re: Jhana Question

Post by dharmagoat »

LonesomeYogurt wrote:
dharmagoat wrote:Experience shows that speech is possible in the first Jhana, but that upon speaking the state of Jhana is easily lost. Is that what is meant here?
Upon speaking, one is no longer in jhana. Just like upon divorcing, one is no longer married. The divorce does not take place "in" the marriage.
On reflection I can see how this can be the case. It clarifies my understanding of what jhana actually is.
Post Reply