MN118 Anapanasati Sutta - no mention of white lights

[Pondera]

I hope that's Heineken 00

[Ceisiwr]

A) which Sutta and which particular part?

The sutta and passage we were discussing:

When I understood that doubt, loss of focus, dullness and drowsiness, terror, excitement, discomfort, excessive energy, overly lax energy, longing, perception of diversity, and excessive concentration on forms are corruptions of the mind, I gave them up.
I thought: ‘I’ve given up my mental corruptions. Now let me develop immersion in three ways.’ I developed immersion while placing the mind and keeping it connected; without placing the mind, but just keeping it connected; without placing the mind or keeping it connected; with rapture; without rapture; with pleasure; with equanimity.

MN 128

B) It depends on what your understanding of 'diverse perceptions' is. It doesn't have to be a single point that is perceived, like a bright light or dot that fills your awareness. This is tied in with some people's understanding of Ekaggata. Ekaggata is a unification of mind (and body) around one theme and a perception is not limited to single points of lights...e.g...

Perception of diversity is perception (lets just go with this translation for sake of argument) of the senses and their objects:

“Mendicants, diversity of elements gives rise to diversity of perceptions. Diversity of perceptions gives rise to diversity of intentions. Diversity of intentions gives rise to diversity of desires. Diversity of desires gives rise to diversity of passions. Diversity of passions gives rise to diversity of searches. And what is the diversity of elements? The sight element, the sound element, the smell element, the taste element, the touch element, and the thought element. This is called the diversity of elements.

And how does diversity of elements give rise to diversity of perceptions, and diversity of perceptions give rise to diversity of thoughts, and diversity of thoughts give rise to diversity of desires, and diversity of desires give rise to diversity of passions, and diversity of passions give rise to diversity of searches?

The sight element gives rise to the perception of sights. The perception of sights gives rise to thoughts about sights. Thoughts about sights give rise to the desire for sights. The desire for sights gives rise to the passion for sights. The passion for sights gives rise to searching for sights. … The thought element gives rise to the perception of thoughts. The perception of thoughts gives rise to thoughts about thoughts. Thoughts about thoughts give rise to the desire for thoughts. The desire for thoughts gives rise to the passion for thoughts. The passion for thoughts gives rise to searching for thoughts.

That’s how diversity of elements gives rise to diversity of perceptions, and diversity of perceptions gives rise to diversity of intentions, and diversity of intentions gives rise to diversity of desires, and diversity of desires gives rise to diversity of passions, and diversity of passions gives rise to diversity of searches.”

https://suttacentral.net/sn14.7/en/sujato

Do you then agree that in MN 128 it is taught that part of what holds one back from the Jhānā are said diverse perceptions, and so to enter the Jhānā there needs to be 1 perception only? If no, on what basis?

[BrokenBones]

Hi Ceisiwr

I asked for clarification of the sutta since this thread about the Anapanasati Sutta.

Quick answer... the sutta appears to be saying that one should give up passion for the senses.

Sensual desire (passion) is abandoned at first jhana.

So 'diverse' perceptions of sights, sounds etc. hold one back from jhana.

The sutta lists the progression from first Jhana (placing the mind etc.) up to the fourth jhana (without placing & with equanimity).

I wouldn't 'go' with your 'perception of diversity' as just... 'perception'... it is obviously just discussing sense objects and passion for them.

[DooDoot]

Quick answer... the sutta appears to be saying that one should give up passion for the senses.

Sounds wrong. MN 128 is about "obhāso dassanañca rūpānaṁ", namely, "light and vision of forms". In other words, it appears about Anurudda's development of the Divine Eye, as well as his companions. The suttas later say of Anuruddha:

Do you see Anuruddha walking together with several mendicants?”
Passatha no tumhe, bhikkhave, anuruddhaṁ sambahulehi bhikkhūhi saddhiṁ caṅkamantan”ti?

“Yes, sir.”
“Evaṁ, bhante”.

