Jhana + Vipassana

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
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi PT,

Yes, of course. The Mahasi school insists that what they teach is entirely compatible with the Suttas, Commentaries, Visuddhimagga, etc.

The long discussion between a Sri Lankan monk and some Mahasi followers was referenced here:
http://www.mahasi.org.mm/discourse/E24/E24ch03.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; by Dmytro. It contains much technical discussion about the different types of concentrations...

I have it collected into a book as "Satipatthana Vipassana Meditation Criticisms and Replies (Abridged! Edition), which is over 200 pages.

You can access all chapters (1-5) by editing the "E24ch03" to ...01 ... 02, etc but I can't figure out whether there is a contents page there...

Metta
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by mikenz66 »

[Apologies for the strange characters from the cut-and-paste...]

Here is the reply by Sayædaw U Ñænuttra t othe first letter.

http://www.mahasi.org.mm/discourse/E24/E24ch01.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It is indeed regrettable that the Ven. Kheminda Thera of Ceylon takes a lopsided view of momentary concentration and purification of mind. (Refer to his article under the above caption in the July 1966 issue of World Buddhism).Was he inspired by prejudice? If so, it is certainly detrimental not only to himself but to all those who, in the Buddha Sæsana, are making efforts, in right earnest, to abandon the four wrong courses of life (agati), and get rid of all defilements.

In The Progress of Insight (page 2), the Ven. Mahæsø Sayædaw writes: “Alluding to the latter class of persons (Suddha-Vipassanæ-yænika)”, the Papañca-sþdanø, commenting on the Dhamma-dæyæda Sutta in the Majjhima-Nikæya, says: “Herein some persons proceed directly with the contemplation of the five Groups of Grasping as having the characteristics of being impermanent and so forth, without having previously developed Tranquility as mentioned in the method called “Preceded by Tranquility” (Samatha-pubba³gamæ)(1)

There are, of course, three kinds of concentration: momentary concentration, access concentration and absorption concentration. In the above passage, it is clearly stated that contemplation is done without having previously developed access concentration and absorption concentration, and so purification of mind comes about by momentary concentration.

The Ven. Kheminda Thera takes no notice of this Commentary and allows himself to be carried away by his own bias. It should be noted that the Papañca-sþdanø, Majjhima Nikæya Commentary, is not a commentary written in Myanmar. It is a commentary translated from Sinhalese into Pæ¹i by Buddhaghosa over 1,500 years ago. Therefore the contemplation method based on momentary concentration is neither new nor Myanmar. It is quite ancient and may even be called the old Ceylon Method. It has stood the test of time.
Mike
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by tiltbillings »

pt1 wrote:
This seems pretty similar to what you are saying, so perhaps "vipassana jhanas" are a modern term for something which was already described in the old commentaries?
Maybe, though I suspect it is a bit more than that. Listen to the two talks by experienced meditation teachers I linked above.
>> 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
pt1
Posts: 417
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:30 am

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by pt1 »

Thanks Mike for the interesting read.
Mike wrote:but I can't figure out whether there is a contents page there...
This might be a part of it: http://www.mahasi.org.mm/discourse/E24/E24cont.htm

If anyone's interested, here are a few things I remember from comparing old and new commentaries regarding "yoked" samatha and vipassana and MN 111. It seems the notion that vipassna and jhana are conducted "at the same time" is a recent development by modern commentators who are not using a strict abhidihamma terminology, or who might not be particularly well acquainted (or simply disagree) with the old commentaries.

It seems that in the old commentaries, "yoked" referred to the fact that a path was attained by insight based on the jhana factors. I.e. there would be full jhana absorption (fixed), then there would be exiting the full absorption so that the jhana factor(s) that has just fallen away could become an object of citta accompanied by wisdom (i.e. insight). In contrast, a dry-insighter path attainment would not have a jhana factor that has just fallen away as the object of citta, but some other dhamma. Apparently, the same is true even for those who do develop a full samatha practice, (i.e. full fixed absorption) but at the moment of path attainment, they don't have a jhana factor as the object of citta, but some other dhamma.

