Jhana

The cultivation of calm or tranquility and the development of concentration
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Jhana

Post by pitithefool »

Pulsar wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:14 pm
"Monks, do not wage wordy warfare, saying: 'You don't understand this Dhamma and discipline, I understand this Dhamma and discipline'; 'How could you understand it? You have fallen into wrong practices: I have the right practice'; 'You have said afterwards what you should have said first, and you have said first what you should have said afterwards'; 'What I say is consistent, what you say isn't'; 'What you have thought out for so long is entirely reversed'; 'Your statement is refuted'; 'You are talking rubbish!'; 'You are in the wrong'; 'Get out of that if you can!'

"Why should you not do this? Such talk, monks, is not related to the goal, it is not fundamental to the holy life, does not conduce to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, tranquillity, higher knowledge, enlightenment or to Nibbana. When you have discussions, monks, you should discuss Suffering, the Arising of Suffering, its Cessation, and the Path that leads to its Cessation. Why is that? Because such talk is related to the goal... it conduces to disenchantment... to Nibbana. This is the task you must accomplish."

— SN 56.9
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Jhana

Post by Pulsar »

pitithefool wrote
When you have discussions, monks,
you should discuss Suffering, the Arising of Suffering, its Cessation,
and the Path that leads to its Cessation. Why is that?
Because such talk is related to the goal... it conduces to disenchantment... to Nibbana. This is the task you must accomplish."
Thank you, did you not realize that this is what I was doing, directing the focus of the thread to the 8-fold path and 4 buddhist jhanas, instead of discussing annihilation or Arupa Samapatthis. Arupas do not lead to the end of suffering, they lead folks to Brama worlds.
  • Eight-fold path and 4 Jhanas
  • These are the procedures, and practices that bring one to the end of suffering, according to the Buddha.
Guess many cannot comprehend the 8-fold path even when described in detail.
Perhaps one reason is this, which Buddha himself points out.
In SN 56.45 Buddha queries Ananda.
What do you think Ananda, which is more difficult and challenging:
to shoot arrows from a distance through a very small keyhole, without missing, or to pierce with the arrowhead the tip of a hair split into seven strands?
How would you answer that question my Dearest pitithefool? OP has laid a clear framework for the discussion.
Do you understand what the discussion is about? If you go the beginning of the thread, you will find out that it is clearly not about annihilation, neither about Arupas.
The Four buddhist jhanas are about doing away with Nama-rupa. Why is it significant?
because it is the naming of the rupa that brings about suffering. But those who have not comprehended the cognitive aspect of Paticca Samuppada will never understand what Right Sati(7th step) or Right samadhi (8th step) are about.
Why is there so much discussion on Arupas on some threads? It is clearly because those who engage in such discussions have not understood what brings about suffering.
It is contact that brings about suffering. The passage you quoted says,
you should discuss Suffering, the Arising of Suffering, its Cessation,
and the Path that leads to its Cessation. Why is that?
Because such talk is related to the goal... it conduces to disenchantment... to Nibbana. This is the task you must accomplish."

With love :candle:
PS at end of SN 56. 45, sutta writes It is more difficult to pierce with the arrowhead the tip of a hair split into seven strands, than to shoot an arrow through a keyhole.
sutta continues
  • "they pierce something even more difficult to pierce who pierce as it really is,
    This is suffering .... this is the way leading to the cessation of suffering"
Quite an eye-opening sutta.
Every sutta in Saccasamyutta ends with
"Therefore Ananda, an exertion should be made to understand, This is suffering ... this is the way leading to the end of suffering"
When people engage in discussions of Annihilation and Arupas they are not exerting that effort.
Saccasamyutta is the concluding Samyutta in the Connected Discourses, and carries the most urgent
message in the entire nikaya.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22390
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Jhana

Post by Ceisiwr »

Pulsar wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:14 pm
The Buddha also seems to have been one (one meaning annihilationist), to begin with
That is what I said, which is different to saying that the Buddha was an annihilationist post awakening. In fact, I said the very opposite of that. You either ignored this, did not fully read what I wrote or simply misread it.