“All of those mendicants have clairvoyance.
“Sabbe kho ete, bhikkhave, bhikkhū dibbacakkhukā.

https://suttacentral.net/sn14.15/en/sujato

But despite this being pointed out to Ceisiwr many times, it appears Ceisiwr remains clinging to German monk Analayo's tenuous ideas. If we apply AN 14.15 to Analayo & Ceisiwr, it would be as follows:

Do you see Analayo walking together with several lay philosphers who use worldly vernacular?”

“Yes, sir.”
“Evaṁ, bhante”.

“All of those have questionable ideas.

MN 8 says:

(44) Others will misapprehend according to their individual views, hold on to them tenaciously and not easily discard them ; we shall not misapprehend according to individual views nor hold on to them tenaciously, but shall discard them with ease — thus effacement can be done.

I wouldn't 'go' with your 'perception of diversity' as just... 'perception'... it is obviously just discussing sense objects and passion for them.

No, its not. Its obviously discussing the Divine Eye and the forms seen with the Divine Eye. Ceisiwr found a hungry ghost idol monk with physic powers yet still unable to give up wrong view about MN 128.

[Ceisiwr]

Quick answer... the sutta appears to be saying that one should give up passion for the senses.

Sensual desire (passion) is abandoned at first jhana.

So 'diverse' perceptions of sights, sounds etc. hold one back from jhana.

The sutta lists the progression from first Jhana (placing the mind etc.) up to the fourth jhana (without placing & with equanimity).

I wouldn't 'go' with your 'perception of diversity' as just... 'perception'... it is obviously just discussing sense objects and passion for them.

Of course there needs to be dispassion towards the senses for the Jhānā to occur. This is why the Jhānā are impossible to enter into without a prior solid foundation in virtue and sense restraint. Part of that training however is in reigning in intention and attention towards the senses. This is part of renunciation, of turning away from the world. When there is no intention or attention towards any given sense base it is no longer experienced. It has been renounced. This is why diversity of perceptions is a problem. Intention and attention is still being given to the senses. Its not renunciation. The opposite then of saññāmanasikārā (attention is plural here) is a singular perception and attention. A state where the world has been renounced, the 5 senses have been dropped and instead there is absorption into one all pervading form/image. We see similar ideas in the Upanishads:

31 ‘By making his body the under-wood and the syllable “Om” the upper-wood, man, after repeating the drill of meditation, will percceive the bright god, like the spark hidden in the wood.’17
32 ‘If the wise man holds his body with the three upright parts even, and turns his senses with his mind towards the heart, he will then in the boat of Brahman cross over all the fearful streams.’18
33 ‘Compressing his breath, let him, who has subdued all motions, breath forth through the nose with gentle breath. Let the wise one, being heedful, keep hold of his mind, that chariot yoked with wild horses.’19
34 ‘When yoga is being performed, the forms that come first, producing apparitions in Brahman, are those of misty smoke, sun, fire, wind, fire-flies, lightnings, and a crystal moon.’

Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad.

It's interesting that bright lights, the nimitta as we would call them, also make an appearance here. It seems these are merely different ways of the mind trying to make sense of such an altered state of consciousness.

34 ‘When yoga is being performed, the forms that come first, producing apparitions in Brahman, are those of misty smoke, sun, fire, wind, fire-flies, lightnings, and a crystal moon.’

When one is approaching access concentration the mind will become increasingly tranquil and still in a way that can't be accurately described, awareness of the body and 5 senses will begin to fade and there will be feelings of "airiness" followed by flashes of light, like the whole mind lighting up, or orbs of light that come and go if the concentration is weak. When the concentration is stronger these images or flashes of an all-encompassing illuminating bright white light remain for longer.

[Ceisiwr]

But despite this being pointed out to Ceisiwr many times, it appears Ceisiwr remains clinging to German monk Analayo's tenuous ideas. If we apply AN 14.15 to Analayo & Ceisiwr, it would be as follows:

I never made the connection here. You should have noticed I've focused on "perception of diversity", rather than "lights and forms".

