Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Coëmgenu »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:58 amAn opinion based on what?
An opinion based on the fact that I don't think you can take SN 1.34 and then say "Whenever kāma is singular it is saṅkapparāgo and whenever it is plural it is citrāni loke irrespective of if the Buddha is contrasting these things." Does this make sense to you? It does to me, but we can go over it more exhaustively if you don't think I'm explaining myself well enough.
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:58 amYou don't think part of the the point of the verse is to differentiate between two things? Seems clear to me that the verse is making a distinction, and that it is defining both of those things in turn. If we read these terms elsewhere, terms which were so central to the Dhamma, it's not a stretch at all to interpret them as having the same meaning. Kāma is always lust for things, everyone agrees, but when it comes to kāmā it is context specific? Doesn't seem likely. I agree that part of it is to show what needs removing. How that is done is left up to other suttas. Are we really to interpret the teaching as

"A wise person gives up desire for desires. How do you give up desire? You give up desires. How do you give up desires? You give up desire."

Clearly desire is only given up when a pleasure that is away from kāmā is experienced. If kāmā are not external things, I don't see how the teaching is even coherent.
So what does this italics section come from? Is this adapted from a quote, or is it you arguing that giving up saṅkapparāgo is impossible without first giving up citrāni loke?
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Ceisiwr »

BrokenBones wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 11:10 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 9:45 am In order to get to absorption there will be a period of what the other side calls non-absorbed Jhana. Maybe now and again the non-absorbed folks could try the Ajahn Brahm etc method too? I mean, it can’t hurt can it?
You're actually assuming that they haven't tried the absorbed method and subsequently rejected it as a dead end. I'm certainly not denying its allure and power... just questioning its worth.

The 'other side' as you call it is an altogether more subtle practice though no less powerful & alluring... it has to be in order to consciously discern, evaluate and abandon sensual pleasures in favour of a higher pleasure.

In a private conversation with another member who shares your view of Jhāna we discussed how the absorbed view can be seen as an intermediary between Jhāna and the formless. Leaving behind the senses is something the Buddha said can also lead to awakening, so it can be beneficial. Obviously I don't see things like that. I think the absorbed model is Jhāna and the non-absorbed model is something like access concentration, but I think it's an interesting way to look at it which moves towards some form of reconciliation or mutual understanding.
A jhana without that awareness being present is just pushing defilements to one side for a period of time after which they'll come roaring back.
I don't see it like that. I think the Buddha was clear in saying that when one experiences the rapture and pleasure of Jhāna then lust for things is abandoned. That's one of the fetters gone right there.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Ceisiwr »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 11:20 am
An opinion based on the fact that I don't think you can take SN 1.34 and then say "Whenever kāma is singular it is saṅkapparāgo and whenever it is plural it is citrāni loke irrespective of if the Buddha is contrasting these things." Does this make sense to you? It does to me, but we can go over it more exhaustively if you don't think I'm explaining myself well enough.
Yes, as you have said. What I don't understand is the reason for that claim, but you don't have to explain it if you don't want to.
So what does this italics section come from? Is this adapted from a quote, or is it you arguing that giving up saṅkapparāgo is impossible without first giving up citrāni loke?
If kāmā aren't external things but rather subjective desires for things, then that is the rather garbled message I get.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Coëmgenu »

It's the rather garbled message you get from where though?

Just to clarify, what you don't get is why I think that the plural-singular distinction from SN 1.34 does not universally apply to every single appearance of "kāmā" and "kāma" in every other sutta?

The way I read SN 1.34, it says, in paraphrase:

It is not the desires that are "the world's beauties" which are removed.
Rather, it is the desire that is "the thought of passion" which is removed.

The world's beauties aren't removed at all in SN 1.34, so the conundrum of, "How do you give up saṅkapparāgo? You give up citrāni loke. How do you give up citrāni loke? You give up saṅkapparāgo," doesn't apply, how I see it.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Ceisiwr »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 11:45 am It's the rather garbled message you get from where though?

