Jhana and the early Mahayana

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and texts.
Post Reply
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 3988
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by Coëmgenu »

Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:51 pmIt's not, in other suttas buddha even dismissed monks because they were too noisy
Do you think you can hear sounds in the first dhyana or not? I had thought you were part of the "you can hear sounds" crowd. If so, your response makes no sense. But perhaps I am the one who is mistaken.
Then, the monks sang this gāthā:

These bodies are like foam.
Them being frail, who can rejoice in them?
The Buddha attained the vajra-body.
Still, it becomes inconstant and rots.
The many Buddhas are vajra-entities.
All are also subject to inconstancy.
Quickly ended, like melting snow --
how could things be different?

The Buddha passed into parinirvāṇa afterward.

(T1.27b10 Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra DĀ 2)
Ratnakar
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:34 am

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by Ratnakar »

Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:04 pm
Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:51 pmIt's not, in other suttas buddha even dismissed monks because they were too noisy
Do you think you can hear sounds in the first dhyana or not? I had thought you were part of the "you can hear sounds" crowd. If so, your response makes no sense. But perhaps I am the one who is mistaken.
How does my response make no sense ?
Is sound thorn in first jhana or outside of first jhana ?

If you can answer that you will answer your own question you will thank me for that
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 3988
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by Coëmgenu »

Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:14 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:04 pm
Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:51 pmIt's not, in other suttas buddha even dismissed monks because they were too noisy
Do you think you can hear sounds in the first dhyana or not? I had thought you were part of the "you can hear sounds" crowd. If so, your response makes no sense. But perhaps I am the one who is mistaken.
How does my response make no sense ?
Is sound thorn in first jhana or outside of first jhana ?

If you can answer that you will answer your own question you will thank me for that
No, thank you. I was trying to ask for clarification, not ask myself about what I think. If you think you can hear sound in the first jhana, your response to Sphairos makes no sense because you are effectively saying "No, you can't." No worries though, there is probably something misread.
Then, the monks sang this gāthā:

These bodies are like foam.
Them being frail, who can rejoice in them?
The Buddha attained the vajra-body.
Still, it becomes inconstant and rots.
The many Buddhas are vajra-entities.
All are also subject to inconstancy.
Quickly ended, like melting snow --
how could things be different?

The Buddha passed into parinirvāṇa afterward.

(T1.27b10 Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra DĀ 2)
Ratnakar
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:34 am

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by Ratnakar »

Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:16 pm
Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:14 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:04 pmDo you think you can hear sounds in the first dhyana or not? I had thought you were part of the "you can hear sounds" crowd. If so, your response makes no sense. But perhaps I am the one who is mistaken.
How does my response make no sense ?
Is sound thorn in first jhana or outside of first jhana ?

If you can answer that you will answer your own question you will thank me for that
No, thank you. I was trying to ask for clarification, not ask myself about what I think. If you think you can heard sound in the first jhana, your response to Sphairos makes no sense because you are effectively saying "No, you can't." No worries though, there is probably something misread.
What do you mean by "no, you can't" ?

What do you think friend, can something that you can't hear thorning or disturbing you ?

Does that make sense to you ?
arkaprava
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2019 12:13 pm

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by arkaprava »

The Jhana formula is very well stated in the Maha-Assapura Sutta :
And what more is to be done? There is the case where a monk seeks out a secluded dwelling: a forest, the shade of a tree, a mountain, a glen, a hillside cave, a charnel ground, a jungle grove, the open air, a heap of straw. After his meal, returning from his alms round, he sits down, crosses his legs, holds his body erect, and brings mindfulness to the fore.

"Abandoning covetousness with regard to the world, he dwells with an awareness devoid of covetousness. He cleanses his mind of covetousness. Abandoning ill will and anger, he dwells with an awareness devoid of ill will, sympathetic with the welfare of all living beings. He cleanses his mind of ill will and anger. Abandoning sloth and drowsiness, he dwells with an awareness devoid of sloth and drowsiness, mindful, alert, percipient of light. He cleanses his mind of sloth and drowsiness. Abandoning restlessness and anxiety, he dwells undisturbed, his mind inwardly stilled. He cleanses his mind of restlessness and anxiety. Abandoning uncertainty, he dwells having crossed over uncertainty, with no perplexity with regard to skillful mental qualities. He cleanses his mind of uncertainty.