and also you are implying
Their practices were then retained by the Buddha (meaning annihilationist practices) post his awakening, as a valid option for some who are practicing the NEFP and can very possibly be attained without Jhānā.
I'm not implying. I said it explicitly, although I'm somewhat on the fence regarding if the Jhānā are required for the formless. As with the Jhānā, the formless aren't problems in of themselves. It all depends on one's view of things, namely Right View. If you have wrong view then the Jhānā will be "bad" too.
That is very cute, total speculation, right? Papanca in other words, which Buddha was totally against.
It is no more speculative than your position. Discussing the Dhamma is not papañca.
You are basically accusing Buddha of replacing samma samadhi (4 buddhist jhanas, which was his own means of awakening executed via Right view etc) with Saint Alara Kalama's and Saint Uddaka Ramaputtha's methods of Arupa samapatthis. Who needs Christians, jews, islamists when buddhists themselves are doing it to themselves, digging their own graves.
I said nothing of the sort. Once again, you have grasped the wrong end of the stick.
You neither understand the 8-fold path, nor the relevance of four buddhist jhanas in doing away with Nama-rupa.
If I had £1 for every time someone said that on here :roll:
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Fri Mar 12, 2021 11:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22390
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Jhana

Post by Ceisiwr »

Pulsar wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 10:53 pm
Thank you, did you not realize that this is what I was doing, directing the focus of the thread to the 8-fold path and 4 buddhist jhanas, instead of discussing annihilation or Arupa Samapatthis. Arupas do not lead to the end of suffering, they lead folks to Brama worlds.
The Jhānā lead to rebirth as a Deva, if not viewed properly. The different meditations are just tools. What matters is how one views and uses them.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22390
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Jhana

Post by Ceisiwr »

pitithefool wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 6:57 am

This is great :popcorn:
You're welcome.
I have no intention of organizing any of this into coherence, but here are some views that have come to my attention over the years:

1. Jhana is not necessary for Nibbana, only discernment.
Disagree.
2. Jhana is necessary but not formless attainments.
Agree.
3. Specifically, the fourth jhana is necessary, but not the formless attainments.
Disagree. Awakening can occur with just the 1st Jhāna.
4. Jhana AND the formless attainments are necessary and the formless attainments are to be grouped with the process of destroying the asavas (specifically the asava of becoming) often paired with the stock description of three or six higher knowledges at the completion of training
Disagree.
5. Formless attainment can be had without jhana.
On the fence on this one. Check out AN 8.63, which links the 4 brahmavihārās and the Jhānā into one overall mode of practice. In another sutta the brahmavihārās are said to culminate in the formless:
If he wishes: ‘May I dwell perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive and in the repulsive,’ he dwells perceiving the repulsive therein. If he wishes: ‘May I dwell perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive and in the unrepulsive,’ he dwells perceiving the unrepulsive therein. If he wishes: ‘Avoiding both the unrepulsive and the repulsive, may I dwell equanimously, mindful and clearly comprehending,’ then he dwells therein equanimously, mindful and clearly comprehending. Or else he enters and dwells in the deliverance of the beautiful. Bhikkhus, the liberation of mind by lovingkindness has the beautiful as its culmination, I say, for a wise bhikkhu here who has not penetrated to a superior liberation...

If he wishes: ‘May I dwell perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive,’ he dwells perceiving the repulsive therein…. If he wishes: ‘Avoiding both the unrepulsive and the repulsive, may I dwell equanimously, mindful and clearly comprehending,’ then he dwells therein equanimously, mindful and clearly comprehending. Or else, with the complete transcendence of perceptions of forms, with the passing away of perceptions of sensory impingement, with nonattention to perceptions of diversity, aware that ‘space is infinite,’ he enters and dwells in the base of the infinity of space. Bhikkhus, the liberation of mind by compassion has the base of the infinity of space as its culmination, I say, for a wise bhikkhu here who has not penetrated to a superior liberation...

If he wishes: ‘May I dwell perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive,’ he dwells perceiving the repulsive therein…. If he wishes: ‘Avoiding both the unrepulsive and the repulsive, may I dwell equanimously, mindful and clearly comprehending, ’ then he dwells therein equanimously, mindful and clearly comprehending. Or else, by completely transcending the base of the infinity of space, aware that ‘consciousness is infinite,’ he enters and dwells in the base of the infinity of consciousness. Bhikkhus, the liberation of mind by altruistic joy has the base of the infinity of consciousness as its culmination, I say, for a wise bhikkhu here who has not penetrated to a superior liberation...

