Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

The cultivation of calm or tranquility and the development of concentration
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2106
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by Assaji »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 4:49 pm You’ll be amazed how many times I have to stress that I’m not relying on the commentaries regarding this matter.
Well, I respect the Theravādin Commentary, and since this is a Theravada forum, it can be of interest to the participants of this thread.
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 4:49 pmI believe the Vimuttimagga also offers a similar description, but then on another page allows for the attainments to be free of the 5 senses.
The Vimuttimagga (pp. 113-114) handles this issue wisely, stating that the cessation of five-sense perception occurs in the formless attainments:
That yogin "by passing entirely beyond perception of form, by the disappearance of the perception of impact, by being freed from attention to perceptions of diversity, thinking, 'Infinite is space', enters into and abides in the sphere of infinite space.

"Entirely" means without remainder. "By passing beyond perception of form": What is perception of form? The perception, the perceiving, the state of having perceived pertaining to one who dwells in the concentration of the form-element — these are called perception of form. "Passing beyond" means the surpassing of this. "By the disappearance of the perception of impact": What is the perception of impact? The perception of visible objects, of sounds, of odours, of flavours, and of tangibles — these are called the perception of impact. "Disappearance" means the ending of these various kinds of (impact-) perception. "By being freed from attention to perceptions of diversity": What are perceptions of diversity? The perception, the perceiving, the state of having perceived pertaining to one who has not attained to concentration and who is endowed with the mind element and the consciousness element — these are called perceptions of diversity. "Freed from attention to perceptions of diversity" means that one is freed from attending to these perceptions of diversity.

Q. Why is it that only the surpassing of perception is taught and not the surpassing of feeling, formations and consciousness?

A. If a man passes beyond perception of form, he passes beyond all the others; and if a man is not freed from perception of form, his mind is not capable of passing beyond the others. Hence the Blessed One taught the surpassing of perception of form with the intention of setting forth the surpassing of all form-objects, because all (form) objects of concentration are dependent on perception.

Q. If that does not happen (i.e., if he does not transcend the perception of form) is there or is there not perception of impact and diversity?

A. There is the perception of impact and diversity in form concentration, because these are removed (later).

Q. Why does he not proceed further in that concentration?

A. He dislikes form, therefore, he does not remove (these perceptions) in that (concentration). This is according to the teaching of the Buddha which says that, owing to the non-removal of these (perceptions of impact) in that (form concentration), sound is a thorn to one entering the first meditation, jhāna. Thus disliking form, he goes further. He destroys them here. Therefore, he attains to the imperturbability of the formless attainment and the peacefulness of liberation. Alara Kalama and Uddaka Ramaputta when they entered the formless attainment, did not see nor hear those five hundred carts passing and repassing. Therefore, it is taught as the destruction of the (sense) spheres; and thus, surpassing of all form perception is taught as the destruction of the form states and the perception of impact. "By being freed from attention to perceptions of diversity" means the destruction of the sense states. Again, the surpassing of all form perception is taught as the attainment of the realm of the formless. The disappearance of the perception of impact is taught as the destruction of the outer disturbance to that concentration (of the formless) and the purification of imperturbability. "Freed from attention to perceptions of diversity" is taught as destruction of the inner disturbance to that concentration and the purification of the peacefulness of liberation.
https://archive.org/details/ArahantUpat ... 5/mode/2up

This fully accords with the earliest and most reliable explanation given in the Vibhaṅga (sorry, no English translation):
602. “sabbaso rūpasaññānaṃ samatikkamā””ti tattha katamā rūpasaññā? rūpāvacarasamāpattiṃ samāpannassa vā upapannassa vā diṭṭhadhammasukhavihārissa vā saññā sañjānanā sañjānitattaṃ — imā vuccanti “rūpasaññāyo”. imā rūpasaññāyo atikkanto hoti vītikkanto samatikkanto. tena vuccati “sabbaso rūpasaññānaṃ samatikkamā””ti.