"Suppose that a man, taking a loan, invests it in his business affairs. His business affairs succeed. He repays his old debts and has extra left over for maintaining his wife. The thought would occur to him, 'Before, taking a loan, I invested it in my business affairs. Now my business affairs have succeeded. I have repaid my old debts and have extra left over for maintaining my wife.' Because of that he would gain joy & experience happiness.

"Now suppose that a man falls sick — in pain & seriously ill. He does not enjoy his meals and has no measure of strength in his body. At a later time he is released from that sickness. He enjoys his meals and has a measure of strength in his body. The thought would occur to him, 'Before, I was sick... Now I am released from that sickness. I enjoy my meals and have a measure of strength in my body.' Because of that he would gain joy & experience happiness.

"Now suppose that a man is bound in prison. At a later time he is released from that bondage, safe & sound, with no loss of property. The thought would occur to him, 'Before, I was bound in prison. Now I am released from that bondage, safe & sound, with no loss of my property.' Because of that he would gain joy & experience happiness.

"Now suppose that a man, subject to others, not subject to himself, unable to go where he likes. At a later time he is released from that slavery, subject to himself, not subject to others, freed, able to go where he likes. The thought would occur to him, 'Before, I was a slave... Now I am released from that slavery, subject to myself, not subject to others, freed, able to go where I like.' Because of that he would gain joy & experience happiness.

"Now suppose that a man, carrying money & goods, is traveling by a road through desolate country. At a later time he emerges from that desolate country, safe & sound, with no loss of property. The thought would occur to him, 'Before, carrying money & goods, I was traveling by a road through desolate country. Now I have emerged from that desolate country, safe & sound, with no loss of my property.' Because of that he would gain joy & experience happiness.

In the same way, when these five hindrances are not abandoned in himself, the monk regards it as a debt, a sickness, a prison, slavery, a road through desolate country. But when these five hindrances are abandoned in himself, he regards it as unindebtedness, good health, release from prison, freedom, a place of security. Seeing that they have been abandoned within him, he becomes glad. Glad, he becomes enraptured. Enraptured, his body grows tranquil. His body tranquil, he is sensitive to pleasure. Feeling pleasure, his mind becomes concentrated.
Followed by :
Quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he enters and remains in the first jhana: rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought and evaluation. He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal. Just as if a skilled bathman or bathman's apprentice would pour bath powder into a brass basin and knead it together, sprinkling it again and again with water, so that his ball of bath powder — saturated, moisture-laden, permeated within and without — would nevertheless not drip; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with the rapture and pleasure born of withdrawal. There's nothing of his entire body unpervaded by rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal.

Here the bolded red part refers to the secluded from sensuality phrase , and the bolded blue part refers to the withdrawal from unskillful mental qualities phrase, in my opinion.
:anjali:
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 3988
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by Coëmgenu »

Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:23 pmWhat do you think friend, can something that you can't hear thorning or disturbing you ?

Does that make sense to you ?
So I'm a Mahayana Buddhist, so yes, I am persuaded by narratives that have sound in the first dhyana, because I think it's perfectly reasonable and indeeed likely that there is a continuity of Mahayanika Aryan saints.
Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:23 pmWhat do you mean by "no, you can't" ?
Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:51 pm
sphairos wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 12:49 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Mar 30, 2021 6:15 pmIt is hardly suspicious. It matches what other suttas say regarding the jhānā being states divorced from the 5 senses. It also has a perfect parallel.
No, it is.
It's not, in other suttas buddha even dismissed monks because they were too noisy
Sphairos is saying it is suspicious that the "thorn" story is only found in one AN sutta. Ceisiwr says "it is hardly suspicious" because he thinks the other suttas say the 5 senses are shut down in jhana and he also points out that the single AN sutta actually has a Northern parallel that is identical. Sphairos says that the sutta is still suspicious, and then you say "It's not, in other suttas, the Buddha even dismissed monks because they were too noisy."