If he wishes: ‘May I dwell perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive,’ he dwells perceiving the repulsive therein…. If he wishes: ‘Avoiding both the unrepulsive and the repulsive, may I dwell equanimously, mindful and clearly comprehending,’ then he dwells therein equanimously, mindful and clearly comprehending. Or else, by completely transcending the base of the infinity of consciousness, aware that ‘there is nothing,’ he enters and dwells in the base of nothingness. Bhikkhus, the liberation of mind by equanimity has the base of nothingness as its culmination, I say, for a wise bhikkhu here who has not penetrated to a superior liberation.”
https://suttacentral.net/sn46.54/en/bodhi

SN 46.54 is quite a nice one since it weaves the the brahmavihārās, the Jhānā (although not explicitly stated, it does mention samādhi as part of the satta bojjhaṅgā) and the formless into one overall practice. This can bring us back to MN 106, which state that entry into the formless is either via the brahmavihārās, element meditation of some kind of insight into impermanence. Seeing as how the 1 entry into the formless (brahmavihārās) is tied to requiring the Jhānā as per the 2 suttas above, and seeing as how the 4 element practice seems to be a practice in the kasiṇa (and indeed infinite space & consciousness too), then it seems that possible mastery of the 4 Jhānā is required. This is further bolstered if we accept that the Jhānā consist of 1 conceptualisation and 1 conceptualisation only. If that is true, then the Jhānā must proceed the formless (since entry into them is via limiting oneself to 1 concept only, as per the kasiṇa). Still, a problem arises in that A) The Buddha recalled Jhānā from his youth, not from his time with Āḷāra Kālāma & Uddaka Rāmaputta and B) The Cūḷasuññata Sutta has a unitary conceptualisation of a forest etc, which is never explained as being a kasiṇa and it seems to have some measure of lose thought within each step.

Needless to say, it is an interesting topic. I'm still currently pretty wedded to the idea however that Āḷāra Kālāma & Uddaka Rāmaputta were annihilationists, that the Buddha began his career as one and that the formless are a valid option for liberation.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Jhana

Post by pitithefool »

I'll try and trim this as much as possible
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 12:11 am [qoute]
1. Jhana is not necessary for Nibbana, only discernment.
Disagree.
[/quote]

Good. me too
2. Jhana is necessary but not formless attainments.
Agree.
Kindof. I'll explain after I quote you addressing view number 4.
3. Specifically, the fourth jhana is necessary, but not the formless attainments.
Disagree. Awakening can occur with just the 1st Jhāna.
This requires some more explanation. Are we talking about the attainment of arahantship or the attainment of nibbana in general? If we are talking about the former, I'm going to hold the view that mastery of all four jhanas is a requisite of attaining arahantship, but not to attaining nibbana.
4. Jhana AND the formless attainments are necessary and the formless attainments are to be grouped with the process of destroying the asavas (specifically the asava of becoming) often paired with the stock description of three or six higher knowledges at the completion of training
Disagree.
This is the major issue of contention, and it seems that Pulsar wishes us to continue this discussion elsewhere, which I'm OK with, but it's happening here right now. Pulsar, if you are reading this and wish for this discussion to go elsewhere, please point me in the right direction.

Now I commented on your post about the formless attainments (sorry I don't know how to link properly) stating that the way the Buddha taught may have been influenced by the specific tendencies of his students.

That being said, I have to pose a few hypothetical questions: (keep in mind I'm referring to arahantship unless otherwise noted)
If someone already has no desire for non-being, would it be necessary to attain the formless attainments, being that they are annihilationist in nature? I don't know, but I'm starting to think not. It seems reasonable to me to be able to destroy the asava of sensuality through jhana and the asava of becoming (not swaying to the side of non-becoming) through attainment of the fourth jhana and subsequent direction of the mind.

What use do they have then? Again, I'm going back to my point that the Buddha enumerated three types of becoming: becoming in the sense realm, the form realm, and the formless realm. By directly experiencing all of them, one again runs the entire gamut of existence and sees firsthand their conditioned and impermanent nature.
5. Formless attainment can be had without jhana.
On the fence on this one. Check out AN 8.63, which links the 4 brahmavihārās and the Jhānā into one overall mode of practice. In another sutta the brahmavihārās are said to culminate in the formless:
[/quote]

AN 8.63 reminds me very much of a certain Bhante Vimalaramsi who specializes in brahmaviharas.