603. “paṭighasaññānaṃ atthaṅgamā”ti tattha katamā paṭighasaññā? rūpasaññā saddasaññā ... pe ... phoṭṭhabbasaññā — imā vuccanti paṭighasaññāyo. imā paṭighasaññāyo santā honti samitā vūpasantā atthaṅgatā abbhatthaṅgatā appitā byappitā sositā visositā byantīkatā. tena vuccati “paṭighasaññānaṃ atthaṅgamā”ti.

604. “nānattasaññānaṃ amanasikārā”ti tattha katamā nānattasaññā? asamāpannassa manodhātu samaṅgissa vā manoviññāṇadhātu samaṅgissa vā saññā sañjānanā sañjānitattaṃ — imā vuccanti “nānattasaññāyo”. imā nānattasaññāyo na manasi karoti. tena vuccati “nānattasaññānaṃ amanasikārā”ti.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by Ceisiwr »

Assaji wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 5:46 pm
Well, I respect the Theravādin Commentary, and since this is a Theravada forum, it can be of interest to the participants of this thread.
I too respect them and it is of course appropriate to refer to them on this forum. It’s also appropriate to depart from them if we see them to be departing from the suttas. This is perfectly in line with the 4 levels of authority, according to classical Theravada.
The Vimuttimagga (pp. 113-114) handles this issue wisely, stating that the cessation of five-sense perception occurs in the formless attainments:
And on another page, if I recall correctly, it offers one of the definitions of “secluded from kāmā” to be seclusion from the 5 senses. I agree that the formless are without experience of the 5 senses, but it does then follow that the jhānā are of them.
This fully accords with the earliest and most reliable explanation given in the Vibhaṅga (sorry, no English translation):
You can find an English translation at suttacentral. Quote a lot of the Theravadin Abdhidhamma is on there now.
“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: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by pitithefool »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 5:57 pm
And on another page, if I recall correctly, it offers one of the definitions of “secluded from kāmā” to be seclusion from the 5 senses. I agree that the formless are without experience of the 5 senses, but it does then follow that the jhānā are of them.
Bro I'm sorry.

I'll use the wording of the relevant suttas here, in the Mahavedalla sutta"
Trying to conclude that "if the formless attainments are 'divorced from the five senses', then the four jhanas must be without sense contact" is patently unsound. I'm honestly not sure how you could come to this conclusion, especially given the information in this sutta.

Further, that same sutta uses this verbiage to describe just what is abandoned upon entry into this first jhana:
Five factors are abandoned in the first jhana, and with five is it endowed. There is the case where, in a monk who has attained the first jhana, sensual desire is abandoned, ill will is abandoned, sloth & torpor is abandoned, restlessness & anxiety is abandoned, uncertainty is abandoned. And there occur directed thought, evaluation, rapture, pleasure, & singleness of mind. It's in this way that five factors are abandoned in the first jhana, and with five it is endowed.
Please note the conspicuous absence of "contact at the senses", or even the word Kamehi. Rather, the word Kamacchando (lit. sensual desire) is used here, along with the other 4 of the nivarana.

Nowhere in the sutta pitaka does it say that "contact at the 5 senses ceases upon entry into the first jhana".
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
suaimhneas
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:02 am

Re: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by suaimhneas »

Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 12:31 pm
Without relying upon either the Abhidhamma of the Visuddhimagga we have suttas which state the following:

1. Whilst in any jhānā there is seclusion from the external kāmā.

2. Whilst in any jhānā there is no saññāmanasikārā.

3. Whilst in the 1st jhāna sound is a thorn, like pain is to happiness.

Analytically it follows from point 1 that when in any jhānā there is no experience of external kāmā. It also follows analytically from point 2 that whilst in any jhānā there is 1 conception/perception only, not many. Taken together the conclusion is that the 5 senses are not experienced in any jhānā. Regarding point 3 it states that just like how pain is a thorn to happiness, sound is a thorn to the 1st jhāna. If we look to the Mahānidāna sutta we find that a person can only experience 1 type of vedanā at a time:
Though, since AN10.72 is being quoted, doesn't the part there shortly after:
To one in the fourth jhana, in breathing and out breathing is a thorn.
most likely imply an awareness of breathing, at least, in this progression? It seems hard to me to imagine something being a thorn if one is not even aware of it (or that it has stopped). It solves some problems otherwise if breathing at least is excluded from any definition of "external kāmā", e.g., the possibility of jhana as part of anapanasati practice isn't ruled out.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by Ceisiwr »

