Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

The cultivation of calm or tranquility and the development of concentration
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 257
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by pitithefool »

Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 11:08 am
P1) Kāmā are external sensory objects.
P2) The jhānā are secluded from the kāmā.
C) Therefore, the jhānā are without sensory contact.
This is not a deductively valid line of reasoning.

Because:

You've made the assertion that "seclusion from sensory objects" is equivalent to "no contact at the sense bases". These are quite different conceptually though superficially similar. You've also made the same assertion with perceptions. You have reasons for equating these two quite different terms and that's where you've used induction to do so,

Given that the terms kama in plural and singular carry implicit connotations of desire for the five sense objects and also becoming in the sensual realm, and that vivicca means something closer to aloofness or separation, The term most likely means, well, exactly what it says: seclusion from sensuality. Jumping to the conlusion that it means "no contact at the 5 senses" requires a significant amount of stretching and I must say the support that you've given for this view is weak at best and directly contradicted in other places in the sutta pitaka.
Last edited by pitithefool on Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:45 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 11720
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by Ceisiwr »

pitithefool wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:59 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 11:08 am
No no no no. You've equated "seclusion from sensory objects" to "no contact at the sense bases", And you have done so by inductive reasoning. Now please provide step by step your reasoning for interpreting that way so we can analyze it.
Can you edit your post, so that it’s easier for people to see what you are objecting to. Thank you.
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
pitithefool
Posts: 257
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by pitithefool »

Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:00 pm
pitithefool wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:59 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 11:08 am
No no no no. You've equated "seclusion from sensory objects" to "no contact at the sense bases", And you have done so by inductive reasoning. Now please provide step by step your reasoning for interpreting that way so we can analyze it.
Can you edit your post, so that it’s easier for people to see what you are objecting to. Thank you.
Done
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
ToVincent
Posts: 1186
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by ToVincent »

pitithefool wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:59 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 11:08 am
P1) Kāmā are external sensory objects.
P2) The jhānā are secluded from the kāmā.
C) Therefore, the jhānā are without sensory contact.
This is not a deductively valid line of reasoning.

Because:

You've made the assertion that "seclusion from sensory objects" is equivalent to "no contact at the sense bases". These are quite different conceptually though superficially similar. You've also made the same assertion with perceptions. You have reasons for equating these two quite different terms and that's where you've used induction to do so,

Given that the terms kama in plural and singular carry implicit connotations of desire for the five sense objects and also becoming in the sensual realm, and that vivicca means something closer to aloofness or separation, The term most likely means, well, exactly what it says: seclusion from sensuality. Jumping to the conlusion that it means "no contact at the 5 senses" requires a significant amount of stretching and I must say the support that you've given for this view is weak at best and directly contradicted in other places in the sutta pitaka.
:goodpost:

Kāmā (objects of sensual pleasures) and bāhirāni āyatanāni (external fields of sensory experience), are not exactly what one could call, the same thing.

It has been noted again and again that this vanishing of perceptions (based) upon the internal organs of senses (ajjhattikāni āyatanāni), only occurs in the fifth attainment (arūpa) - as seen here: https://justpaste.it/2veig

-------

Anyway - this time worn Humean stuff applied to Buddha, is mere "ontological relativity".
We all, might as well sing "Rule Britannia", and get that blood clot from the empiricist and scientific method freaks.

Should we also call Hume an impostor and a bare plagiariser - who uses Buddha's concepts, that he might have probably heard about, from his enlightened brothers of the East Indian Company.
Ludicrous, isn't it?

I don't think Buddha was an afficionado of corruption, profit, badness, enjoyment, and possession; as the guys of the Enlightenment were*, (and still are) .
Hume's "destruction of the whole world", is not really Buddha's position on how to transcend and escape it.
(*Hegel demolished that nonsense "mobish" and "maraish" philosophy, in few paragraphs (https://justpaste.it/x3ky ).)

Moreover, how can one say this:
There is nothing metaphysical in that, if the Buddha directly experienced it. No synthetic a priori can be found above.
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=39409&p=609225&hil ... ha#p609225

I already acknowledged that what I have just been arguing is based on belief (and analysis of the suttas). This will be the case until I directly experience nibbāna for myself. You might reply with, "but you don't know that will ever happen" to which I would also agree. There is, of course, an element of risk with any trust & faith. It's a risk I'm more than willing to take.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=39030&p=601796&hil ... ha#p601796

-----------

The Buddha taught dependent origination. That is to say, conditionality and causality
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=38333&p=584787&hil ... ha#p584787

--------

The Totality of what can be known and which encompasses everything has had all metaphysics removed from it, and has instead been reduced to direct sense experience.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=39061&p=601779&hil ... ha#p601779
and still talk our ears off with this sense-experience-only, analytical knowledge, and non-causality nonsense.

"Seeker" usually means messy attempts — but does not necessary stand for pretension.
.
.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
Those who desire good are few, and those who desire evil are many.
Buddha
(And you just can't imagine how much goodness, those who desire evil, are ready to display - ToVincent).
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 257
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by pitithefool »

ToVincent wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 9:55 am
Man I wish I knew what you were talking about, but thanks!
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 4533
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by confusedlayman »

Quite secluded from sensuality means 5 sence not there... ita access concentration where body and sence disappear...
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 11720
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by Ceisiwr »

pitithefool wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 1:22 am
ToVincent wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 9:55 am
Man I wish I knew what you were talking about, but thanks!
:rofl:

I see you’ve met ToVincent :tongue:
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: 11720
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by Ceisiwr »

ToVincent wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 9:55 am
"Seeker" usually means messy attempts — but does not necessary stand for pretension.
I see you’ve learnt some Welsh via this translation of my username. This is progress.
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
pitithefool
Posts: 257
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by pitithefool »

Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 6:27 am
Enlightenment era philosophers are not my bag. I'm much more of a formal logic guy myself.