[suaimhneas]

I can agree that some people make the Dhamma conform to themselves and look everywhere but the Suttas for that confirmation.

Do you agree that:

A) The Jhanas are being referred to in this sutta.

B) Diverse perceptions hold one back from the Jhanas.

If no to either, on what basis?

Just to interject myself into this argument, IMO many things are just not particularly clear in the suttas with respect to jhana. There's certainly a possible case for what you say based on that sutta. However, just to muddy the waters, easily the most frequent occurrence of "perceptions of diversity" in the suttas is in the following pericope, which crops up in quite a few places:

Going totally beyond perceptions of form, with the ending of perceptions of impingement, not focusing on perceptions of diversity, aware that ‘space is infinite’, they enter and remain in the dimension of infinite space.

Apart from that there are some scattered references here and there (a cluster of nearby suttas in the SN on diversity of perception, which I think you've already referenced), the sutta you are quoting above, and IIRC some references to types of devas with and without perceptions of diversity (cannot recall the reference now).

However, in terms of frequency, this is a phrase most associated with the immaterial attainments rather than jhana as such. Sure, the sutta you are referring to above does muddy the waters. Does the sutta above refer to immaterial attainments? Probably not. However, why this strong association with immaterial attainments elsewhere. Conflicting strands of tradition on this? MN137 would be a sutta with the aforementioned pericope but that does say a bit more on the topic:

There is equanimity that is diversified, based on diversity, and equanimity that is unified, based on unity.

And what is equanimity based on diversity? There is equanimity towards sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and touches. This is equanimity based on diversity.

And what is equanimity based on unity? There is equanimity based on the dimensions of infinite space, infinite consciousness, nothingness, and neither perception nor non-perception. This is equanimity based on unity.

Therein, relying on equanimity based on unity, give up equanimity based on diversity. That’s how it is given up.

Relying on non-identification, give up equanimity based on unity. That’s how it is given up. ‘Therein, relying on this, give up that.’ That’s what I said, and this is why I said it.

This sounds like the model of enlightenment based on going through the immaterial attainments, which is not the only model in the suttas, of course.

[Ceisiwr]

Just to interject myself into this argument, IMO many things are just not particularly clear in the suttas with respect to jhana. There's certainly a possible case for what you say based on that sutta. However, just to muddy the waters, easily the most frequent occurrence of "perceptions of diversity" in the suttas is in the following pericope, which crops up in quite a few places

I would have to disagree. The suttas are quite clear. You are correct that in terms of meditation "perception of diversity" is found next to infinite space etc, but on it's own this doesn't prove anything other than infinite space is without perceptions of diversity. That of course does not mean that the Jhānā are then with them, lest we succumb to logical fallacies. Considering how we have said sutta which has the abandoning of said perceptions prior to the 1st Jhāna, and given that the Jhāna pericope can be read as "secluded from sense objects" as well as other strong bits of evidence, it is clear to me that experience of the 5 senses is dropped even from the 1st Jhāna. I would then read the formless pericope as an injunction to maintain this state after leaving the 4th Jhāna to enter the formless (for upon leaving the 4th, multiple perceptions would return).

[suaimhneas]

I would have to disagree. The suttas are quite clear. You are correct that in terms of meditation "perception of diversity" is found next to infinite space etc, but on it's own this doesn't prove anything other than infinite space is without perceptions of diversity.

Sure, it doesn't prove it. Though, if one takes a sutta like MN111, which again has the "perceptions of diversity" pericope, the four jhanas and four immaterial attainments are gone through in sequence. At the start of each stage, the factors that cease/disappear or are given up to get to that stage are listed. They are much as one would expect, and going from the 4th jhana to infinite space, "perceptions of diversity" is mentioned. I guess logically it could be just a continuing injunction to maintain what has happened earlier. However, if so, I think it would be unique in this sequence out of the all the other factors at the different stages (otherwise they are precisely the factors one would expect to disappear at the various stages). IMO the simplest, if not only, interpretation for this particular sutta is that it is something particular to this transition.

