That would seem odd for "A Buddhist discussion forum on the Dhamma of Theravāda Buddhism". To move to "connections to other paths"
Is this the first time anyone suggested on DW that a conversation be moved to "connections to other paths?"
In fact on this very same thread Ven. Dhammnando suggested that a conversation happening right here be moved to "Connections to other paths". To clarify himself he reposted my OP, which was very kind of him. Under that reposting on March 27/2021 he also wrote
Anyone wishing to discuss jhāna in relation to Hindu methods are invited to start a new thread in Connections to other Paths.
Pl read the OP again.
The OP is about MN 117. The jhana involved relies on the aforementioned path. I admitted in the OP my own flaw, that I find it harder to stick to Right speech as defined in MN 117. Speech is an impulsive thing, sometimes folks identify a joke as a sign of aggression.
Thus speech can be tricky. "Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder." Aggression could be likewise. In fact a friend on DW on another thread, once wrote
Neither for Pulsar (who was just joking), or for myself (who could care less).
Speech is not always well thought out, hence it is more likely to be flawed, I admit.
Ceiswer et al insists on this thread, the Jhāna are not unique to Buddha.
Do you think the jhana that belongs in the 8-fold path was practiced in pre-Buddha times? This thread is based on the Pali canon.
Can you bring me a single sutta from the Pali canon, where the text identifies anything other than the fine material jhanas as jhana?
Pali canon is not without flaws, but this is one instance where the compilers maintained consistency.
- In the Pali canon only the four fine material jhanas, via which Buddha awoke are called Jhana.
Commentaries may present other narratives, but this thread is not about the commentaries.
Do you believe there were pre-buddhist meditations that were compliant with the eight-fold path?
If so, why is Buddha given credit for finding a path to the end of suffering?
- End of suffering is an All or None matter in my eyes.
People interpret suttas in multiple ways.
Could it be because some do not have a firm foundation on Dependent origination unique to the Buddha?
Recently I read Migajala sutta, SN 35.63 and it struck me that it was a teaching on Dependent Origination, even though not a single word in the sutta says so.
In fact some folks speculate that the intention of Migajala is to deflate the conceit of those who think physical withdrawal from the world is the solution to one's woes. But folks who understand DO see it as clear teaching on Paticca Samuppada. The synopsis of the sutta may be...
One who can block the entry of nimittas, upon sight, sound etc are able to block the admission of suffering.
One lives without a companion, amidst crowds of people, on the internet, (a modern version of it might say).
Posting on the internet does not mean there is something flawed about the practitioner.
Goal of Samma sati and Samma samadhi is to 'live alone'.
The chinese translation of Migajala ends with,
is a companion, and one who has given it up, is therefore called 'dwelling alone', or 'living alone'
Thirsty love in other words is craving.
I shall answer your comment regarding VSM as I find the time.
However let me remind the readers, the OP is about the 8 or 10 fold path. OP does not include commentary.
If one wants to bring up other meditations, and commentary, i also have a thread on DW viewtopic.php?f=13&t=34797
"Misconceptions regarding Jhana"
Any meditation that does not involve Noble path, may be discussed under that thread.
PS From my previous thread "Between Jhana and Satipatthana is there a big differenceviewtopic.php?f=13&t=34789
Buddha in SN 47.6 "Do not stray outside your own resort into the domain of others, Mara will gain access to those who stray outside their own resort into the domain of others... Move in your own ancestral domain"
It is possible to withdraw into our ancestral domain even as we post on the www, as stated