So, "yoked" in the old days seemed to refer to a particular way of attainment, not a particular practice. I.e. according to old commentaries, jhana proper means fixed absorption, which excludes the possibility of insight at that very moment. So, I'd guess that whenever modern commentators say that insight is happening at the same time as jhana, I'd guess that what they mean is that concentration is not on absorption (fixed) level but on access level - and thus, it seems they are close to describing what was known before as "dry-insight" practice, even though they might call it "sutta jhana", "vipassana jhana", etc, though of course, this is a bit of a simplification and things might not be quite as clear-cut as that, as tilt suggests.

As for MN111, according to the old Majjhima commentary (from memory of reading about this) this sutta in fact documents the moment that Sariputta attained arahatship, while he was fanning the Buddha who was at that time delivering a sermon to another monk, sorry can't remember his name. (So this sutta is not talking about some random person here, we are talking about Ven.Sariputta - the wisest man (i.e. with strongest insight) in the history of mankind, second only to the Buddha, light-years ahead of all of us here for many life-times to come in regards of development of wisdom). Such was his wisdom and mastery of jhanas, that while he was fanning the Buddha, he could enter one jhana (full absorption) for only a few moments, then exit it the next moment and consider with insight (wisdom) the jhana factors that have just fallen away, keep fanning the Buddha some more, then enter another jhana, exit, consider the factors, etc. So every time there's listing of factors in the sutta, this is not a record of Sariputta thinking about those factors, but a record of Sariputa's direct insight into the nature of these dhammas, which happens in microseconds. When I was reading this, I was wondering, okay, so why doesn't it says so in the sutta that he was entering and exiting jhanas, and the suggestion someone made was that it was (a) so obvious to everyone in those days that it wasn't considered necessary to mention it in the sutta, but (b) it was mentioned in the ancient commentary to Majjhima just to make sure people don't forget it.

Anyway, it's very interesting to compare old and new commentaries, too bad there's not much of the old stuff available in English yet..

Best wishes
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi PT,
pt1 wrote:Thanks Mike for the interesting read.
Mike wrote:but I can't figure out whether there is a contents page there...
This might be a part of it: http://www.mahasi.org.mm/discourse/E24/E24cont.htm
Yes, that's it. I must finish reading it. It gets extremely technical about what the (ancient) commentaries say about satipatthana.

Thanks for the interesting comments about the Commentary to MN111 and possible misunderstandings.
The Sutta that mentions Sariputta's arahantship while fanning is: MN 74: Dighanaka Sutta
Now at that time Ven. Sariputta was sitting behind the Blessed One, fanning him. The thought occurred to him, "Indeed, it seems that the Blessed One speaks to us of the abandoning of each of these mental qualities through direct knowledge. Indeed, it seems that the One Well-gone speaks to us of the relinquishing of each of these mental qualities through direct knowledge." As Ven. Sariputta was reflecting thus, his mind was released from fermentations through not-clinging. While in LongNails the wanderer there arose the dustless, stainless Dhamma eye: "Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to cessation."
Of course, the whole point of the link above is that the "dry insight" path also exists in the Ancient Commentaries, not just modern ones.

Metta
Mike
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2106
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by Assaji »

Hi Sean,
seanpdx wrote:I'm curious if anyone in this forum has read Alexander Wynne's "The Origin of Buddhist Meditation"? If so, any thoughts?
I've read some parts of it at Google books:
http://books.google.com/books?id=TiZWJ1 ... frontcover" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and explored the Brahmanic "jhana" practices, referred to in this book. Quite interesting.

Regards, Dmytro
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2106
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by Assaji »

Hi BlackBird,
BlackBird wrote:
Dmytro wrote:"The suddhivipassanayanika yogi, the subject under discussion, is the lowest of several types of yogis, and he needs not develop jhana particularly to dispel the hindrances before the contemplation of the four foundations of mindfullness. He dispels them while contemplating on the four foundations of mindfullness. He has to do so because he is not possessed of special powers. He is like a person, who, having no boat to cross by, has to swim across the river."
I am quite interested in this classification, I was wondering if you could point me to some more stuff on it, couldn't find much beyond your quote in the source page.
That's from Majjhima Nikaya Atthakatha 4.67:

Nissāya nissāyāti taṃ taṃ samāpattiṃ nissāya. Oghassa nittharaṇā akkhātāti oghataraṇaṃ kathitaṃ, tatiyajjhānaṃ pādakaṃ katvā ṭhitabhikkhuno oghanittharaṇā kathitā…pe… nevasaññānāsaññāyatanaṃ pādakaṃ katvā ṭhitabhikkhuno oghanittharaṇā kathitāti vadati.