That of course does not mean that the Jhānā are then with them, lest we succumb to logical fallacies. Considering how we have said sutta which has the abandoning of said perceptions prior to the 1st Jhāna, and given that the Jhāna pericope can be read as "secluded from sense objects" as well as other strong bits of evidence, it is clear to me that experience of the 5 senses is dropped even from the 1st Jhāna. I would then read the formless pericope as an injunction to maintain this state after leaving the 4th Jhāna to enter the formless (for upon leaving the 4th, multiple perceptions would return).

The argument about whether jhana is "secluded from sense objects" and the argument on "perceptions of diversity" may not overlap completely. I guess one possibly could have perceptions of diversity but these perceptions not be of sense objects. Even in your interpretation, does "secluded from sense objects" then necessarily imply no "perceptions of diversity"? I'm not sure that it necessarily does. These may not be mutually exclusive options.

On "logical fallacies", I've wondered are the suttas on jhana actually all really logically consistent with each other. I tend to doubt it. On pretty much any jhana interpretation (on whatever permutation of sides one takes on the controversial jhana questions), there are going to be some suttas that sit rather uneasily with it. Of course, human language is not naturally that precise and one can make those suttas fit (squeeze the square peg into the corresponding round hole). There are indeed suttas that appear to support the "secluded from sense objects" reading. For me, though, one of the difficulties for that reading (as I've mentioned before) is the description of cessation of breathing in the 4th jhana in at least 6 suttas (or breathing as a thorn to the 4th jhana in one of these). Of course, one can make it work logically with some effort. Generally, the argument would be that perception of breathing ceases in the 1st jhana and that it is the physical breathing process itself that becomes quiescent in the 4th jhana in the "secluded from sense objects" interpretation, though without the meditator being aware of the breathing ceasing (though with external observers able to notice it). That is certainly logically consistent with that interpretation. Though breathing becomes then, rather uniquely I think, a jhana factor (or thorn) that the meditator themselves is unaware of (not a particularly comfortable fit).

That's not to say that I couldn't do the same with other jhana interpretations. I doubt that there is any interpretation that sits completely naturally with all relevant suttas. I suspect that when the Nikayas were laid down, there were some differing and not entirely consistent jhana traditions/approaches that got incorporated.

[Ceisiwr]

Sure, it doesn't prove it. Though, if one takes a sutta like MN111, which again has the "perceptions of diversity" pericope, the four jhanas and four immaterial attainments are gone through in sequence. At the start of each stage, the factors that cease/disappear or are given up to get to that stage are listed. They are much as one would expect, and going from the 4th jhana to infinite space, "perceptions of diversity" is mentioned. I guess logically it could be just a continuing injunction to maintain what has happened earlier. However, if so, I think it would be unique in this sequence out of the all the other factors at the different stages (otherwise they are precisely the factors one would expect to disappear at the various stages). IMO the simplest, if not only, interpretation for this particular sutta is that it is something particular to this transition.

The difficulty in them being peculiar to said attainment would be the development of 1 singular perception previously, the abandonment of perceptions of diversity previously, the inability to hear sound and the seclusion from sense objects. All those have to be explained away for it even to be considered. One should also still be wary not to deny the antecedent.

The argument about whether jhana is "secluded from sense objects" and the argument on "perceptions of diversity" may not overlap completely. I guess one possibly could have perceptions of diversity but these perceptions not be of sense objects. Even in your interpretation, does "secluded from sense objects" then necessarily imply no "perceptions of diversity"? I'm not sure that it necessarily does. These may not be mutually exclusive options.

But, as has been shown, diverse perceptions are always tied to sensing at the 6 senses. On my interpretation yes, since what is being perceived (I really do dislike this translation) is form/image (rūpa). Since attention is given to this sole sense object, a mental dhamma, the other senses are not experienced (since attention is required to do so).

