Breath as the Object of Jhana

[Ben]

Yes, I hear what you are saying.
You could either get lost or lose all confidence, that is for sure. By all means examine the differing teachings handed down to us.
If the teacher is reputable and the methodology sound, then there should be some discernable difference to the lives of those who are earnestly practicing under that teacher.
Lastly - you will need to take the plunge yourself. Try out a particular teacher's meditation practice and evaluate it yourself. If after, say one year of practice, it doesn't suit you - try something else.

There's no conflict with particular methodologies having internal consistency yet differ from other competing methodologies.
In some places, Ledi Sayadaw referred to Vipassana Meditation as "insight exercises", I have vague recollections that he also referred to samadhi/jhana as "concentration exercises" - they are just skilful means to develop particular mind states. So, imho, it doesn't really matter if Ajahn Brahm's method for attaining jhana appears different to my own teacher's instructions - so long as the applied method gets you to develop particular rarified mind states - that is the important thing.
with metta

Ben

[convivium]

Thanks Ben! So do they all agree on what qualifies as these particular rarefied states (specifically jhana)? Do they each simply emphasize different degrees of absorption within any possible jhana while they all agree on what qualifies as each particular jhana? For example, Thanissaro's jhana as against Brahm's or Pa-Auk's appears different. Would the latter teachers consider each jhana, under Thanissaro's description, true jhana (only to a lesser degree of absorbtion)?

[Sylvester]

I'm not so sure about the statement that, in third jhana, piti ceases.

The jhana pericope has

pītiyā ca virāgā

which is indifference to piti, not the cessation of piti. That Sutta spends most of its time connecting jhana progression with formless progression, which for various reasons I take to be a sign of relative lateness.

Ahem, I think you'd need to inflect the pīti into the accusative case to read as such. The instr/abl/gen/dat inflection does not appear to admit of such a reading, although the locative of reference might, save that there's no verb to trigger that...

I think the genitive is intended here, especially in light of DN 9 which says that the earlier perception of rapture and pleasure born of concentration ceases in 3rd Jhana.

[mikenz66]

Hi Convivium,

Thanks Ben! So do they all agree on what qualifies as these particular rarefied states (specifically jhana)? Do they each simply emphasize different degrees of absorption within any possible jhana while they all agree on what qualifies as each particular jhana? For example, Thanissaro's jhana as against Brahm's or Pa-Auk's appears different. Would the latter teachers consider each jhana, under Thanissaro's description, true jhana (only to a lesser degree of absorbtion)?

See:
The Great Jhana Debate
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=4597" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

My opinion is that there are quite large differences in definition and interpretation because the suttas are quite vague on some details, especially details of how to achieve jhana (or develop satipatthana for that matter...).

If you look in the Visuddhimagga (which I referred to above) or teachings from Ajahn Brahm, or Pa Auk Sayadaw, you'll find techniques for entering very absorbed states, which they will say are the "true jhanas". Others teach much less absorbed states, which sound more like what U Pandita terms "vipassana jhana" See In This Very Life http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pesala/Pan ... hanas.html
This gives him the advantage of being able to advocate a "soft jhana" without contradicting the commentaries...

Anyway, there is plenty of discussion in the thread I referred to above, so there is little point in repeating all of that, but I would agree with Ben that the respectable modern teachers teach well, but differ in emphasis and terminology.


MIke

[tiltbillings]

See

The Great Jhana Debate
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=4597" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And also see:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 21#p140097" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[khlawng]

so what does, for example, "speech has ceased" mean? it sounds like it's supposing a verbal mantra, but that seems like an unjustified interpretation.

It means that you do not speak, or that it is not possible for speech to arise.

This was explained to me during one of our meditation session as the internal voice and instructions you give yourself for each step during your meditation. The little "I" in your head, if you can say that, should be quiet. The correct result should be a silent and bright mind not just the ceasation of external vocalization. Hope that helps.