Jhana and the early Mahayana

[pitithefool]

What one earth do you think saññāmanasikārā being a problem means? If saññāmanasikārā is a problem, then analytically 1 perception only is not. Likewise, if sound is a problem then it stands that not experiencing the 5 senses is not. Ironically, it is the jhāna-lite adherents who end up relying upon Abhidhamma definitions to make their arguments. The Vism. itself has to go around the houses as to why the 5 senses aren't experienced in jhāna, because of the definition given in the Vibhaṅga that it uses.

This is REALLY boiling down to whether we're considering experiencing "perception and attention in regards to [...]" as throwing one completely out of the jhana or whether those perceptions and attention are simply regarded as impurities (or thorns) in the jhana.

It would seem that the suttas regard the perceptions as impurities rather than as having thrown one into or out of a lower stage of concentration as the abhidhamma seems to believe.

[Coëmgenu]

I need to look a little more but I think what I mean by “hard jhana” is something as rigorous as the most rigorous definitions found specifically in the visuddhimagga.

I think I’m probably going to post a couple of threads in either General Theravada or Samatha to try and flesh out what the differences are between “hard and soft” because from what I see here, this actually comes closer to what I might call “soft”

The main actual difference I’ve been able to see is the inclusion of “access” concentration the commentaries and VSM which does not appear in the Pali Sutta Pitaka, as well as the “hearing sounds” argument, of which the consensus seems to be that you can indeed hear sounds while in the first jhana.

People say that "access concentration"/upacarasamadhi is the Theravadin version of the Sarvastivadin anagamyasamadhi. It is a "pre-dhyana" non-dhyanic samadhi. However, looking up upacarasamadhi, Wikipedia relates:

Arises when the five hindrances are dispelled, when jhana is present, and with the appearance the 'counterpart sign' (patibhaganimitta).

(Wikipedia article on samadhi)

So if this is accurate, and it might not be, it's Wikipedia, then upacarasamadhi is not the anagamya at all because "jhana is present." The anagamya is defined by dhyana not yet being present. It's what its name refers to. Also, between the first and second dhyanas, the Sarvastivadins believe in the dhyanantara, the "between-dhyana." This is the place where vitarkavicara ceases, though I have yet to find a technical scholastic explanation from them pontificating as to where/when precisely that is (i.e. before the dhyanantara, during, etc.). Ven Vasubandhu describes the absorption in Abhidharmakośakārikā as corresponding to a raised daïs in the heaven of the first dhyana, where Mahabrahma and his retinue of Brahma lords reside.

[Ceisiwr]

...

From the Vimuttimagga:

ACCESS-MEDITATION
Q. What is access-meditation?
A. It means that the man follows the object unimpeded by his inclinations. Thus he overcomes the hindrances. But he does not practise initial and
sustained application of thought, joy, bliss, unification of mind and the five faculties of faith and so forth. Though he gains meditation-strength, diverse trends of thought occur yet. This is called access-meditation.

FIXED MEDITATION, JHĀNA
Fixed meditation, jhāna, follows access. This state acquires the power of mental progress. This is the power of application of thought, faith and the others. This state does not move in the object. This is called fixed meditation, jhāna.

Q. What is the difference between. access and fixed meditation, jhāna?
A. The overcoming of the five hindrances is access. One overcomes these five and thereby fulfils fixed meditation, jhāna. Through access one
approaches distinction in meditation, jhāna. When distinction in meditation is accomplished, it is fixed meditation, jhāna. In access-meditation mind and body, not having attained to tranquillity, are unsteady like a ship on waves. In fixed meditation, jhāna, mind and body having attained to tranquillity are steady like a ship on unruffled water. Because the factors are not powerful the mind does not dwell long on the object, in access-meditation, like a child. All factors' being powerful (in fixed meditation, jhāna) one dwells on the object peacefully and long, like a powerful man. In access-meditation one does not practise with facility. Therefore yoga is not accomplished. It is like the forgetfulness of a discourse-reciter who has stopped, (reciting) for a long time. In fixed meditation, jhāna, practice being facile, yoga is accomplished: It is like a discourse-reciter who keeps himself in training, always, and who does not forget when he recites.

If a man does not overcome the (five) hindrances, he is blind as regards access-meditation. These are the teachings regarding impurity. If a man overcomes the hindrances weII, he gains sight (lit. becomes not-blind), Concerning the accomplishment of fixed meditation, jhāna, these are
the teachings of purity:-From the state of facility in the sign to (the state of) repelling is called access. Continued repelling of the hindrances is called fixed meditation, jhāna.