Just to clarify, what you don't get is why I think that the plural-singular distinction from SN 1.34 does not universally apply to every single appearance of "kāmā" and "kāma" in every other sutta?

They way I read SN 1.34, it says, in paraphrase:

It is not the desires that are the world's beauties which are removed.
Rather, it is the desire that is the "thought of passion" which is removed.

The world's beauties aren't removed at all in SN 1.34, so the conundrum of, "How do you give up saṅkapparāgo? You give up citrāni loke. How do you give up citrāni loke? You give up saṅkapparāgo," doesn't apply, how I see it.
I would read it as

"It is not the worlds diverse things which are the problem. Lust for them is the problem. A wise person therefore removes lust for them."

Just how this is done is left unexplained, but other suttas tell us that it is via Jhāna. On my reading then we could say the following

"It is not the worlds diverse things which are the problem. Lust for them is the problem. A wise person therefore removes lust for them. How? By experiencing a rapture and bliss which is away from them, when one is secluded from the senses. Only then can you stop desiring them, because only then do you see that when they are gone there is an ever more refined happiness and bliss which doesn't depend upon them."

That is because I see kāma as always meaning "lust" (I assume you do to, no?) whilst the kāmā are the external things to which lust aims (although they can be unpleasant objects too). I see no real justification for saying that kāma always means lust, but when we get to the Jhāna kāmā then means something else. The same for saying that both kāma and kāmā mean different things in different contexts. If, however, the definitions in SN 1.34 don't apply to how to achieve Jhāna, and so the text is totally irrelevant to how one actually abandons lust (a strange proposition I think), then of course one can argue that seclusion from kāmā doesn't mean seclusion from external things. The only option, as far as I can see, would be to argue that it is seclusion from subjective lusts. So, if said person does not take into account SN 1.34 (I don't see how they can, since it's essentially meaningless to them now) then we get

"Experience Jhāna to remove lust. How do you experience Jhāna? Remove lusts. How do you remove lusts? Remove lust. How do you remove lust? Remove lusts"

This is rather circular, isn't it?
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Coëmgenu »

If I were to modify your two bolded and italicized sections, I would do so like this:

1) It is not the world's diverse things which are the problem. Lust for them is the problem. A wise person therefore removes lust for them. How? By experiencing a rapture and bliss which is utterly alien to, or secluded from, lust. Only once jhāna with an absence of lust has been stabilized and practiced repeatedly is lust momentarily quenched outside of the jhāna, because only then have you experienced this unique state, second to Nibbāna in quenching ability and transformative power, and only after becoming an adept of the jhāna can you extend its aftereffects for a significant time.

2) Jhāna is a lustless state. Becoming strong in the jhānas through frequent experience of them removes everyday lust encountered outside of the jhāna. How does the non-dhyānin experience jhāna for the first time to get this ball rolling? He follows the precepts and observes moral cultivation in such a way that the precepts are made to shine. Then, in a special contrived setting conducive to jhāna (not an everyday setting doing everyday things!), he temporarily secludes himself from lusts and distracting factors, fostering five factors while avoiding five hindrances. With the attainment of the jhāna, seclusion from lust becomes removal of lust while in the jhāna. Afterwards, this selfsame removal lingers even though the mediator is no longer in a jhāna, until it fades and experience is normal. The afflictions thunder back in. So how do you remove lusts in the longterm? Experience jhāna, the lustless state that hinders everyday lust that occurs after it for some time, and get good at extending that and entering at will in less contrived settings. Even better, experience Nibbāna, which has a more permanent transformative effect with regards to lust.

