arupa jhanas

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Meditation, e.g. meditation postures, developing a regular sitting practice, skillfully relating to difficulties and hindrances, etc.
User avatar
manas
Posts: 2678
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: arupa jhanas

Post by manas »

Earlier/on/i/said/that/to/my/knowledge
the/formless/jhanas/required/mastery/of/the/fourth/rupa/jhana
to/be/embarked/upon/successfully

but/i/just/read/of/two/instances
in/which/a/different/route/is/taken

so/it/appears/i/was/mistaken.

it/seems/to/me/that/when/the/Buddha/was/still/physically/present
there/were/a/number/of/ways/to/practice/meditation
for/the/ending/of/the/mental/effluents

the/notion/that/only/one/way/or/only/another/way
is/the/right/one
might/not/be/entirely/correct

theres/a/saying
*theres/more/than/one/way/to/skin/a/cat*
not/a/nice/image/but/im/beginning/to/believe
that/there/might/be/quite/a/few/meditation/techniques
that/worked/for/particular/individuals
which/today/are/not/widely/practiced/or/known/anymore
but/which/in/the/early/days/of/the/Sangha,/were.
ThanissaroBhikkhu wrote:Emptiness as a State of Concentration

The third kind of emptiness taught by the Buddha — as a state of concentration — is essentially another way of using insight into emptiness as an attribute of the senses and their objects as a means to attain release. One discourse (MN 43) describes it as follows: A monk goes to sit in a quiet place and intentionally perceives the six senses and their objects as empty of self or anything pertaining to self. As he pursues this perception, it brings his mind not directly to release, but to the formless jhana of nothingness, which is accompanied by strong equanimity.

Another discourse (MN 106) pursues this topic further, noting that the monk relishes the equanimity. If he simply keeps on relishing it, his meditation goes no further than that. But if he learns to see that equanimity as an action — fabricated, willed — he can look for the subtle stress it engenders. If he can observe this stress as it arises and passes away simply on its own terms, neither adding any other perceptions to it nor taking anything away, he's again adopting emptiness as an approach to his meditation. By dropping the causes of stress wherever he finds them in his concentration, he ultimately reaches the highest form of emptiness, free from all mental fabrication.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... iness.html
There/is/also/this/sutta,/in/which/the/fourth/jhana
if/not/mentioned/(by/name),as/being/required/for/entry
into/'the/perception/of
the/dimension/of/the/infinitude/of/space':
(from/the/Cula-suññata Sutta: The Lesser Discourse on Emptiness):

..."He discerns that 'Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of human being are not present. Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of wilderness are not present. There is only this modicum of disturbance: the singleness based on the perception of earth.' He discerns that 'This mode of perception is empty of the perception of human being. This mode of perception is empty of the perception of wilderness. There is only this non-emptiness: the singleness based on the perception of earth.' Thus he regards it as empty of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: 'There is this.' And so this, his entry into emptiness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, & pure.

(The Infinitude of Space)

"Further, Ananda, the monk — not attending to the perception of wilderness, not attending to the perception of earth — attends to the singleness based on the perception of the dimension of the infinitude of space. His mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, settles, & indulges in its perception of the dimension of the infinitude of space.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
there/is/a/problem/with/discussing/these/states
(although/i/admit/i/find/them/very/interesting)
its/that/afaik/none/of/us/here/have/attained/them
furthermore/almost/no/one/seems/to/advocate/them
and/they/are/not/in/common/usage/(it/would/seem?)
so/we/end/up/discussing/things/way/beyond/us
anyway/its/interesting/regardless
but/care/must/be/taken
not/to/try/to/imagine
using/the/intellect/alone
what/these/realms/must/be/like,because
aiui/whatever/our/intellect/comes/up/with
will/almost/certainly/be/wrong!

metta/ :anjali:
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: arupa jhanas

Post by Sylvester »

manas wrote: There/is/also/this/sutta,/in/which/the/fourth/jhana
if/not/mentioned/(by/name),as/being/required/for/entry
into/'the/perception/of
the/dimension/of/the/infinitude/of/space':
(from/the/Cula-suññata Sutta: The Lesser Discourse on Emptiness):

..."He discerns that 'Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of human being are not present. Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of wilderness are not present. There is only this modicum of disturbance: the singleness based on the perception of earth.' He discerns that 'This mode of perception is empty of the perception of human being. This mode of perception is empty of the perception of wilderness. There is only this non-emptiness: the singleness based on the perception of earth.' Thus he regards it as empty of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: 'There is this.' And so this, his entry into emptiness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, & pure.

(The Infinitude of Space)

"Further, Ananda, the monk — not attending to the perception of wilderness, not attending to the perception of earth — attends to the singleness based on the perception of the dimension of the infinitude of space. His mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, settles, & indulges in its perception of the dimension of the infinitude of space.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Good observation, manas.

I think MN 121's description of the entry into that formless attainment fits easily into the standard pericope -
...with the complete transcending of perceptions of form, with the disappearance (setting down) of perceptions of resistance, and not heeding perceptions of diversity...