So now comes my assumption. I had assumed you were part of the "you can hear sound in jhana" crowd. If you are, then the point that you made undermines your own stance. The "you can hear sound in jhana" stance is predicated upon "the thorn does not destroy jhana, but makes it more difficult." If the thorn destroys the jhana, then there is all the more reason for the Buddha to dismiss noisy monks -- they are inhibiting the formation of new dhyanins rather than just making the matter more difficult. To be fair, now that I look at things, there is another way to read what you read that does make sense, namely that the Buddha sends the monks away because they make jhana difficult rather than impossible, but I am still a bit mystified by why you decided to bring up the Buddha dismissing noisy monks particularly at this moment.
Last edited by Coëmgenu on Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Then, the monks sang this gāthā:

These bodies are like foam.
Them being frail, who can rejoice in them?
The Buddha attained the vajra-body.
Still, it becomes inconstant and rots.
The many Buddhas are vajra-entities.
All are also subject to inconstancy.
Quickly ended, like melting snow --
how could things be different?

The Buddha passed into parinirvāṇa afterward.

(T1.27b10 Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra DĀ 2)
Ratnakar
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:34 am

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by Ratnakar »

Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:31 pm
Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:23 pmWhat do you mean by "no, you can't" ?
Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:51 pm
sphairos wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 12:49 pmNo, it is.
It's not, in other suttas buddha even dismissed monks because they were too noisy
Sphairos is saying it is suspicious that the "thorn" story is only found in one AN sutta. Ceisiwr says "it is hardly suspicious" because he thinks the other suttas say the 5 senses are shut down in jhana and he also points out that the single AN sutta actually has a Northern parallel that is identical. Sphairos says "this sutta is still suspicious," and then you say "It's not, in other suttas, the Buddha even dismissed monks because they were too noisy."

So now comes my assumption. I had assumed you were part of the "you can hear sound in jhana" crowd. If you are, then the point that you made undermines your own stance. The "you can hear sound in jhana" stance is dependent upon "the thorn does not destroy jhana, but makes it more difficult." If the thorn destroys the jhana, then there is all the more reason for the Buddha to dismiss noisy monks -- they are inhibiting the formation of new dhyanins rather than just making the matter more difficult. To be fair, now that I look at things, there is another way to read what you read that does make sense, but I am still a bit mystified by why you decided to bring up the Buddha dismissing noisy monks particularly at this moment.
Because some noises are indeed a thorn in first jhana,so you need to abide in noiseless empty building

Furthermore buddha always recommend noble silence/2nd jhana or dhamma discussion so not all noises are thorns

non dhamma noise are thorns

The fact that noise is thorn in first jhana means you can hear them it doesn't make sense if they thorn you without you hearing them
Ratnakar
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:34 am

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by Ratnakar »

Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:31 pm
Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:23 pmWhat do you think friend, can something that you can't hear thorning or disturbing you ?

Does that make sense to you ?
So I'm a Mahayana Buddhist, so yes, I am persuaded by narratives that have sound in the first dhyana, because I think it's perfectly reasonable and indeeed likely that there is a continuity of Mahayanika Aryan saints.
Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:23 pmWhat do you mean by "no, you can't" ?
Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:51 pm
sphairos wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 12:49 pmNo, it is.
It's not, in other suttas buddha even dismissed monks because they were too noisy
Sphairos is saying it is suspicious that the "thorn" story is only found in one AN sutta. Ceisiwr says "it is hardly suspicious" because he thinks the other suttas say the 5 senses are shut down in jhana and he also points out that the single AN sutta actually has a Northern parallel that is identical. Sphairos says that the sutta is still suspicious, and then you say "It's not, in other suttas, the Buddha even dismissed monks because they were too noisy."

