Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars (cross-post from Samatha Bhavana)

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Meditation, e.g. meditation postures, developing a regular sitting practice, skillfully relating to difficulties and hindrances, etc.
Locked
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars (cross-post from Samatha Bhavana)

Post by pitithefool »

Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars:

At this point I’ve heard very compelling arguments for both sides of this debate. Both the absorbed-style and the non-absorbed jhanas seem to have both experiential backing as well as canonical discourse supporting their efficacy. After hearing the arguments I have to conclude that they are both correct.

1. What is a jhana really?

According to the suttas, jhana is any concentration that is endowed with these five factors: vitakka-vicara, piti-sukha, and ekaggata.
Whether or not we are using the absorbed or non-absorbed model, I think the most relevant term here for either side is the term ekaggata, which literally means “the mind gone to one”. From what I’ve gathered, this simply means that the mind is completely attentive to unified with its object and with nothing else.

This is an important point here, and I will be revisiting this topic later.

2. Hearing sound while in jhana.

In the Sutta Pitaka, the evidence for not hearing sound while rapt in concentration is fairly inconclusive and weak at best. We do, however, see quite a bit of commentary supporting this. The idea that sound cannot be heard appears to come from two places, though this list is not meant to be exhaustive:

First, from the Abhidhamma view that mental events can only occur one at a time, therefore if one is attentive to only one object, they must also be inattentive to all others. This view is not supported in the sutta pitaka and there is evidence to the contrary in which the sutta pitaka does appear to allow for parallel processing and for multiple events to be occurring simultaneously.

Second, from the techniques found in the Visuddhimagga. This is important because it deals with something critical to jhana practice or any type of meditation at all and it’s the definition of the object. I’ll elaborate a little more later, but the techniques listed in the Visuddhimagga lend themselves to one-pointedness wherein sensory inplut must be rejected as not part of the meditation, whereas the sutta pitaka contains a fairly large number of passages that contain much more inclusive and expansive objects. Which leads me to my next point.

3. Definition of the object, its place on the NEFP, and its effects on the experience.

In the Visuddhimagga, the technique for Anapanasati is treated similarly to the technique for kasina. Kasina objects appear to be quite well suited to concentration in which one may not hear sound because by definition, they do not include the senses.

However, in the Anapanasati sutta as well as others, we see a much more inclusive list of what is considered the object, including contemplation of impermanence, directing the attention towards the whole body, feeling rapture, feeling pleasure, calming the bodily fabrications, calming the mental fabrications, etc. Further, a fairly standard formula found in the canon describes unambiguously rapture, pleasure and awareness being spread across the entire body, head to toe. This formula is not always used though, and it seems to be closely linked with body contemplation.

How are these be reconciled?

I propose that we first think about what our object is. When we sit down, we must have a clear definition of what is and is not the object in order for our meditation to be a success. If we follow a more inclusive approach, we can include sensory information into the practice as part of the object, which fulfils contemplation of the six-sense media included in the standard Satipatthana formula under contemplation of Dhamma. Further, we can include Dependent origination into our meditation, as again the falls under right mindfulness. We can include the entire body as our object, following the advice of the Kayagatasati sutta, or we can include contemplation of feelings, or contemplation of the mind. These all fulfil right mindfulness and can thus be included as wholesome and acceptable. It can also be discerned that if one limits oneself to the Dhamma, or to the 16 steps of anapanasati, then rapture, pleasure, directed though, evaluation arise and grow strong, and the mind does not venture outside of the limits of the defined object. This fulfils all five factors of the first jhana. Further, if it is supported by right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, and right mindfulness, then it is noble right concentration.

If we look at it this way, then it’s clear that whether or not one hears sound in the meditation depends completely on how the object is defined. If the object is very limited, and way say to ourselves “sensory information, contact and attention to sense objects are not part of this meditation”, then it would follow that if one gains ekaggata with such a definition, then sensory information will necessarily not be included. If, on that occasion, rapture, pleasure, directed thought and evaluation arise and one is successful limiting the mind to its object, then it fulfils all five factors of the first jhana. Further, if it is supported by right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, and right mindfulness, then it is noble right concentration.

It would then follow that either of these methods would follow a similar trajectory: The awareness becomes saturated with piti-sukha and the work of vitakka-vicara can be dropped upon entry into the second jhana. Piti is dropped upon entry into the third, and the in-and-out breathing grows still with the abandonment of pleasure and pain in the fourth jhana. By then, the mind is perfectly equanimous, bright, malleable, pliant, and wieldy and can be directed anywhere we steer it.

To summarize:

1. As long as a concentration fulfils the five factors of jhana, it is a jhana.
2. If this concentration is supported by the other factors of the NEFP, it is right concentration.
3. Contact at the senses or lack thereof is not a factor of jhana.
4. Experience of contact at the senses depends on how restrictive or inclusive the object/subject of meditation is defined to be.
5. Contact at the senses can be the basis of right mindfulness and thus can be included with the subject or object.
6. You're both right! Now get over it!!!
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
Locked