...sabbaso rūpasaññānaṃ samatikkamā paṭighasaññānaṃ atthaṅgamā nānattasaññānaṃ amanasikārā...
Non-attention (amanasikārā) to nānattasaññā matches MN 121's "not attending to perceptions of wilderness and earth" (amanasikaritvā araññasaññaṃ amanasikaritvā paṭhavisaññaṃ). Earth is of course part of the description of form/rūpa, and DN 15 suggests a very close connection between form and sensory impression contact (paṭighasamphassa). The formless pericope's reference to paṭighasaññā is not explained, and DN 15 is the only sutta that gives some clues as to how paṭigha and adhivacana (sensory impression and delineation/designation) are the functional aspects of rūpa and nāma respectively.
mogg
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 11:44 am

Re: arupa jhanas

Post by mogg »

daverupa wrote:
alan... wrote:what do you all think?
They're unrelated to sammasamadhi.

I think they're additions, splices if you will, which the reciters felt were good fits as time went on but which started life among the ocean of methodologies and meditational exegeses floating around the Gangetic plain in those days.

They were ...popular (?) enough to get added into the story of the Buddha's final meditation, and were probably strongly related to contemporary cosmological speculation (as DN 2 suggests). The salient presence of deities/realms and the salient presence of formless meditations in the Nikayas are two sides of the same cultural coin, I expect, but their absence from a majority of suttas where the jhanas are discussed is more telling than any positive statement about them, it seems to me.
This is incorrect.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10184
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: arupa jhanas

Post by Spiny Norman »

Sylvester wrote:rūpa = the physical khandha associated with the 5 material senses
nāma = the 4 arūpa khandhas (including consciousness).
Possibly I'm missing the point, but are you saying this analysis is incorrect?

Also, is there any correlation here with the distinction between the 4 elements and the 6 elements? The additional 2 elements are space and consciousness, which appear to tie in with the 1st and 2nd formless jhanas. :juggling:
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: arupa jhanas

Post by Sylvester »

porpoise wrote:
Sylvester wrote:rūpa = the physical khandha associated with the 5 material senses
nāma = the 4 arūpa khandhas (including consciousness).
Possibly I'm missing the point, but are you saying this analysis is incorrect?

Also, is there any correlation here with the distinction between the 4 elements and the 6 elements? The additional 2 elements are space and consciousness, which appear to tie in with the 1st and 2nd formless jhanas. :juggling:

Well, I'll try to refrain from a right/wrong judgement and simply point out the differences in treatment.

The Abhidharmic axiom rūpa = the physical khandha associated with the 5 material senses does not quite fit in MN 28 here -
Following the same analysis with contact at the 5 senses -

But when internally the intellect is intact and externally ideas come into range, and there is a corresponding engagement, then there is the appearing of the corresponding type of consciousness.

The form of what has thus come into being is gathered under the form clinging-aggregate. etc etc
I don't see any reason why rūpa should be associated only with the 5 material doors, not when Sue Hamilton has noted that such an association is never made in the suttas. If anything, MN 28 is even more radical in suggesting that mental contact can give rise to rūpa, as with the rest of the other 4 aggregates. We also have DN 15 making the heretical suggestion -
If the permutations, signs, themes, and indicators by which there is a description of form-group were all absent, would resistance-contact (paṭighasamphassa) with regard to the name-group be discerned?
What this plainly states are -

1. form is associated with paṭigha; and
2. nāma can function in a paṭigha "mode".

As far as I can see, that doesn't leave very much room for the position that paṭigha is not also a function of the mind.

My take on name-&-form is that the Buddha was borrowing Upanishadic terminology to deal with the process of naming and appearance that arises with contact (described most fully in DN 15). You won't find nāma defined as the 4 arūpa khandhas in the Pali suttas, since the standard definition of nāma is feeling, perception, intention, contact and attention. Consciousness is not included within nāma in the Pali suttas. I have however seen this done in at least one Chinese parallel in the Agamas, and I suspect this is a textual error that allowed the Sarvastivadin Abhidharma to move away from the naming/appearance treatment to an ontological essay on material/non-material.

While the Abhidharmic exegesis has its value for those interested in ontology, I think that model misses the point about why and how bare sensory impression contact (paṭighasamphassa) leads to delineation contact (adhivacanasamphassa) and subsequently to the emotional responses. Suffering in the affective sense revolves around that vortex, especially if the adhivacanasamphassa infers incorrectly that a self exists.

My suspicion about the transition from rūpa to the arūpa lies in the absolute dependance of the latter on the former. As you point out, rūpa includes space (again, MN 28). "Infinite space" can be delineated once one frees oneself from the sensory impression of "space", but yet, one cannot get to the delineation of "infinite space" without a referent, namely "space". This absolute dependance of delineation of name on form is suggested by the above-quoted passage in DN 15. The delineation of "infinite space" depends on the ability to cognise "space". I suspect that what happens in the transition from rūpa to the arūpa is that the meditator sets down paṭighasaññā of space, and directs his/her attention to the abstract delineation of infinite space.

In this regard, I think a better interpretation of paṭighasaññā would be not to treat it as a genitive tappurisa (ie perception of resistance), but possibly as an ablative tappurisa (perception from paṭigha). Alternatively, it could be read as a kammadhāraya compound, where the paṭigha functions adjectivally.

Take with a pinch of salt...
Post Reply