Katamo pana, bhante, ariyo vimokkhoti idha kiṃ pucchati? Samāpattiṃ tāva padaṭṭhānaṃ katvā vipassanaṃ vaḍḍhetvā arahattaṃ gaṇhanto bhikkhu nāvaṃ vā uḷumpādīni vā nissāya mahoghaṃ taritvā pāraṃ gacchanto viya na kilamati. Sukkhavipassako pana pakiṇṇakasaṅkhāre sammasitvā arahattaṃ gaṇhanto bāhubalena sotaṃ chinditvā pāraṃ gacchanto viya kilamati.

One who makes the concentration attainments a basis for vipassana, can be compared to one who crosses the great flood on a boat, and does not exhaust himself in the process. However the dry-insight practitioner can be compared to one who crosses the stream without a boat, and gets tired in the process.

Metta, Dmytro
rowyourboat
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:29 pm
Location: London, UK

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by rowyourboat »

there are advantages as well as disadvantages in doing vipassana in jhana
advantages: the mind is more maleable in deep samadhi so any insight gained will strike deeper and last longer
the samadhi component is already well developed so there is no struggle to build that up like in dry vipassana
disadvantages: you may not see impermanence of the world you normally inhabit ie the kama loka, but only see impermanence in the rupa world/jhanas. Hence not letting go completely, hence getting stuck at certain levels of progression. If a person's wisdom is penetrating enough to see the symbolic nature of seeing impermanence in one thing being (mind door) applied to everything (6 sense doors) then it would be less of a problem.
Because of the deep samadhi it maybe difficult to see impermanence and as there is little that one may observe as the self- difficulty in understanding non-self.

I would leave this to the experts who have already attained stream entry and understand the impermanence of all phenomena already. Their minds will be more amenable to limitations that this method poses but are well placed to make use of the advantages it offers.

with metta
With Metta

Karuna
Mudita
& Upekkha
seanpdx
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by seanpdx »

Dmytro wrote:Hi Sean,
seanpdx wrote:I'm curious if anyone in this forum has read Alexander Wynne's "The Origin of Buddhist Meditation"? If so, any thoughts?
I've read some parts of it at Google books:
http://books.google.com/books?id=TiZWJ1 ... frontcover" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and explored the Brahmanic "jhana" practices, referred to in this book. Quite interesting.

Regards, Dmytro
Unfortunately, google books doesn't have any of the really good stuff. The paper is quite apropos considering the topic of discussion. Ah well.
Freawaru
Posts: 489
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:26 pm

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by Freawaru »

Dmytro wrote:Hi Smokey,

Here's a relevant quotation:

"The suddhivipassanayanika yogi, the subject under discussion, is the lowest of several types of yogis, and he needs not develop jhana particularly to dispel the hindrances before the contemplation of the four foundations of mindfullness. He dispels them while contemplating on the four foundations of mindfullness. He has to do so because he is not possessed of special powers. He is like a person, who, having no boat to cross by, has to swim across the river."

http://www.mahasi.org.mm/discourse/E24/E24ch03.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It seems that nobody is against jhana.

Metta, Dmytro
Hi Dmytro,

I have two questions:

How does one discern between momentary, access, absorption, and neighbourhood concentration? According to Leigh Brasington
How do you know access concentration has been established? The mind is fully with the object of meditation and, if there are any thoughts, they are wispy and in the background; they do not draw you away from the meditation object.
http://www.leighb.com/jhana2a.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I thought this to be a clear definition: the object of concentration is stable in the mind, one can observe it and analyse it (with thoughts and concepts) and think about something else, too, without loosing track of it.

