Sammā-samādhi
Sammā-samādhi
This has come up a few times, so I thought it would be good to discuss it. Many times the Buddha taught that liberation depends upon the NEFP, the last factor of which is sammā-samādhi (Right Concentration). My question then is, what does “sammā” mean in sammā-samādhi? What makes a samādhi right or wrong? The experience itself, or how it is viewed and used or both (or something else)? How do you understand it?
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Sammā-samādhi
Both words predate Buddhism and have complicated metaphysical meanings. The latter doesn't mean concentration, and the former doesn't always mean simply right. That's what I think. To understand them properly I'd suggest looking into sources that are typically considered to predate Buddhism. That's all I can say [for now]...
Edit: Left you a PM.
Edit: Left you a PM.
Re: Sammā-samādhi
The important thing it is where it takes you, the destination. If it leads to more desire for delight and attachment is micca-samadhi, if it leads to dispassion and liberation it is samma, but there's also the possibility of a practice that doesn't leads to more desire, but leads you nowhere like the hard ascetics practices. This is too a form of micca-samadhi. The experience itself is not the problem, the problem is that it doesn't solve your problem and the Buddha discovered it the hard way after six years.
The evaluation of the practice must be done on the ability to get you revulsion > dispassion > liberation in the fastest possible time.
The evaluation of the practice must be done on the ability to get you revulsion > dispassion > liberation in the fastest possible time.
Re: Sammā-samādhi
Also, would say the same about miccha, sam, sammasambuddha, etc. Basically a lot of words have secondary metaphysical meanings, e.g. loka, piya, etc., that predate Buddhism, and are used by non-Buddhists and Buddhists alike.Mr. Seek wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 11:29 am Both words predate Buddhism and have complicated metaphysical meanings. The latter doesn't mean concentration, and the former doesn't always mean simply right. That's what I think. To understand them properly I'd suggest looking into sources that are typically considered to predate Buddhism. That's all I can say [for now]...
Edit: Left you a PM.
Re: Sammā-samādhi
Textually, rather than linguistically, one of the usual understandings of what makes sammā-samadhi, according to the Suttas, is that samādhi must be aligned with the other factors of the Path (in particular right view, being the most important):
"Sammā-samādhi" is Buddhist, and was defined as such by the Buddha—so it is understandable that specifically Buddhist elements must be part of samādhi for it to be considered sammā.
Also, this passage from Ven. Anālayo's Excursions into the Thought-world of the Pāli Discourses II (p. 132-133) might be of use:
—MN 117 (transl., Bhikkhu Bodhi)What, bhikkhus, is noble right concentration with its supports and its requisites, that is, right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, and right mindfulness? Unification of mind equipped with these seven factors is called noble right concentration with its supports and its requisites.
"Sammā-samādhi" is Buddhist, and was defined as such by the Buddha—so it is understandable that specifically Buddhist elements must be part of samādhi for it to be considered sammā.
Also, this passage from Ven. Anālayo's Excursions into the Thought-world of the Pāli Discourses II (p. 132-133) might be of use:
Ven. Anālayo wrote:The discourses define "right concentration" in two complementary ways. The most frequently found definition enumerates the four absorptions. Since the development of the noble eightfold path, and with it of the path factor "right concentration", is a prerequisite for awakening, this definition clearly accords a central role to the development of absorption within the early Buddhist scheme of deliverance.
Since some discourses describe the gaining of full awakening based on the first absorption (see MN I 350; MN I 435; AN IV 422 and AN V 343), it would follow that not all four absorptions have to be developed to win full awakening. All four absorptions would however be needed to gain the threefold higher knowledge (tevijjā).
Another definition of right concentration, found in a few discourses, does not mention the absorptions (see DN II 217; MN III 71; SN V 21 and AN IV 40). One of these discourses is the Mahācattārīsaka-sutta, a discourse which defines right concentration as unification of the mind (cittassekaggatā) developed in interdependence with the other seven path-factors (MN III 71). This definition highlights the fact that in order for concentration to become 'right' concentration, it needs to be developed as part of the noble eightfold path.
Judging from other discourses, the expression 'unification of the mind' is not confined to absorption concentration, since the same expression occurs in relation to walking and standing (AN II 14) or to listening to the Dhamma (AN III 175), activities which would not be compatible with absorption attainment. This suggests that this second definition of 'right concentration' would also include levels of samādhi that have not yet reached the depth of absorption concentration. In fact, the formulation of this second definition makes it clear that the decisive factor qualifying concentration as 'right' is not merely the depth of concentration achieved, but the purpose for which concentration is employed.
A similar nuance underlies the qualification sammā, 'right', which literally means "togetherness", or to be "connected in one". This thus indicates that the criterion for describing concentration as sammā, as 'right', is whether it is developed 'together' with the other factors of the noble eightfold path. Of central importance here is the presence of right view, as the forerunner of the whole path, without whose implementation concentration can never be reckoned sammā.