So now comes my assumption. I had assumed you were part of the "you can hear sound in jhana" crowd. If you are, then the point that you made undermines your own stance. The "you can hear sound in jhana" stance is predicated upon "the thorn does not destroy jhana, but makes it more difficult." If the thorn destroys the jhana, then there is all the more reason for the Buddha to dismiss noisy monks -- they are inhibiting the formation of new dhyanins rather than just making the matter more difficult. To be fair, now that I look at things, there is another way to read what you read that does make sense, namely that the Buddha sends the monks away because they make jhana difficult rather than impossible, but I am still a bit mystified by why you decided to bring up the Buddha dismissing noisy monks particularly at this moment.
You should not take a camp If jhana is hard let it be if jhana is easy let it be our task is only to follow the buddha
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 3988
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by Coëmgenu »

Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 12:33 pmThe entire thing is:

1) rejecting colours
2) rejecting sounds
3) rejecting smells
4) rejecting tastes
5) rejecing touchables

Each of these is interpreted in such a way:
[...]
[...]

After fascination and desire for the five kāmā has been left behind, the dhyanin-to-be removes the five obstacles with weak non-dhyanic instantiations of the five dhyanic factors.

1) envy is removed via ekāgratā ,
2) malevolence via prīti,
3) torpour via vitarka,
4) restlessness via sukha,
and 5) doubt via vicāra [...]
All of this can be read at the linked document, Ven Migme Chodron's translation of Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa.
Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 12:33 pmIn the first dhyana, smell and taste are gone and sight, hearing, and tactile sensation are there. In the second dhyana, sight and hearing drop out. In the third dhyana, there is only the neutral feeling of the internal feedback of the tactile sensation of having a body, and this is understood as "experiencing bliss throughout the (physical) body," the reading of "sukham . . . kayena sampravedayate" dominant in some sects of the Northern Tradition. There is no external feedback from external rupa dharmas during the experience of what the Dharmaguptakas call "the body of bliss" of the third dhyana, because the dhyana itself is interpreted as causing the bodily sensation internally. The physical body becomes filled with the sensation of bliss.
For this, if readers have it, see Prüden's rendering of de La Vallée-Poussin's Abhidharmakośakārikā & Bhāṣya at vol 4 and pages 1229-1231, After that, referring to "the dhyana itself is interpreted as causing the bodily sensation internally," see the extensive debate between the Darstantikas & Vaibhasikas concerning this at pages 1232-1237, particularly concerning whether sukha is "bodily" in the sense of "this (physical) body." The "body of bliss" claim concerning the Dharmaguptakas is from DA 28. I will post a translation with defense as to why I think it says that in a few. More to come when I have more time.
Then, the monks sang this gāthā:

These bodies are like foam.
Them being frail, who can rejoice in them?
The Buddha attained the vajra-body.
Still, it becomes inconstant and rots.
The many Buddhas are vajra-entities.
All are also subject to inconstancy.
Quickly ended, like melting snow --
how could things be different?

The Buddha passed into parinirvāṇa afterward.

(T1.27b10 Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra DĀ 2)
asahi
Posts: 207
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by asahi »

Ps :
If in deep jhana , one could not hear sounds .

This monk (age 62) below sat for 18 days (15?) in jhana in1901 in the Zhong Nan Shan mountain in china .
In 1907 he went deep in jhana for 9 days (7?) in the middle of giving a dhamma talk in Bangkok Thailand . It was said the King and royals paid respect to him .
467246033_m.jpg


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xuyun
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 3988
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by Coëmgenu »

The next relevant section is Abhidharmakośakārikā & Bhāṣya vol 4 pages 1239-1241 and onward where Venerable Vasubandhu in the Bhāṣya outlines the Vaibhasika v.s. the Sautrantika-specific position on the operation of the senses in the dhyanas.

This is the text being referenced, if people do not have it, as this will save me copying out large chunks, can be found via Googling "pruden abhidharmakosa pdf." I am citing vol 4.