Absorption concentration means, I think, that one is merged with the object. One gets the impression "I am the object". Say, one concentrates on the tactile impression of the nostrils then absorption concentration is reached when one feels "I am the nostrils" - there is a shift of perspective, a shift INTO the object and away from our "normal" view (which localises us somewhere in the head and our personality). So I expect that when one reaches absorption concentration with, say, the "The Base of Infinite Space" (5th jhana) one has the impression "I am Infinite Space". One IS that "Infinite Space" rather than one's body and personality but one knows that this is so and that normally one is body and personality. It was mentioned that during this state of absorption concentration one cannot practice insight but I don't understand why this should not be possible. Just like during access concentration there is an awareness present that can be used to observe and analyse. In fact it is more easy to analyse because letting go of controlling the object is even more easy than during access concentration and the awareness is more lucid. So I would say that vipassana practice during a jhana should be more easy than afterwards. One just has to pay more attention to the awareness itself than to the object of the absorption.

Then there is neighbourhood concentration. The name itself suggests that it is that concentration on an object before absorption happens. For example
Leigh Brasington wrote: It has been mistaken for achieving oneness with all consciousness. It can be entered from the fifth Jhana by realizing that in order to "gaze" at an infinite spaciousness, you must have an infinite consciousness, and then shifting your attention to that consciousness.
So before the absorption into another object happens one is already aware of the object and it is stable and there is concentration linked on it. This is a slightly different state than absorption concentration: while during absorption one has the impression "I am Infinite Space", during neighbourhood concentration one has the impression "There is infinite space". It is also different from access concentration because there are no wispy thoughts and the like any more. I think vipassana should be also possible during neighborhood concentration.

And finally, momentary concentration. If I understand Mahasi Sayadaw's definition correctly the only difference is regarding the stability of an object. While during access concentration there is always the same object the object changes from moment to moment during momentary concentration. The point is that here, too, the lucid awareness arises in tandem with the object (any object that arises) so vipassana is possible, too.

Please correct me if these definitions are incorrect.

My second question is regarding the difference of classification of different kinds of yogis. I think I understand first jhana then vipassana: one enters jhana and then uses the awareness that is present during it (the very same lucid awareness that enables one to switch to another jhana) to observe and analyze (which slightly changes the experience). But I don't understand why it shouldn't be possible to ALSO practice dry insight as in the Mahasi Method during both sittings and every day issues? Isn't it possible to practice both ways and so be kinda both kinds of yogis?
Moggalana
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:31 am
Location: Germany

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by Moggalana »

There is this book, The Experience of Samadhi - An In-depth Exploration of Buddhist Meditation. The first part of the book is an analysis of how Samadhi/Jhana is defined in the Suttas compared to how they are defined in the Visduddhimagga. The second part consists of interviews with various buddhist teachers (Jack Kornfield, Ajahn Thanissaro, Sharon Salzberg, Bhante Gunaratana, Christina Feldman, Leigh Brasington, Ajahn Brahm, Pa Auk Sayadaw), each of them representing a slightly different view on the subject. Part of it is accessible online: The Experience of Samadhi.

At first, I was slightly bewildered by all those different interpretations. Now, I have a more relaxed view on this topic. We don't know exactly what the Buddha actually taught, and we probably never will. Each teacher's inerpretation is in accord with his own experience and the tradition he has been trained in. Maybe we should understand that this is actually a gift and not something to worry about. There is this great range of skilful means. Just use what works for you (as long as it is in compliance with an authentic tradition/teacher).

There was this one part, in the interview with Bhante Gunaratana, which provides a possible solution to the old jhana vs. dry insight controversy.
...
Richard Shankman: Teachers do not all agree that jhana is necessary to attain enlightenment, regardless of the style of practice you engage in.
Bhante Gunaratana: When you attain enlightenment, you have to attain jhanic concentration at the attainment of stream entry. You may not have practiced jhana, per se, seperately. But when you attain stream-entry, that attainment is always attained at the jhanic concentration level.
...
:anjali:
Let it come. Let it be. Let it go.
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2106
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by Assaji »

Hi Freawaru,
Freawaru wrote: How does one discern between momentary, access, absorption, and neighbourhood concentration?
To put it simple, appana-samadhi (absorption) is stable - one maintains it steadily, neighbourhood (upacara-samadhi) is unstable - one is still unable to maintain the concentration, and khanika-samadhi (momentary) lasts from moment to moment.

There's not much more about it.
Absorption concentration means, I think, that one is merged with the object. One gets the impression "I am the object".
Identification is a possible way to get hold of meditative attainment, but IMHO, a poor one.