So, yes, temporarily suppress lust to enter into the lustless jhāna, which then allows you to extend the lustlessness inherited from the state afterwards. This reading is predicated on jhāna itself not being the only way to temporarily remove lust. The only things that permanently remove lust are the Āryan fruits, I think we'll agree. But maybe we won't.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Ceisiwr »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 12:56 pm If I were to modify your two bolded and italicized sections, I would do so like this:

1) It is not the world's diverse things which are the problem. Lust for them is the problem. A wise person therefore removes lust for them. How? By experiencing a rapture and bliss which is utterly alien to, or secluded from, lust. Only once jhāna with an absence of lust has been stabilized and practiced repeatedly is lust momentarily quenched outside of the jhāna, because only then have you experienced this unique state, second to Nibbāna in quenching ability and transformative power, and only after becoming an adept of the jhāna can you extend its aftereffects for a significant time.
It doesn't say "secluded from lust". It says "secluded from the world's diverse things", according to the person who is saying it (since they accept the definition of SN 1.34 here).
2) Jhāna is a lustless state. Becoming strong in the jhānas through frequent experience of them removes everyday lust encountered outside of the jhāna. How does the non-dhyānin experience jhāna for the first time to get this ball rolling? In a special contrived setting conducive to jhāna (not an everyday setting doing everyday things!), temporarily seclude yourself from lusts and distracting factors, fostering five factors while avoiding five hindrances. With the attainment of the jhāna, seclusion from lust becomes removal of lust while in the jhāna. Afterwards, this selfsame removal lingers even though the mediator is no longer in a jhāna, until it fades and experience is normal. The afflictions thunder back in. So how do you remove lusts in the longterm? Experience jhāna, the lustless state that hinders everyday lust that occurs after it for some time, and get good at extending that and entering at will in less contrived settings. Even better, experience Nibbāna, which has a more permanent transformative effect with regards to lust.

Not experiencing the activation of lust based upon pleasant contact, which leads to joy, is part of sense-restraint. There is no denying that, but this comes before Jhāna. Said sense restraint is what the cultivates the weakening of kāmacchanda, sense desire. The desire for things. Then, once this has been developed one secludes from the kāmā and enters jhāna. Now, if kāmā here means external objects then we get

Sense restraint > weaning of kāmacchanda > experiencing no lust > not experiencing the 5 senses > rapture and pleasure apart from the 5 senses > lust fully abandoned.

If, however, kāmā here is simply the plural "lusts" then we get

Sense restraint > weakening of kāmacchanda > experiencing no lust > experiencing no lusts > rapture and pleasure because no lusts > lust fully abandoned.

Not experiencing kāma and kāmā is repetitive, if both simply mean subjective desire. I don't see how we can read kāmā here as anything but external objects of lust.

A question also arises. If the kāmā in the Jhāna pericope means "lusts", how then are the Buddha's and Arahants not in a constant state of Jhāna? I realise that you are a Mahāyānist, and so likely you believe that they always are in Jhāna, but how is this a sustainable position based upon the suttas and āgamas? In those texts it's clear that the Buddha and Arahants are not always in these attainments. This is easy to answer from my perspective, but rather perplexing from a non-absorbed Jhāna position.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Coëmgenu »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:00 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 12:56 pm If I were to modify your two bolded and italicized sections, I would do so like this:

1) It is not the world's diverse things which are the problem. Lust for them is the problem. A wise person therefore removes lust for them. How? By experiencing a rapture and bliss which is utterly alien to, or secluded from, lust. Only once jhāna with an absence of lust has been stabilized and practiced repeatedly is lust momentarily quenched outside of the jhāna, because only then have you experienced this unique state, second to Nibbāna in quenching ability and transformative power, and only after becoming an adept of the jhāna can you extend its aftereffects for a significant time.
It doesn't say "secluded from lust". It says "secluded from the world's diverse things", according to the person who is saying it (since they accept the definition of SN 1.34 here).
It says "secluded from lusts." I don't see the point of SN 1.34 as outlining a universal princple of meaning as to when the word is pluralized versus singular. The point of it is what is removed, IMO. SN 1.34 expressly states that citrāni loke are not removed.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Ceisiwr »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:04 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:00 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 12:56 pm If I were to modify your two bolded and italicized sections, I would do so like this:

1) It is not the world's diverse things which are the problem. Lust for them is the problem. A wise person therefore removes lust for them. How? By experiencing a rapture and bliss which is utterly alien to, or secluded from, lust. Only once jhāna with an absence of lust has been stabilized and practiced repeatedly is lust momentarily quenched outside of the jhāna, because only then have you experienced this unique state, second to Nibbāna in quenching ability and transformative power, and only after becoming an adept of the jhāna can you extend its aftereffects for a significant time.
It doesn't say "secluded from lust". It says "secluded from the world's diverse things", according to the person who is saying it (since they accept the definition of SN 1.34 here).
It says "secluded from lusts." I don't see the point of SN 1.34 as outlining a universal princple of meaning as to when the word is pluralized versus singular. The point of it is what is removed, IMO.
Secluded from the kāmā, which according to SN 1.34 and MN 14 are external things. In the Jhāna pericope it has the plural too, but in your example above you only talk about the singular.
It says "secluded from lusts." I don't see the point of SN 1.34 as outlining a universal princple of meaning as to when the word is pluralized versus singular. The point of it is what is removed, IMO.
SN 1.34 seems to be completely pointless from your position, since it doesn't relate to Jhāna and how lust is actually removed at all. You also didn't answer my point regarding how your Jhāna is different from sense-restraint, which occurs before the attainment, nor how the Buddha and Arahants are not always in Jhāna if the correct translation is seclusion from many desires.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Ceisiwr »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:04 pm The point of it is what is removed, IMO. SN 1.34 expressly states that citrāni loke are not removed.
I really don't understand your insistence on this point. Lust is what needs to be removed in relation to the external kāmā. To do that you need to see a rapture and pleasure that can exist when they aren't there, so they lose their appeal. Nothing in that suggests that removing the external things is the solution to the problem. Back when I used copious amounts of cocaine, it was not the cocaine that was the issue but rather my lust towards it. Getting rid of the cocaine wouldn't work, because I would still desire it. I would still desire it because I didn't know about a more refined happiness that exists away from it. When I knew of a happiness that was separate from cocaine, that had nothing to do with cocaine, that wasn't based on cocaine, that included no experience of cocaine, then I abandoned my lust for cocaine. The same with sense objects. Simply hacking off my ears, gouging my eyes out, cutting out my tongue and so on isn't the solution nor is sitting in a dark room with nothing in it, because I would still desire things. I would still desire things because I haven't experienced a rapture and pleasure that is separate from and away from those things. When that does occur, when the senses are dropped and that blissful experience is there, then when I come across the senses again I won't want them anymore. I would be detached from them. It's not getting rid of the external world to be happy, it's seeing how there is a happiness away from the external world.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Coëmgenu »

I think that my understanding of SN 1.34 seems pointless to you because my understanding of SN 1.34 is such that I think it is saying pretty much the opposite of what you think it's saying. You say that because kāmā in the plural is specified as citrāni loke, it must also mean citrāni loke in the jhāna pericope. Because I don't see the point as outlining how we need to read kāmā and kāma every time they are or aren't pluralized, and instead see the point as pointing out that citrāni loke are not removed, you see it as pointless. I wager this is because you associate jhāna exclusively with the temporary cessation of the 5 kāmaguṇas. I do not associate it so.

For instance, here, you redundantly duplicate an element in a sequence,

Sense restraint > weakening of kāmacchanda > experiencing no lust > experiencing no lusts > rapture and pleasure because no lusts > lust fully abandoned

...because you need something in the position of "not experiencing the 5 senses." To you, seclusion from kāmā is necessarily the removal of citrāni loke. Just eliminate that altogether instead and you'll see the unadulterated sequence, or at least see the opposing side's framing of it. Also, depending on how you are framing it, I may not agree with the last element of the sequence.