On "logical fallacies", I've wondered are the suttas on jhana actually all really logically consistent with each other. I tend to doubt it. On pretty much any jhana interpretation (on whatever permutation of sides one takes on the controversial jhana questions), there are going to be some suttas that sit rather uneasily with it. Of course, human language is not naturally that precise and one can make those suttas fit (squeeze the square peg into the corresponding round hole). There are indeed suttas that appear to support the "secluded from sense objects" reading. For me, though, one of the difficulties for that reading (as I've mentioned before) is the description of cessation of breathing in the 4th jhana in at least 6 suttas (or breathing as a thorn to the 4th jhana in one of these). Of course, one can make it work logically with some effort. Generally, the argument would be that perception of breathing ceases in the 1st jhana and that it is the physical breathing process itself that becomes quiescent in the 4th jhana in the "secluded from sense objects" interpretation, though without the meditator being aware of the breathing ceasing (though with external observers able to notice it). That is certainly logically consistent with that interpretation. Though breathing becomes then, rather uniquely I think, a jhana factor (or thorn) that the meditator themselves is unaware of (not a particularly comfortable fit).

Is the breathing stopped in the attainment, or just prior to entry into it

[suaimhneas]

The difficulty in them being peculiar to said attainment would be the development of 1 singular perception previously, the abandonment of perceptions of diversity previously, the inability to hear sound and the seclusion from sense objects. All those have to be explained away for it even to be considered. One should also still be wary not to deny the antecedent.

But, as has been shown, diverse perceptions are always tied to sensing at the 6 senses. On my interpretation yes, since what is being perceived (I really do dislike this translation) is form/image (rūpa). Since attention is given to this sole sense object, a mental dhamma, the other senses are not experienced (since attention is required to do so).

Well, if one combines, for example, SN14.8:

Mendicants, diversity of elements gives rise to diversity of perceptions.
...
And what is the diversity of elements? The sight element, the sound element, the smell element, the taste element, the touch element, and the thought element. This is called the diversity of elements.

with the assumption that other senses are not experienced then, sure, that's a reasonable argument.

However, one could also turn this argument around and say that since cessation of diversity of perceptions is usually described as happening in the transition from 4th jhana to the first immaterial attainment, then perhaps that's exactly where the bodily formation and all other senses (or any holdout ones) actually fully cease (even if it is only the perception of the physical breath that still remains). Your argument heavily depends on there being no other senses experienced at all from the very start of jhana. I suppose that depends on how rock solid one thinks that interpretation is.

Is the breathing stopped in the attainment, or just prior to entry into it

I think you are drawing parallels with the ceasing of perceptions of diversity (that maybe like the above that it may occur at the very start or even before jhana proper)! However, I guess for breathing we can pin it down a bit more solidly. It's a reasonable inference from MN44 (successive cessation of verbal, bodily and feeling formations) that it cannot be before 2nd jhana (since the verbal formation only fully ceases there and the bodily formation and the breath cannot cease before this). Therefore, at the least, it must be from within the jhana sequence and not before (assuming MN44 is correct). Therefore, I think for the purposes of my argument, the exact sequencing is not such an important question.

[Coëmgenu]

It occurs to me, if we believe in dhyāna with one object of cognition exclusively, that being the nimitta, then a literal reading of the cessation of breathing is more likely. The meditator in such a dhyāna would not be able to sense whether they were breathing or not from the first dhyāna onwards, let alone the 4th. When it ceases at the 4th, a literal reading becomes more likely, otherwise it seems like useless instructions that breathing stops.

[Ceisiwr]

Well, if one combines, for example, SN14.8:...

with the assumption that other senses are not experienced then, sure, that's a reasonable argument.

Indeed.

However, one could also turn this argument around and say that since cessation of diversity of perceptions is usually described as happening in the transition from 4th jhana to the first immaterial attainment, then perhaps that's exactly where the bodily formation and all other senses (or any holdout ones) actually fully cease (even if it is only the perception of the physical breath that still remains).