Re: Sammā-samādhi
i don't agree with his judgement on walking and standing are activities(in Sutta and commentary sense) and that the walking and standing can't occur during or are impediments for attaining absorption. Jhāna can be attained while walking, that is if rebirth consciousness is accompanied with the knowledge.samseva wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 4:54 pmVen. Anālayo wrote:Judging from other discourses, the expression 'unification of the mind' is not confined to absorption concentration, since the same expression occurs in relation to walking and standing (AN II 14) or to listening to the Dhamma (AN III 175), activities which would not be compatible with absorption attainment.
Wonder if posture and activity is one and the same?
Re: Sammā-samādhi
You can't walk while in jhāna. This opinion is based on a single obscure passage, of only one Sutta—which is likely mistranslated.auto wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 7:04 pm i don't agree with his judgement on walking and standing are activities(in Sutta and commentary sense) and that the walking and standing can't occur during or are impediments for attaining absorption. Jhāna can be attained while walking, that is if rebirth consciousness is accompanied with the knowledge.
Wonder if posture and activity is one and the same?
Re: Sammā-samādhi
Samadhi and Jhana are two different things.samseva wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 1:39 amYou can't walk while in jhāna. This opinion is based on a single obscure passage, of only one Sutta—which is likely mistranslated.auto wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 7:04 pm i don't agree with his judgement on walking and standing are activities(in Sutta and commentary sense) and that the walking and standing can't occur during or are impediments for attaining absorption. Jhāna can be attained while walking, that is if rebirth consciousness is accompanied with the knowledge.
Wonder if posture and activity is one and the same?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: Sammā-samādhi
According to Wharaka school that Samma means which eliminate attachment, aversion, and ignorance. So Samadhi aim at this call Samma Samadhi. Another explanation is Samadi completed with all other factors of the path, especially the right view.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 11:05 am This has come up a few times, so I thought it would be good to discuss it. Many times the Buddha taught that liberation depends upon the NEFP, the last factor of which is sammā-samādhi (Right Concentration). My question then is, what does “sammā” mean in sammā-samādhi? What makes a samādhi right or wrong? The experience itself, or how it is viewed and used or both (or something else)? How do you understand it?
Mitya Samadhi leads to attachment, aversion, and ignorance.
It is important to note that there is Lokiya Samma Samadi as well. Some say that is the Samadhi lead to Deva and Brahmaworlds.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: Sammā-samādhi
Appanā javana cittas support walking posture. Walking or any other posture doesn't constitute what bodily or verbal expression is(kāya-, vacī-viññatti).
One condition what prevents appanā javana cittas from arising when walking or other position is when jhāna isn't realized yet.
-
- Posts: 10262
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Sammā-samādhi
The suttas describe samma-samadhi in terms of the four jhanas. I understand samma to mean "perfect" or "complete".Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 11:05 am This has come up a few times, so I thought it would be good to discuss it. Many times the Buddha taught that liberation depends upon the NEFP, the last factor of which is sammā-samādhi (Right Concentration). My question then is, what does “sammā” mean in sammā-samādhi? What makes a samādhi right or wrong? The experience itself, or how it is viewed and used or both (or something else)? How do you understand it?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Re: Sammā-samādhi
This was posted in the "Samādhi" thread, which might be useful:
Definitions of Right Concentration In Comparative Perspective - Bhikkhu Anālayo
Definitions of Right Concentration In Comparative Perspective - Bhikkhu Anālayo
Re: Sammā-samādhi
My take on thisCeisiwr wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 11:05 am This has come up a few times, so I thought it would be good to discuss it. Many times the Buddha taught that liberation depends upon the NEFP, the last factor of which is sammā-samādhi (Right Concentration). My question then is, what does “sammā” mean in sammā-samādhi? What makes a samādhi right or wrong? The experience itself, or how it is viewed and used or both (or something else)? How do you understand it?
Samma-Samadhi is the concentration of mind free from five hindrances, it doesn't need to be jhana
Wrong samadhi is the concentration endowed with one of the 5 hindrances or all of them. For eg: A hunter concentrating on the trap with the intention to kill any animal as soon as it falls under the trap.
Samma-Samadhi also means the concentration is directed at the 4 frames of references, i.e concentration is equipped with right mindfulness.
Re: Sammā-samādhi
Nawp!!! Exactly incorrect.SarathW wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 2:28 amSamadhi and Jhana are two different things.samseva wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 1:39 amYou can't walk while in jhāna. This opinion is based on a single obscure passage, of only one Sutta—which is likely mistranslated.auto wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 7:04 pm i don't agree with his judgement on walking and standing are activities(in Sutta and commentary sense) and that the walking and standing can't occur during or are impediments for attaining absorption. Jhāna can be attained while walking, that is if rebirth consciousness is accompanied with the knowledge.
Wonder if posture and activity is one and the same?
Right Concentration is by definition the four material jhanas. Google “what is right concentration Buddhism” and you will get a link to the sutta supporting the idea that samma samadhi is jhana. I have illustrated this point to you before. You haven’t seemed to gotten it.
"And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration."
— SN 45.8
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded
Re: Sammā-samādhi
I do agree with you that the statement isn't exactly correct (jhāna is still samādhi), however, did you read the rest of the thread? There are other instances in the Suttas where sammā-samādhi is defined differently than the usual definition of simply being the four jhānas.