You further argue that, because I do not think that the citrāni loke which are the 5 kāmaguṇas cease, my definition of jhāna is identical to general sense restraint. This is not the case, because sense-restraint in general is not accompanied by the five beneficial factors of, for instance, the first jhāna. The Buddhas are not constantly in jhāna. They are not constantly experiencing the five or less or more factors of a jhānic existence. Furthermore, the gods in the heavens of the jhānas cannot be constantly in jhāna, otherwise they would never not be gods.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Ceisiwr »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:39 pm I think that my understanding of SN 1.34 seems pointless to you because my understanding of SN 1.34 is such that I think it it saying pretty much the opposite of what you think it's saying.
It would be pointless since according to you, for undeclared reasons, the meaning of kāmā in SN 1.34 is different to what we find in the Jhāna pericope. The singular kāma is an exception it seems, also for undeclared reasons.

I wager this is because you associate jhāna exclusively with the temporary cessation of the 5 kāmaguṇas. I do not associate it so.
The temporary shut down of kāmā, of which the kāmaguṇas are a sub-set yes.
You further argue that, because I do not think that the citrāni loke which are the 5 kāmaguṇas cease, my definition of jhāna is identical to general sense restraint. This is not the case, because sense-restraint in general is not accompanied by the five beneficial factors of, for instance, the first jhāna. The Buddhas are not constantly in jhāna. They are not constantly experiencing the five or less or more factors of a jhānic existence.
Where exactly does the rapture and bliss come from on a non-absorbed view of things? From my perspective it starts from increasing stillness, as the 5 senses begin to drop away (where the nimitta starts to form). How does it come about according to you? I'd also like to know how you understand vitakka-vicāra, before I offer a rebuttal regarding constant jhāna?
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Ceisiwr »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:39 pm For instance, here, you redundantly duplicate an element in a sequence,

Sense restraint > weakening of kāmacchanda > experiencing no lust > experiencing no lusts > rapture and pleasure because no lusts > lust fully abandoned

...because you need something in the position of "not experiencing the 5 senses." To you, seclusion from kāmā is necessarily the removal of citrāni loke. Just eliminate that altogether instead and you'll see the unadulterated sequence, or at least see the opposing side's framing of it. Also, depending on how you are framing it, I may not agree with the last element of the sequence.
No, it is for the following reason

Sense restraint > weakening of kāmacchanda > experiencing no lust due to sense restraint > experiencing no lusts > rapture and pleasure because no lusts > lust fully abandoned

When there is sense restraint, there is no lust. Seems then rather redundant to have the Jhāna as "seclusion from lusts" since that has already occurred.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Coëmgenu »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:52 pmIt would be pointless since according to you, for undeclared reasons, the meaning of kāmā in SN 1.34 is different to what we find in the Jhāna pericope. The singular kāma is an exception it seems, also for undeclared reasons.
I've declared the reason quite a few times actually. I keep saying, the point in SN 1.34 is what is removed and what is not removed. You've voiced that you don't understand what I'm saying in saying that, for instance when you say, "I really don't understand your insistence on this point." So I need to find a new way to say it.

The actual semantic content of SN 1.34 says that the wise removes his thoughts of passion and says that it is not the beauties in the world that are removed. I read the kāmā removed in the jhāna pericope in numerous places as "thoughts of passion" despite it being in the singular in SN 1.34 and in the plural in the jhāna pericope. I do this based on the precedent in SN 1.34 as specifying that it is the thoughts of passion that are removed, not (consciousnesses generated by interaction with) the beauties and/or variegated things in the world.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Ven. Anālayo uses circular reasoning, to assert that jhāna is not possible while walking

Post by Coëmgenu »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:55 pmNo, it is for the following reason

Sense restraint > weakening of kāmacchanda > experiencing no lust due to sense restraint > experiencing no lusts > rapture and pleasure because no lusts > lust fully abandoned

When there is sense restraint, there is no lust. Seems then rather redundant to have the Jhāna as "seclusion from lusts" since that has already occurred.
I still think that it is you who are inadvertently artificially generating the redundancy. Just collapse elements 3 and 4 into one element 3 and remove the repetition.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Post Reply