Do I whiff denying the antecedent here?

Your argument heavily depends on there being no other senses experienced at all from the very start of jhana. I suppose that depends on how rock solid one thinks that interpretation is.

Personally I no longer have any doubt regarding the matter, and in terms of the suttas they are quite clear it seems to me.

I think you are drawing parallels with the ceasing of perceptions of diversity (that maybe like the above that it may occur at the very start or even before jhana proper)! However, I guess for breathing we can pin it down a bit more solidly. It's a reasonable inference from MN44 (successive cessation of verbal, bodily and feeling formations) that it cannot be before 2nd jhana (since the verbal formation only fully ceases there and the bodily formation and the breath cannot cease before this). Therefore, at the least, it must be from within the jhana sequence and not before (assuming MN44 is correct). Therefore, I think for the purposes of my argument, the exact sequencing is not such an important question.

It follows that if there is awareness of breathing then one is not in the 4th Jhāna, and so when there is entry into the 4th Jhāna breathing has ceased. When there are the intentions of vitakka-vicāra one is not in the 2nd Jhāna. When they cease there is the 2nd Jhāna.

[suaimhneas]

It occurs to me, if we believe in dhyāna with one object of cognition exclusively, that being the nimitta, then a literal reading of the cessation of breathing is more likely. The meditator in such a dhyāna would not be able to sense whether they were breathing or not from the first dhyāna onwards, let alone the 4th. When it ceases at the 4th, a literal reading becomes more likely, otherwise it seems like useless instructions that breathing stops.

In some ways my breathing point is quite a flimsy objection. It's just that this talk about cessation of breathing in the 4th jhana in a number of suttas (or cessation of the bodily formation in MN44) would seem to me to be a rather superfluous/redundant point if it is not actually experienced by the meditator.
For example, SN36.11:

Then, bhikkhu, I have also taught the successive cessation of formations. For one who has attained the first jhana, speech has ceased. For one who has attained the second jhana, thought and examination have ceased. For one who has attained the third jhana, rapture has ceased. For one who has attained the fourth jhana, in-breathing and out-breathing have ceased. For one who has attained the base of the infinity of space, the perception of form has ceased. For one who has attained the base of the infinity of consciousness, the perception pertaining to the base of the infinity of space has ceased. For one who has attained the base of nothingness, the perception pertaining to the base of the infinity of consciousness has ceased. For one who has attained the base of neither-perception-nor-nonperception, the perception pertaining to the base of nothingness has ceased. For one who has attained the cessation of perception and feeling, perception and feeling have ceased. For a bhikkhu whose taints are destroyed, lust has ceased, hatred has ceased, delusion has ceased.

Though, to play devil's advocate to myself, the cessation of the mental formation (third in the sequence of formations in MN44) won't actually be perceived at the time, but only recognized retrospectively.

[suaimhneas]

Do I whiff denying the antecedent here?

I guess quibbling on which is actually the antecedent!

Personally I no longer have any doubt regarding the matter, and in terms of the suttas they are quite clear it seems to me.

No worries. I 'm not going to argue this ad infinitum. I enjoy the occasional jhana argument, but I usually get bored of it relatively quickly, until eventually I go looking for another one!

It follows that if there is awareness of breathing then one is not in the 4th Jhāna, and so when there is entry into the 4th Jhāna breathing has ceased. When there are the intentions of vitakka-vicāra one is not in the 2nd Jhāna. When they cease there is the 2nd Jhāna.

If I had to guess it seems likeliest to me that physical breathing has become quiescent in the 4th jhana and the meditator is actually aware of that, but that it not until the first material attainment that awareness of breathing itself ceases (or the bodily formation and/or perceptions of diversity have actually ceased), rather like as seems likely the verbal formation has become quiescent in the first jhana but not actually ceased fully until the second jhana (or the mental formation becoming quiescent in the fourth immaterial attainment but not actually ceasing until the cessation of feeling & perception).