This is a good segue into the debate about whether metta bhavana can be considered jhana. I think so, you might disagree with me, but I don't really want to get into that too much, because I don't think it matters. From what I've read and practiced over the years, the way the Dhamma was orriginally taught was not meant to be so rigid and standardized but rather more tailored to individuals. The type of discussion we're engaged in here probably has more value in the realm of teaching others than it does in our own practice of meditation.

AN 8.63 to me is a good example of this. I have no idea why it was taught this way. I think from this alone you could soundly argue that brahmaviharas are indeed jhana, and that they can lead directly to the formless and then nibbana. That sounds fine, but it's rather different than how it's taught elsewhere. Does that mean it's wrong? Does not mean the canon is not internally consistent? No, I think it just means the Buddha gave someone a way of understanding the practice that he thought was best for them in their particular circumstance.

In this modern day as we've seen clearly, it really helps us to study the context of the suttas, what came before and after and what spurred on an utterance of the Buddha, especially when many of us don't have teachers to show us a way that works for us. We have to comb through this vast Pali Canon, talk to others, study Pali even and that's still often not enough.

This brings me back to the question of whether or not the formless attainments are necessary, and I think maybe you're right, maybe they aren't. I still choose to include them in my practice for the sake of thoroughness and for all the other reasons I've outlined above. I'm a meditator and I think including the formless attainments is the most surefire way that would probably work for someone like me, while also admitting that I don't possess the confidence that they aren't necessary (for me anyways) required to actually omit them.

[qoute]
Needless to say, it is an interesting topic. I'm still currently pretty wedded to the idea however that Āḷāra Kālāma & Uddaka Rāmaputta were annihilationists, that the Buddha began his career as one and that the formless are a valid option for liberation.
[/quote]

I agree, the evidence definitely points to the Buddha being an annihilationist prior to his Enlightenment.
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Jhana

Post by pitithefool »

I'll try and trim this as much as possible
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 12:11 am
Disagree.
Good. me too
2. Jhana is necessary but not formless attainments.
Agree.
Kindof. I'll explain after I quote you addressing view number 4.
3. Specifically, the fourth jhana is necessary, but not the formless attainments.
Disagree. Awakening can occur with just the 1st Jhāna.
This requires some more explanation. Are we talking about the attainment of arahantship or the attainment of nibbana in general? If we are talking about the former, I'm going to hold the view that mastery of all four jhanas is a requisite of attaining arahantship, but not to attaining nibbana.
4. Jhana AND the formless attainments are necessary and the formless attainments are to be grouped with the process of destroying the asavas (specifically the asava of becoming) often paired with the stock description of three or six higher knowledges at the completion of training
Disagree.
This is the major issue of contention, and it seems that Pulsar wishes us to continue this discussion elsewhere, which I'm OK with, but it's happening here right now. Pulsar, if you are reading this and wish for this discussion to go elsewhere, please point me in the right direction.

Now I commented on your post about the formless attainments (sorry I don't know how to link properly) stating that the way the Buddha taught may have been influenced by the specific tendencies of his students.

That being said, I have to pose a few hypothetical questions: (keep in mind I'm referring to arahantship unless otherwise noted)
If someone already has no desire for non-being, would it be necessary to attain the formless attainments, being that they are annihilationist in nature? I don't know, but I'm starting to think not. It seems reasonable to me to be able to destroy the asava of sensuality through jhana and the asava of becoming (not swaying to the side of non-becoming) through attainment of the fourth jhana and subsequent direction of the mind.

What use do they have then? Again, I'm going back to my point that the Buddha enumerated three types of becoming: becoming in the sense realm, the form realm, and the formless realm. By directly experiencing all of them, one again runs the entire gamut of existence and sees firsthand their conditioned and impermanent nature.
5. Formless attainment can be had without jhana.
On the fence on this one. Check out AN 8.63, which links the 4 brahmavihārās and the Jhānā into one overall mode of practice. In another sutta the brahmavihārās are said to culminate in the formless:

AN 8.63 reminds me very much of a certain Bhante Vimalaramsi who specializes in brahmaviharas.

This is a good segue into the debate about whether metta bhavana can be considered jhana. I think so, you might disagree with me, but I don't really want to get into that too much, because I don't think it matters. From what I've read and practiced over the years, the way the Dhamma was orriginally taught was not meant to be so rigid and standardized but rather more tailored to individuals. The type of discussion we're engaged in here probably has more value in the realm of teaching others than it does in our own practice of meditation.