Also, I can't sleep tonight. You're going to get my latest home cooking, starting with

The translation of the first jhana formula should actually read:

"Piti-sukha with vitakka-vicara that arises not due to sensuality or unwholesome states."

I believe this actually has the same semantic content as the original.

I'm cooking up some deductive lines of reasoning too, but I'm probably not going to post those in this thread.

Soon :meditate:
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
ToVincent
Posts: 1186
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by ToVincent »

deleted duplicate.
See below
Last edited by ToVincent on Wed Apr 07, 2021 8:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
Those who desire good are few, and those who desire evil are many.
Buddha
(And you just can't imagine how much goodness, those who desire evil, are ready to display - ToVincent).
ToVincent
Posts: 1186
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by ToVincent »

pitithefool wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 1:22 am
ToVincent wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 9:55 am
Man I wish I knew what you were talking about, but thanks!
Well, you have people on this forum who — not only cannot make the difference between kāmā (objects of sensual pleasures) and bāhirāni āyatanāni (external fields of sensory experience) — but can also indulge heavily into such a ludicrous "ontological relativity", that they can say such ridiculous things like: "Buddhism is not a synthetic a priori" - while at the same time saying: "what I have just been arguing is based on belief (and analysis of the suttas). This will be the case until I directly experience nibbāna for myself. You might reply with, "but you don't know that will ever happen" to which I would also agree. There is, of course, an element of risk with any trust & faith. It's a risk I'm more than willing to take."

Or else, saying that the first four jhanas do not involve the senses - while at the same time advocating that: "the Totality of what can be known, and which encompasses everything, has had all metaphysics removed from it, and has instead been reduced to direct sense experience".

!?!?!?!?!

Bloody messy intellect - isn't it?
How do you want to argue with such a person, whose avatar means "Seeker" in Brittonic (of which I am unfortunately a part of).
Let him seek, without having to endure his pathetic pretentious and dubious sureties.

________

I see no rationale in the suttas WITH PARALLELS, that could have one pretend that the ajjhattikāni āyatanāni cannot experience objects, that do not carry lust (kāma).

By the way, AN 6.63 has no parallel for the extract. The verse is included neither in T57, nor in MA 111.
Expect a dubious discussion, from a dubious extract in a sutta.

________

Also, you're right — Buddhist logic has nothing to do with the logic of the "Universal") Enlightenment — let alone the Goidelic one (of which I am [also,] unfortunately a part of) .
.
.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
Those who desire good are few, and those who desire evil are many.
Buddha
(And you just can't imagine how much goodness, those who desire evil, are ready to display - ToVincent).
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 257
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by pitithefool »

ToVincent wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 8:36 am
You are a wise person indeed, and far above my level of reasoning.

I may post this in the Pali section of the website, but
Would you care to comment on my restatement of the jhana formula and whether it carries the same meaning?

"Piti-sukha with vitakka-vicara that arises but not due to sensuality or unwholesome states."

Because:

"born of seclusion from [kamehi akusala dhammehi]" is equivalent to "not born of union with [kamehi akusaladhammehi]"?

Is it too far of a leap to make that conclusion? If not, I feel it reveals the meaning a little better.

Thank you :anjali:
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 3992
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by Coëmgenu »

pitithefool wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 4:11 pm
frank k wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 3:40 pm Off topic question:
What does your screen name mean? Great name by the way.
Let me know if I guess correctly:
You like a show from the 80's called A-team, and the character Mr. T., a burly huge black guy with a mohawk, gold chains, had the famous catchphrase, "I pity the fool.", that he would say referring to the various criminals he would beat up in each episode, or even his friends on occasion.

So you're turning the phrase from one of mockery and violence into something more akin to mudita and compassion (mudita being closely related to pīti the awakening factor and pāmojja).
Yes exactly thank you lol! :D

I haven't figured out how to do a profile picture but I really want a picture of Mr. T as my profile pic on here.
fa0f5a989feadc476a5c57a8d268da85.jpg
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)
BrokenBones
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by BrokenBones »

Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 6:27 am
pitithefool wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 1:22 am
ToVincent wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 9:55 am
Man I wish I knew what you were talking about, but thanks!
:rofl:

I see you’ve met ToVincent :tongue:
Please keep on topic... no snidey comments please 😋
I'm enjoying this thread... it's like Sylvester is here in spirit... Arupa?
ToVincent
Posts: 1186
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: Can We Hear Sound in Jhāna?

Post by ToVincent »

pitithefool wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 6:53 pm .....
Personally, I translate it: "separating oneself from objects of sensual pleasures".
But that's my take.

Personal jhāna Cheatsheet: https://rentry.co/m3inp
.
.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
Those who desire good are few, and those who desire evil are many.
Buddha
(And you just can't imagine how much goodness, those who desire evil, are ready to display - ToVincent).
Post Reply