Q. What is the meaning of access?
A. 'Because it is near meditation, jhāna, it is called access, as a road near a village is called a village road. The meaning is the same, though the names differ. What is the meaning of fixed meditation, jhāna? Fixed meditation, jhāna, means yoga. Fixed meditation, jhāna, is like the mind entering the maṇḍala. There is no difference in meaning between renunciation, meditation' (jhāna) and fixed meditation, (jhāna). Here the yogin, dwelling in access, fixed meditation (jhāna) or the first meditation (jhāna) should increase the kasiṇa.

From the Visuddhimagga:

32. Now, concentration is of two kinds, that is to say, access concentration and absorption concentration: the mind becomes concentrated in two ways, that is, on the plane of access and on the plane of obtainment. Herein, the mind becomes concentrated on the plane of access by the abandonment of the hindrances, and on the plane of obtainment by the manifestation of the jhāna factors.
33. The difference between the two kinds of concentration is this. The factors are not strong in access. It is because they are not strong that when access has arisen, the mind now makes the sign its object and now re-enters the life-continuum, just as when a young child is lifted up and stood on its feet, it repeatedly falls down on the ground. But the factors are strong in absorption. It is because they are strong that when absorption concentration has arisen, the mind, having once interrupted the flow of the life-continuum, carries on with a stream of profitable impulsion for a whole night and for a whole day, just as a healthy man, after rising from his seat, could stand for a whole day.

[pitithefool]

So if this is accurate, and it might not be, it's Wikipedia, then upacarasamadhi is not the anagamya at all because "jhana is present." The anagamya is defined by dhyana not yet being present. It's what its name refers to. Also, between the first and second dhyanas, the Sarvastivadins believe in the dhyanantara, the "between-dhyana." This is the place where vitarkavicara ceases.

Where Vitakk-vicara ceases is defined in the Sutta-Pitaka again as the second jhana.

Nonetheless, the dichotomy still seems to exist between access-absorption when this is found NOWHERE in the Sutta Pitaka.

I still must conclude that access and absorption would both be covered by the term first jhana as the canon defines it.

[Coëmgenu]

So if this is accurate, and it might not be, it's Wikipedia, then upacarasamadhi is not the anagamya at all because "jhana is present." The anagamya is defined by dhyana not yet being present. It's what its name refers to. Also, between the first and second dhyanas, the Sarvastivadins believe in the dhyanantara, the "between-dhyana." This is the place where vitarkavicara ceases.

Where Vitakk-vicara ceases is defined in the Sutta-Pitaka again as the second jhana.

Well, it depends on what you mean by "where."

佛告阿難：「初禪正受時，言語止息，二禪正受時，覺觀止息，三禪正受時，喜心止息，四禪正受時，出入息止息 [...]
The Buddha said to Ananda: "At the time of the attainment of the first dhyana, spoken language has stopped and come to a rest. At the time of the attainment of the second dhyana, vitarkavicara has stopped and come to a rest. At the time of the attainment of the third dhyana, mental joy has stopped and come to a rest. At the time of the attainment of the fourth dhyana, the exiting and entering of the breath has stopped and come to a rest.
(T99.121b02 SA 474)

J. Pierquet in the translation on SuttaCentral renders these formulas like:

“When in the First Dhyāna, words and speech are extinguished. When in the Second Dhyāna, vitarka and vicāra are extinguished” etc.

"When in" has to be read here as "at the point of time of attainment" (正受時), so we are supposed to read "When in the Second Dhyāna, vitarka and vicāra are extinguished" in such a way that it is not in the middle of the second dhyana that vitarkavicara stops. When it is the case that someone is in the second dhyana, vitarka and vicara aren't there anymore. They are "stopped," 止, and are "come to a rest," 息, which J. Pierquet translates as they are "extinguished," likely based on a Pali parallel I assume. 時 is here a particular point/moment of time, that point is of 正受, which is "meditative attainment" here. Through a microscope, the sequence of characters is

[at]
初 first
禪 dhyana
正受 attainment
時 point of time
言語 spoken language
[has]
止 stopped
[and has]
息 come to a rest

You don't actually need the [has] and [and has]. This is me trying to make the sentence work in English. It can also be "at the instant of the attainment of X dhyana, Y ceases." 時 however is often used in the agamas as "at that time," in the sense of a particular time often in the past.