AN 8.63 to me is a good example of this. I have no idea why it was taught this way. I think from this alone you could soundly argue that brahmaviharas are indeed jhana, and that they can lead directly to the formless and then nibbana. That sounds fine, but it's rather different than how it's taught elsewhere. Does that mean it's wrong? Does not mean the canon is not internally consistent? No, I think it just means the Buddha gave someone a way of understanding the practice that he thought was best for them in their particular circumstance.

In this modern day as we've seen clearly, it really helps us to study the context of the suttas, what came before and after and what spurred on an utterance of the Buddha, especially when many of us don't have teachers to show us a way that works for us. We have to comb through this vast Pali Canon, talk to others, study Pali even and that's still often not enough.

This brings me back to the question of whether or not the formless attainments are necessary, and I think maybe you're right, maybe they aren't. I still choose to include them in my practice for the sake of thoroughness and for all the other reasons I've outlined above. I'm a meditator and I think including the formless attainments is the most surefire way that would probably work for someone like me, while also admitting that I don't possess the confidence that they aren't necessary (for me anyways) required to actually omit them.

Needless to say, it is an interesting topic. I'm still currently pretty wedded to the idea however that Āḷāra Kālāma & Uddaka Rāmaputta were annihilationists, that the Buddha began his career as one and that the formless are a valid option for liberation.
I agree, the evidence definitely points to the Buddha being an annihilationist prior to his Enlightenment.
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Jhana

Post by pitithefool »

I am a mess, did my unedited comment really end up there? Geez
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Jhana

Post by Pulsar »

pitithefool wrote
I am a mess, did my unedited comment really end up there? Geez
Don't worry about it, your comment does far less harm to this discussion and is far less disruptive than people who come here and claim that the four buddhist jhanas was a path to heaven. It is an insult to the Buddha who came up with the Noble path as a means to end suffering.
Heaven was the last thing on his mind as he left his wife and child, to look for an end to suffering.
There was a reason I selected MN 117 as the base for this discussion. It points out what wrong samadhi is and what right samadhi is.
Why would anyone want to discuss wrong Samadhi here unless they were fabulously ignorant, and delighted in their ignorance?
Here is a little story I made up to cheer you up, inspired by SN2.29. Susima.
A small excerpt.. Blessed One says to Ananda
"Do you too, Ananda, approve of Sariputta?
Indeed venerable sir, who would not approve of the Venerable Sariputta, unless he were foolish, full of hatred, deluded, or mentally deranged?
replies Ananda.
Here is my own insertion ...fabulously made up by Pulsar
Blessed One says to Ananda
"Do you too, Ananda, approve of The great Forty"
Indeed venerable sir, who would not approve of the Great Forty (MN 117), unless he were foolish, full of hatred, deluded, or mentally deranged?
Who would ever say you came up with the Great Forty in order to export suffering individuals to heaven?
Just to clarify to those who do not understand the Great Forty, that "The Great Forty" was designed to free the participant from suffering. In SN 4.4 Buddha declares
"By careful attention, by careful striving, I have arrived at unsurpassed liberation"
I am sure he paid that much attention in devising the Noble Path for others too.
My Dearest pitithefool, you had some very valid questions regarding Brahma Vihara, and its relevance to the path, I had addressed this issue before on this thread. When I have some time I will find it and copy and paste it, with some additional notes.
Meanwhile be happy, it seems your intentions in joining the thread were pure, intention is the
most important thing Buddha said, in other words according to Buddha
Intention is Karma
With love :candle:
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Jhana

Post by pitithefool »

Pulsar wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 7:37 pm
My Dearest pitithefool, you had some very valid questions regarding Brahma Vihara, and its relevance to the path, I had addressed this issue before on this thread. When I have some time I will find it and copy and paste it, with some additional notes.
Meanwhile be happy, it seems your intentions in joining the thread were pure, intention is the
most important thing Buddha said, in other words according to Buddha
Intention is Karma
With love :candle:
That is very kind of you to say that Pulsar, thank you :anjali:

In the mean time, I will look back through the thread some more. Ceisiwr and myself have started engaging in new threads as well so we can carry on our discussion there.