Samadhi is synchronization of the mind, collecting it together. The basis of concentration serves as a kind of pitchfork for such synchronization.

The mind is not crumbling into a single point, but instead it is getting very spacious.

The development of vipassana is possible in all these kinds of samadhi. Thought it may somewhat problematic in some respects in formless jhanas.
My second question is regarding the difference of classification of different kinds of yogis. I think I understand first jhana then vipassana: one enters jhana and then uses the awareness that is present during it (the very same lucid awareness that enables one to switch to another jhana) to observe and analyze (which slightly changes the experience). But I don't understand why it shouldn't be possible to ALSO practice dry insight as in the Mahasi Method during both sittings and every day issues? Isn't it possible to practice both ways and so be kinda both kinds of yogis?
Surely it's possible. It's called 'yugannadha' in Pali.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta, Dmytro
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Freawaru, Moggalana,
Freawaru wrote: How does one discern between momentary, access, absorption, and neighbourhood concentration?
As far as I can see, access and neighbourhood are two names for the same thing.
Nyanatiloka http://what-buddha-said.net/library/Bud ... m%C4%81dhi" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; defines:
parikamma-samādhi: preparatory (basic mundane concentration)
upacāra-samādhi : access, neighbourhood.
appanā-samādhi: absorption
He doesn't mention momentary concentration (khanikasamadhi), e.g. see http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el351.html, which is what the Mahasi school emphasises. As I understand it, the Mahasi school claim that khanikasamadhi is able to suppress the hindrances sufficiently for insight to occur. This was discussed earlier in this thread: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2890#p41795. Access and absorption are discussed in detail in the Commentaries and Visuddhimagga.
Moggalana wrote: There was this one part, in the interview with Bhante Gunaratana, which provides a possible solution to the old jhana vs. dry insight controversy.
...
Richard Shankman: Teachers do not all agree that jhana is necessary to attain enlightenment, regardless of the style of practice you engage in.
Bhante Gunaratana: When you attain enlightenment, you have to attain jhanic concentration at the attainment of stream entry. You may not have practiced jhana, per se, seperately. But when you attain stream-entry, that attainment is always attained at the jhanic concentration level.
...
Thank you for quoting that. However, it is hardly a "controversy", unless one disregards the Commentaries, Visuddhimagga, etc. Ven Gunaratana is simply giving the standard Abhidhamma/Commentary explanation of how dry insight works.

Metta
Mike
Freawaru
Posts: 489
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:26 pm

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by Freawaru »

Hi Dmytro,

thank you for your explanations :)
Dmytro wrote: To put it simple, appana-samadhi (absorption) is stable - one maintains it steadily, neighbourhood (upacara-samadhi) is unstable - one is still unable to maintain the concentration, and khanika-samadhi (momentary) lasts from moment to moment.

There's not much more about it.
I see. In this case neighbourhood and access concentration are indeed just two words for the same thingy.
Identification is a possible way to get hold of meditative attainment, but IMHO, a poor one.
I admit this surprises me as it does not agree at all with my own experience. In my experience a stable concentration without a shift of perspective is less useful as it does not change the self-view at all. I still are "Freawaru" if you know what I mean. But conscious shifts of perspective alter this idea of "I am a permanent self" in a way stable concentration on any object without a shift cannot. This is why I would discern between these two kinds of stable concentration. Could you please explain this statement of yours more deeply.
Surely it's possible. It's called 'yugannadha' in Pali.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Thank you :)
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2106
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Jhana + Vipassana

Post by Assaji »

Hi Freawaru,
Freawaru wrote:I admit this surprises me as it does not agree at all with my own experience. In my experience a stable concentration without a shift of perspective is less useful as it does not change the self-view at all. I still are "Freawaru" if you know what I mean. But conscious shifts of perspective alter this idea of "I am a permanent self" in a way stable concentration on any object without a shift cannot. This is why I would discern between these two kinds of stable concentration. Could you please explain this statement of yours more deeply.
IMHO, the shift of perspective is truly useful, but it need not to be identified with.

On the contrary, it may be eventually quite liberating to contemplate the impermanence of the subtle self and happiness, and disidentify from it.

See, for example, Jhana sutta:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta, Dmytro
Post Reply