This is actually reinforced by the Pali suttas, at least those seemingly at variance with the Tapussasutta at AN 9.41:

Puna caparaṁ, bhikkhave, sāriputto vitakkavicārānaṁ vūpasamā ajjhattaṁ sampasādanaṁ cetaso ekodibhāvaṁ avitakkaṁ avicāraṁ samādhijaṁ pītisukhaṁ dutiyaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati.
“Again, monks, with the calming of thought and consideration, and with internal composure and mental focus, Sāriputta attains and remains in the second jhāna, which is free of thought and free of consideration, and has rapture and pleasure born from concentration.
(Anupadasutta MN 111 Ven Bodhi translation)

[Coëmgenu]

To illustrate how Chinese poorly maps onto English yet encodes material accurately all the same (English and Indo-European semantic domains are not default!):

We have the option to read 時 as "when"

When the first dhyana is attained, spoken language stops and comes to a rest.

Because of tense ambiguity inherent in Chinese, we also have the option of

When the first dhyana is attained, spoken language has stopped and come to a rest.

We also have the option of

When the first dhyana has been attained, spoken language has stopped and come to a rest.

時 appears in the ubiquitous opening of many agamasutras:

如是我聞一時佛住 ...
Like this I heard, at one (point of) time, the Buddha dwelt [at] ...

We can also read this as

如是我聞一時佛住 ...
Like this I heard, once when the Buddha dwelt [at] ...

[pitithefool]

'
Well, it depends on what you mean by "where."

This may be the most pedantic thing I've ever said.
BUT

I have to disagree.

Here, the cessation of factors is the defining characteristic of which jhana one is in, perhaps moreso than what is present.

In the first jhana, the defining characteristic is that sensuality or kama is abandoned, which is essentially turning away from the five senses for pleasure.

It doesn't necessarily follow that one enters the second jhana when kama is completely abandoned, rather the first jhana is fully developed.

Likewise, the defining feature of the second jhana is the cessation of vitakka vicara. Once vitakka vicara has ceased, the second jhana is fully developed.

Then, the defining feature of the third is the cessation of piti. When piti ceases, the third jhana is fully developed.

... And so on.

To summarize, one enters into a particular jhana when the process of cessation begins in regards to whatever it is that ceases in that jhana.

Some say that the jhana is not entered until cessation is complete but I find that isn't in line with the Suttas.

[Coëmgenu]

So basically I think what you propose is a twofold bifurcation of each jhana

first dhyana
first dhyana (fully developed) and kama ceases
second dhyana
second dhyana (fully developed) and vitarkavicara ceases

etc.

Is this wrong?

...

From the Vimuttimagga:

[...] Thus he overcomes the hindrances. But he does not practise initial and sustained application of thought, joy, bliss, unification of mind and the five faculties of faith and so forth [...]

From the Visuddhimagga:

[...] Herein, the mind becomes concentrated on the plane of access by the abandonment of the hindrances, and on the plane of obtainment by the manifestation of the jhāna factors. [...] The factors are not strong in access. [...] But the factors are strong in absorption. [...]

If the "factors" are the "five factors," it seems like the two, Vimuktimarga and Visuddhimagga, disagree on if access concentration is "in jhana" or not.

[pitithefool]

So basically I think what you propose is a twofold bifurcation of each jhana

first dhyana
first dhyana (fully developed) and kama ceases
second dhyana
second dhyana (fully developed) and vitarkavicara ceases

etc.

Is this wrong?

Eh kindof. I would honestly argue against saying it like that but yes,

In the first jhana, we turn away from kama
In the second jhana, we turn away from vitakka-vicara
In the third, we turn away from piti
In the fourth, we turn away from pleasure and pain

Whether you want to view the intermediates as part of one jhana or another doesn't really matter but I like to include the process of abandoning along with the state of having abandoned it within the same jhana, as that seems to be in line with how the sutta pitaka defines it.

I could be wrong but I've yet to be convinced otherwise

[Coëmgenu]

So basically I think what you propose is a twofold bifurcation of each jhana

first dhyana
first dhyana (fully developed) and kama ceases
second dhyana
second dhyana (fully developed) and vitarkavicara ceases

etc.

Is this wrong?

Eh kindof. I would honestly argue against saying it like that but yes, [...]