Three particularly relevant pages:
abhidharmakosavol4p1240.JPG
abhidharmakosavol4p1241.JPG
footnotes.JPG
Unless I'm mistaken, the "12" is Kośakārikā and the "a." "b." "c." commentary is the Bhāṣya. I might be wrong in reading it like that. The original translator has the two texts completely interwoven into each other as it is in the manuscripts. Also, we'll notice that Ven Vasubandhu has body consciousness cease at dhyana 2, despite the earlier Vaibhasika-Darstantika debate.
Last edited by Coëmgenu on Thu Apr 01, 2021 4:54 pm, edited 5 times in total.
Then, the monks sang this gāthā:

These bodies are like foam.
Them being frail, who can rejoice in them?
The Buddha attained the vajra-body.
Still, it becomes inconstant and rots.
The many Buddhas are vajra-entities.
All are also subject to inconstancy.
Quickly ended, like melting snow --
how could things be different?

The Buddha passed into parinirvāṇa afterward.

(T1.27b10 Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra DĀ 2)
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by pitithefool »

Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 9:52 am
pitithefool wrote: Wed Mar 31, 2021 9:08 pm
By practicing jhana, we are still manipulating feeling, perception, vitakka-vicara and anapana as they condition contact, feeling, etc.
I wouldn’t think in terms of “conditioning” since this implies causality, which the Buddha refused to engage with based on his epistemological outlook (DN1 being a prime example of this). This is, perhaps, playing into your views on the jhānā. That said I’m potentially going off topic here.
No no I'm not saying causes, I'm saying conditions, like a colored lens
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 3988
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by Coëmgenu »

Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 4:12 pmUnless I'm mistaken, the "12" is Kośakārikā and the "a." "b." "c." commentary is the Bhāṣya. I might be wrong in reading it like that. The original translator has the two texts completely interwoven into each other as it is in the manuscripts. Also, we'll notice that Ven Vasubandhu has body consciousness cease at dhyana 2, despite the earlier Vaibhasika-Darstantika debate.
I think I was mistaken. I didn't notice the earlier "13a-c." So the lettered items are not differentiated from the numbered items like that. I still have a hard time delineating the two nested texts, but it looks like this is all Kośakārikā.
Then, the monks sang this gāthā:

These bodies are like foam.
Them being frail, who can rejoice in them?
The Buddha attained the vajra-body.
Still, it becomes inconstant and rots.
The many Buddhas are vajra-entities.
All are also subject to inconstancy.
Quickly ended, like melting snow --
how could things be different?

The Buddha passed into parinirvāṇa afterward.

(T1.27b10 Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra DĀ 2)
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 11687
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by Ceisiwr »

Ratnakar wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:28 am
I think you can be right here But the buddha didn't explicitly say they fall to lower jhana, on the contrary to your argument buddha even said he went to higher 3rd jhana just to avoid vitakka completely
The text says nothing of the sort. The definition of being in the 2nd jhāna is the absence of vitakka-vicāra. It is repeated over and over again. Logically it follows that if vitakka-vicāra is happening, yet one is still in meditation, then there is a falling back.
If buddha follow your argument he will say "why don't I purify the second jhana or why don't i go back to second jhana ?"
He really doesn't need to, since the text is quite clear.
Buddha explicitly said he fall to first jhana from the second jhana in dn16, he would do the same if he really means that
He did not fall back in DN 16. As he had mastery over them the Buddha entered the 4 jhāna and the formless attainments at will. This is different to the sutta in question, which is a teaching regarding the difficulties that can arise in different meditations.
Remember that buddha said not once but twice that he was still in that second jhana
1.I was entering and remaining in the second absorption
2.While I was in that meditation
So I don't think even if buddha said thrice or ten times stressing only that you would listen sir but I hope I am wrong
You are indeed mistaken. All that you have established here is that whilst in the 2nd jhāna something happened. You have not established that what arose was in anyway compatible with the meditation itself.
Staying in the neighborhood of women doesn't make you fall from celibacy does it?
So sound too won't make you fall from the first jhana
Buddha advice us to avoid staying in the neighborhood of women because it thorn us regarding preserving our celibacy especially mental celibacy in the same way we need to avoid sound because it thorns us
Whilst in the 1st jhāna hearing a sound will knock you off balance, just like how seeing a beautiful woman can knock a heterosexual man off balance in terms of sense restraint.
If really in first jhana there is no sound at all I don't think sound will even be a concern let alone a thorn
Not for a jhāna master, no, since they have well tamed the mind in terms of restraining it from intentions and attentions to the 5 senses. For a beginner, which is really who the sutta is aimed at, there can be issues. The human mind naturally seeks sense experience and pleasurable objects. There is a natural tendency for intention and attention to arise towards the 5 senses. Restraining that is difficult, which is why jhāna is so difficult. Its a training in renunciation. Of turning away from the 5 sense experience.
You still avoid my question whether sound is thorn in jhana or outside of jhana
If whilst in jhāna the meditator slips and intention and attention is given to hearing a sound, then they will fall away from that state. Sound is a thorn to it, like pain is a thorn to happiness.
I never quoted vibhanga so you don't contradict vibhanga sir, you contradict the buddha you contradict the sutta, but of course you are free to believe whatever you want to believe sir
No, but you rely heavily on English translations which are based on the Abhidhamma definition of kāmā. Based on the suttas alone, the kāmā are external objects not "sensual pleasures".
Buddha said the pleasure and happiness that arise not the sense objects itself so in first jhana the pleasure and happiness regarding desirable sense objects won't arise, instead of happiness it's equanimity that arise from those 5 objects in first jhana
The mind is quite secluded from the external sights, sounds etc. From the kāmā, which is why whilst in jhāna one is at the end of the world where Māra cannot see. The pleasure and happiness arises dependent upon the external sense objects:

Yaṁ kho, bhikkhave, ime pañca kāmaguṇe paṭicca uppajjati sukhaṁ somanassaṁ—ayaṁ kāmānaṁ assādo.

We can shorten to:

Any external sensual objects there are, the arising of pleasure and happiness dependent upon them is the enjoyment of them.

This is a standard teaching of contact giving rise to vedanā, which then follows to lust due to the underlying tendencies. When I see an alluring man (a kāmā) the underlying tendencies will be activated, in turn giving rise to pleasure and happiness. This is the enjoyment of the kāmā. Being fully secluded from the kāmā means not being able to see the attractive man walking by. The underlying tendencies are temporarily denied the chance to blossom, and so lust and pleasure do not arise.
Pleasure and happiness is a mental thing it's not physical thing, here happiness and pleasure is a feeling that arise due to body contact
Kāma is "a mental thing". Kāmā are alluring external objects in the world which, unless you are a subjective Idealist, are quite mind-independent.
Feeling is one of four part of namakaya together with perception, intention and consciousness they form mental body/mental aggregates
Consciousness is not part of the nāmakāya. This is a later Abhidhamma idea. For someone who wants to only rely on the suttas you sure do gulp down whole gallons of the Abhidhamma. Its surprising how many of the "sutta only" types unconsciously end up doing that. As for sañña it means more along the lines of "conceptualisation" than "perception", but that is a different topic.
Notice that buddha said 5 feeling born contacts is a fetter in his teaching if really buddha follow your argument that sense objects are fetters then non blind and deaf people cant even follow the teaching let alone become stream enterer
No. The fetter is lust (kāma). The Buddha and Arahants no longer experience that dhamma, but the dhammas of the kāmā remain just as they are in the world.

Saṅkapparāgo purisassa kāmo,
Greedy intention is a persons lust

Nete kāmā yāni citrāni loke;
Not the kāmā which are pretty in the world

Saṅkapparāgo purisassa kāmo,
Greedy intention is a person’s lust

Tiṭṭhanti citrāni tatheva loke;
The world’s pretty things stay just as they are,

Athettha dhīrā vinayanti chandanti.
but a wise one removes desire for them.
And here the buddha said the gratification of sensual pleasure
Mn13

And what is the gratification of sensual pleasures? There are these five kinds of sensual stimulation. What five? 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. These are the five kinds of sensual stimulation. The pleasure and happiness that arise from these five kinds of sensual stimulation: this is the gratification of sensual pleasures.
You would think that avoiding the gratification of sensual pleasure is the seclusion or escape of sensual pleasure
Already addressed above.
So not only buddha said you don't need to avoid sense objects you don't need to avoid feeling born contacts/sense objects too
Lets looks at the text, based on the suttas only instead of your cherished Abhidhamma defintion:

Yo kho, bhikkhave, kāmesu chandarāgavinayo chandarāgappahānaṁ—idaṁ kāmānaṁ nissaraṇaṁ.