:anjali: :anjali: :anjali:
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Jhana

Post by Pulsar »

pitithefool wrote
Ceisiwr and myself have started engaging in new threads as well so we can carry on our discussion there.
I am happy for the both of you. It is sweet of you to conduct that conversation elsewhere, since my primary interest is in the Great forty and Samma Samadhi, and how the Samadhi can be applied to break up Dependent Origination of suffering.
Brahma Vihara plays a crucial role in this endeavor. The second step of the path Samma Samkappa is about
  • renunciation of all cruelty, greed and confusion.
This is where Metta meditation comes in. More on that later.
With love :candle:
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Jhana

Post by pitithefool »

Pulsar wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 10:18 pm
my primary interest is in the Great forty and Samma Samadhi, and how the Samadhi can be applied to break up Dependent Origination of suffering.
Brahma Vihara plays a crucial role in this endeavor. The second step of the path Samma Samkappa is about
  • renunciation of all cruelty, greed and confusion.
This is where Metta meditation comes in. More on that later.
With love :candle:
I will do some more reading. It's been some time since I read the Great Forty, but I remember it being one of my favorites. This way I'll be able to see if I can add anything of use here.

Thanks again, you're very kind :anjali:
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Jhana

Post by Pulsar »

Defending Buddha and the Ten-Fold Path leading to the end of suffering. There were people 2600 years or more ago as there are now, who accused the Buddha of being an
annihilationist,
an abolitionist, a do nothing person or a proponent of non-doing. Even though the Buddha rejected the methods of Alara kalama & company they were built back into the path, a new 10-fold path created but these methods would be wrong meditations based on the definition of Samma samadhi by the founder. He limited Samma Samadhi to the 4 buddhist Jhanas.
After the Founder's passing away, ensuing events lead to many conflicts.
There were some who believed that every sutta in the canon was purely Buddha's teaching.
Stacking the Arupas atop the four jhanas would create holes in the understanding of Dependent Origination basically making Buddhism a false religion.
If Buddha did that, surely that was no way to end suffering. 
  • Via right Jhana one reaches cessation, or undoes the karmic consciousness,
then the same meditator resorting to Arupas would retrieve that karmic consciousness (which is ceased) to build fancy mansions of states of consciousness created by Alara Kalama and company, in order to undo karmic consciousness a second time? Does this make sense?
Let us retrieve a sutta from the canon that is honest. It refers to Nibbana but only refers to the 4 buddhist jhanas, true to the 8-fold/10fold path.
Some suttas were left uncorrupted, I am  thankful to those sensible compilers.
Taking a sensible example from the Great Chapter of the Book of Eights. AN 8.11 Veranja
A limited edition:
Brahmin Veranja approaches Buddha and says,
"You have been accused of being a an annihilationist, an abolitionist, a do nothing person or a proponent of non-doing"
Buddha's calm response 
"True Gotama is an annihilationist."
For I assert the annihilation of lust, hatred, and delusion"
 
"True Gotama is an abolitionist"'
"For I teach the dhamma for the abolition of lust, hatred, and delusion"
"True Gotama is a proponent of non-doing."
"For I assert the non-doing of bodily, verbal, and mental misconduct"
To make story short, this brief comment intends
  • to silence those who declare that Buddha was an annihilationist,
abolitionist, and a proponent of non-doing. 
Dear Buddha, if you could hear me, I want you to know that there are those of us who understand the one human being that tread this world that was worth its salt, 
  • "the beast of burden"
stone splinter, SN 1.38
Lead us away from suffering.
With love  :candle:
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22390
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Jhana

Post by Ceisiwr »

Pulsar wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 1:35 pm ...
You really need to start reading other people’s posts better, as your comment here is nothing but a massive straw man. No one here said the Buddha was an annihilationist post awakening. I specifically said he likely started out as one. If it makes it easier for you I could rephrase it as Gotama started out as an annihilationist whilst the Buddha was not. In other words, he stopped being one when he awakened. I actually said this myself, when I said that I suspect part of his awakening was seeing how his annihilationist views still tethered him to existence.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Jhana

Post by pitithefool »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 2:28 pm
Pulsar wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 1:35 pm ...
You really need to start reading other people’s posts better, as your comment here is nothing but a massive straw man. No one here said the Buddha was an annihilationist post awakening. I specifically said he likely started out as one. If it makes it easier for you I could rephrase it as Gotama started out as an annihilationist whilst the Buddha was not. In other words, he stopped being one when he awakened. I actually said this myself, when I said that I suspect part of his awakening was seeing how his annihilationist views still tethered him to existence.
For real though
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
Post Reply