Well, if it's wrong in any way, I invite you to clarify. If you'll forgive me for putting more words in your mouth, basically, I think you are suggesting that dhyana/"the dhyanas" is/are a spectrum. They are one continuous line of progression with "certain boundaries," but the edges of them are "fuzzy" or "wrongly assigned" by the Visuddhimagga. My words, not yours. What you object to is the classification and categorization, "first" "second" third," with the implied sharply-defined differences that differentiate "first" from "second," etc. What the Vimuktimarga, Visuddhimagga, Mahayana sutras and treatises, etc., say about dhyana and/or the dhyanas could well be true and good, but you object to the delineation and systemization of the "stages of the path," as it were. Keep in mind, by saying unconditionally "yes," you are agreeing that the Visuddhimagga etc. could well be true and accurate, but the way it delineates the categories of dhyana are not to be taken literally and/or are inaccurate. Is this wrong?

[pitithefool]

Well, if it's wrong in any way, I invite you to clarify. If you'll forgive me for putting more words in your mouth, basically, I think you are suggesting that dhyana/"the dhyanas" is/are a spectrum. They are one continuous line of progression with "certain boundaries," but the edges of them are "fuzzy" or "wrongly assigned" by the Visuddhimagga. My words, not yours. What you object to is the classification and categorization, "first" "second" third," with the implied sharply-defined differences that differentiate "first" from "second," etc. What the Vimuktimarga, Visuddhimagga, Mahayana sutras and treatises, etc., say about dhyana and/or the dhyanas could well be true and good, but you object to the delineation and systemization of the "stages of the path," as it were. Keep in mind, by saying unconditionally "yes," you are agreeing that the Visuddhimagga etc. could well be true and accurate, but the way it delineates the categories of dhyana are not to be taken literally and/or are inaccurate. Is this wrong?

Lol no-one is twisting my arm right?

I wouldn't call the delineations in the VSM or VKM to be "wrongly assigned" per se. I just think the suttas give a delineation already and that it should be held as the gold standard.

I'm also growing weary of this conversation heading off into fruitlessness bordering on idle chatter as well.

I think the main thing to focus on in a practical sense is how to develop jhana (anapanasati for example) and how to use the standard jhana formulae as a road map. In that sense, clearly defined boundaries between first, second, third etc jhanas, to the extent that I called for in my previous comment are likely not necessary at all and may even be conterproductive.

The jhanas present the path of detaching from pleasure, first sensual, then jhanic. I honestly think that making such hair-splitting definitions at some point becomes more pedantic than it's worth and they likely don't end up making too much difference in the long run.

I still wouldn't consider vitakka-vicara as being possible in the third jhana.

[Ratnakar]

Why is sound a thorn to first jhana meditator master ?

It wouldn't be to a master of it, since they would be well trained in maintaining the singular conception required. In other words, skilled in not directing attention to the 5 senses.

Did the sutta say "for a meditator who wants to enter first jhana sound is a thorn or it said "in first jhana sound is a thorn"

Did it say in first jhana or outside first jhana that sound is a thorn ?

Vitakka can still exist in second jhana but it's a pain for second jhana meditator who see it

No it can't.

You contradict the buddha here

An9.41
And so, as the placing of the mind and keeping it connected were stilled … I was entering and remaining in the second absorption. While I was in that meditation, perceptions and attentions accompanied by placing the mind beset me, and that was an affliction for me. Suppose a happy person were to experience pain; that would be an affliction for them. In the same way, when perceptions and attentions accompanied by placing the mind and keeping it connected beset me, that was an affliction for me

[Coëmgenu]

I wouldn't call the delineations in the VSM or VKM to be "wrongly assigned" per se. I just think the suttas give a delineation already and that it should be held as the gold standard.

I'm also growing weary of this conversation heading off into fruitlessness bordering on idle chatter as well.

Well, it's your thread. The "early" Mahāyāna to the extent that it can be reconstructed has a considerably "lighter" first dhyāna, possibly a lighter second dhyāna as well, than the Theravādin tradition. The Mahāyāna sutra, corresponding Mahāyāna commentary, as well as the Sarvāstivādin āgamasūtra quoted and at least MN 111 state that vitarkavicara is absent in the second dhyāna.

You've suggested, though objected to the phrasing,

first dhyana
first dhyana (fully developed) and kama ceases
second dhyana
second dhyana (fully developed) and vitarkavicara ceases

You preferred

In the first jhana, we turn away from kama [etc.]