Removing and giving up desire and lust for sensual objects: this is the escape from sensual objects.

So no you don't need to avoid the external pretty things in the world, the kāmesu/kāmānaṁ, you merely need to remove lust for them.
It's interesting that buddha said quite secluded from sensual pleasure instead of completely secluded from sensual pleasures
Not even the Abhidhamma, which you are still yet to justify, defines the plural kāmā in the singular. This would be quite grammatically incorrect. According to the suttas, it is seclusion from the pretty things in the world (kāmā).
Notice that buddha directly explicitly refer to desire and aversion not the sight itself as unskillful qualities and in first jhana you are quite secluded from desire and aversion
You are secluded from lust and unwholesome states because the underlying tendencies are no longer being activated by ignorance-based contact with the kāmā.
It's quite secluded from sensual pleasures you can refer to your own quote
Once again, the suttas define kāmā as pretty things in the world. The Abhidhamma defines them as "sensual pleasures". Quoting English translations based on the Abhidhamma doesn't prove your point. It merely begs the question. It is circular reasoning, which is a logical fallacy. They seem popular on this page again.
So what kind of desires that is considered as unskillful qualities ?
Repetitive question. Addressed above.
So sensual desires is what buddha considered as unskillful qualities
Kāma is, not the kāmā (plural).
Mara is desire sir
Sn 23.35
Rādha, you should give up any desire, any greed, any desire and greed for whatever is Māra
Once again I'm dumbstruck as to why people quote suttas that actually go against their position. The sutta here clearly makes a distinction between desire/greed and Māra. In fact, the sutta goes on to define Māra as the 5 aggregates rather than desire:
Yes only when you gives up the desire for the world you go tothe end of the world
If there is intention and attention towards the senses then there is contact at vision, hearing and so on. If there is no intention and attention and no lust towards the 5 senses then there is no experience of the 5 senses as per MN 28. This is why renunciation is important and why no one can attain any jhāna without a firm foundation of sīla. You have to train the mind to turn away from the 5 senses, from indulging in sensual objects, as this turning away from sense experience is essential for any jhāna. If you cannot practice sense restraint then you cannot obtain the jhānā.
If I am not mistaken in late abhidhamma and visuddhimagga you are completely off from 5 senses in first jhana so abhidhamma should support your cause here not me
The Vibhaṅga defines kāmā as "sensual pleasures". This is the definition you keep relying upon, without ever justifying it. The Visuddhimagga then has to go around the houses as to why this means seclusion from the 5 senses. Based on a sutta only reading, the kāmā are external pretty things.
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Thu Apr 01, 2021 11:18 pm, edited 7 times in total.
Mendicants, a mendicant who has five things will soon penetrate the unshakable. What five? It’s when a mendicant has attained the analytical knowledge of meaning, the analytical knowledge of Dhamma, the analytical knowledge of language, the analytical knowledge of discernment and they review the extent of their mind’s freedom. A mendicant who has these five things will soon penetrate the unshakable.”

AN 5.95
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 11687
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Jhana and the early Mahayana

Post by Ceisiwr »

Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:31 pm So I'm a Mahayana Buddhist, so yes, I am persuaded by narratives that have sound in the first dhyana, because I think it's perfectly reasonable and indeeed likely that there is a continuity of Mahayanika Aryan saints.
I wonder how hearing a sound in the 1st jhāna is squared with the kasiṇa, which is of 1 conception, since these are accepted in Mahāyāna based on the texts you referred me to? If there is the 1st jhāna based on a kasiṇa, and kasiṇa is 1 conception only, it is impossible then to hear sound no?
Mendicants, a mendicant who has five things will soon penetrate the unshakable. What five? It’s when a mendicant has attained the analytical knowledge of meaning, the analytical knowledge of Dhamma, the analytical knowledge of language, the analytical knowledge of discernment and they review the extent of their mind’s freedom. A mendicant who has these five things will soon penetrate the unshakable.”

AN 5.95
Post Reply