If you think this conversation is pedantic or counterproductive, we can discontinue. Just say the word, but I will note earlier you said "This may be the most pedantic thing I've ever said. BUT." If you want to stop, just say the word.

In contrast to the earlier scheme with "first dhyāna" distinct from "fully completed" first dhyāna, the various sources brought forward with the exception of the Aṅguttaranikāya Tapussasutta suggest:

0) In the anāgamya and/or upacārasamādhi, we turn away from kāma
1) In the first dhyāna, kāma is gone and we turn away from vitarkavicāra
2) In the second jhana, vitarkavicāra is gone and we turn away from prīti
3) In the third, prīti is gone and we turn away from sukhaduḥkha
4) In the fourth, sukhaduḥkha is gone and we turn away from ekāgratā itself
etc.

[Ratnakar]

An9.34 Furthermore, take a mendicant who, as the placing of the mind and keeping it connected are stilled, enters and remains in the second absorption. While a mendicant is in such a meditation, should perceptions and attentions accompanied by placing of the mind and keeping it connected beset them, that’s an affliction for them. Suppose a happy person were to experience pain; that would be an affliction for them. In the same way, should perceptions and attentions accompanied by placing of the mind and keeping it connected beset them, that’s an affliction for them."

But I agree that we should rather understand the first jhāna and the above AN passage along the lines your provide, not as the "hard jhāna".

I am at a loss why the adherents of jhāna-lite think this sutta supports their position. It does the exact opposite. Two things to notice. Firstly, the sutta is describing what knocks one out of x jhāna. Here the sutta is stating that the presence, or arising, of vitakka-vicāra is what has knocked one out of the meditation. Secondly, the sutta repeats over and over again that part of what is going wrong is saññāmanasikārā. That is to say, multiple attentions to conceptions. In other words, being distracted by the 5 senses. In other words, part of what knocks one out of jhāna is giving rise to attention to the 5 senses. Jhāna is without the 5 senses.

If indeed that's the case buddha would say the meditator emerge from second jhana and enter first jhana but buddha didn't say such a thing

And You clearly neglect the bold and very explicit statement of the buddha

An9.34 Furthermore, take a mendicant who, as the placing of the mind and keeping it connected are stilled, enters and remains in the second absorption. While a mendicant is in such a meditation, should perceptions and attentions accompanied by placing of the mind and keeping it connected beset them, that’s an affliction for them. Suppose a happy person were to experience pain; that would be an affliction for them. In the same way, should perceptions and attentions accompanied by placing of the mind and keeping it connected beset them, that’s an affliction for them."

[Ratnakar]

That isn't the consensus, and in terms of the suttas and āgamas the opposite is said.

I've yet to be convinced of this. rRther the first jhana is indeed the process of turning away from sesnuality in and of itself. According to the sutta pitaka's definition, experiencing attention and perception related to sensuality and subsequently turning away from it is indeed part of the process of concentrating the mind.

In the suttas, it seems that this isn't conceptualized as "popping in and out of the jhana" rather one is still said to be in the jhana while attention and perception related to the lower factors occur. It's not binary as it appears in abhidhamma, rather it's conceptualized more like the process of distilling alcohol or petrol in the suttas.

What gets me about this lol is that it means the same thing.

Its not "sensuality" but sense objects that one turns away from. It says so right in the Pali. Nothing I am saying here is based on the commentaries or the Abhidhamma. They merely get it right. The suttas alone are quite clear.

You contradict the buddha again, the buddha explicitly said sensual pleasure is not sense object

An6.63
Sensual pleasures should be known. And their source, diversity, result, cessation, and the practice that leads to their cessation should be known.’ That’s what I said, but why did I say it? There are these five kinds of sensual stimulation. Sights known by the eye that are likable, desirable, agreeable, pleasant, sensual, and arousing. Sounds known by the ear … Smells known by the nose … Tastes known by the tongue … Touches known by the body that are likable, desirable, agreeable, pleasant, sensual, and arousing. However, these are not sensual pleasures. In the training of the Noble One they’re called ‘kinds of sensual stimulation’.

Greedy intention is a person’s sensual pleasure.
The world’s pretty things aren’t sensual pleasures.
Greedy intention is a person’s sensual pleasure.
The world’s pretty things stay just as they are,
but a wise one removes desire for them.

So by secluded from sensual pleasure to attain jhana buddha means removing desire from sensual stimulation

It's by removing the first craving and the first fetter which is fetter of craving for sensuality