suaimhneas wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 9:35 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 12:31 pm
Without relying upon either the Abhidhamma of the Visuddhimagga we have suttas which state the following:

1. Whilst in any jhānā there is seclusion from the external kāmā.

2. Whilst in any jhānā there is no saññāmanasikārā.

3. Whilst in the 1st jhāna sound is a thorn, like pain is to happiness.

Analytically it follows from point 1 that when in any jhānā there is no experience of external kāmā. It also follows analytically from point 2 that whilst in any jhānā there is 1 conception/perception only, not many. Taken together the conclusion is that the 5 senses are not experienced in any jhānā. Regarding point 3 it states that just like how pain is a thorn to happiness, sound is a thorn to the 1st jhāna. If we look to the Mahānidāna sutta we find that a person can only experience 1 type of vedanā at a time:
Though, since AN10.72 is being quoted, doesn't the part there shortly after:
To one in the fourth jhana, in breathing and out breathing is a thorn.
most likely imply an awareness of breathing, at least, in this progression? It seems hard to me to imagine something being a thorn if one is not even aware of it (or that it has stopped). It solves some problems otherwise if breathing at least is excluded from any definition of "external kāmā", e.g., the possibility of jhana as part of anapanasati practice isn't ruled out.
I take this text to be referring to absorption via ānāpānasati. On such a reading, attendance to the physical breath (rather than the conceptual image) would be a thorn to the attainment since it is a return to diverse conceptual attentions (saññāmanasikārā). As AN. 934 states that saññāmanasikārā is an obstacle to any attainment, and since MN 28 has attention being a key ingredient in experiencing the 5 sense (no attention, no experience of them) it follows that all attainments are without experience of the 5 senses. That, of course, coupled with the pericope for the very 1st Jhāna:

Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu vivicceva kāmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi savitakkaṁ savicāraṁ vivekajaṁ pītisukhaṁ paṭhamaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati.

With "kāmehi" being external sense objects. I've recently wrote some further thoughts regarding this, which I will share here:

“Na te kāmā yāni citrāni loke"

Na = Not

Te = those

Kāmā = ?

yāni = whichever

citrāni = ?

loke = world

AN 6.63

You will notice that I have placed a ? in relation to "citrāni". The reason being that it can have slightly different meanings. If we look at the definition given in the Concise Pali Dictionary we find the following:
Citra : (nt.) mind; thought; (m.), name of a month: March-April. (adj.), variegated; manifold; beautiful. (nt.), a painting; picture.
Now, "citrāni" is found in the text in question. It can either be a noun or adjective in the nominative or accusative case. Since being a noun in the nominative or accusative case would mean "mind", "thought" or "month", which clearly doesn't apply here, we are left with an adjective. It is describing something. By contrast "kāmā" here is a noun in the nominative plural case. It can only be an adjective when it is in suffix form. Since citrāni is an adjective and since kāmā is a noun, kāmā is the subject of the sentence. With this in mind we can then only read the sentence as either:

Not those citrāni [adj.] kāmā [noun] whichever are in the world.

Not those pretty kāmā whichever are in the world.

Or as:

Not those manifold kāmā whichever are in the world.

If you doubt this 2nd usage of citrāni please note that Ven. Sujato also recognises this use of "citrāni", albeit in a different text:

Kāmā hi citrā madhurā manoramā,
Sensual pleasures are diverse, sweet, delightful,


https://suttacentral.net/thag5.1/en/sujato

Of course, I would change this myself to:

Kāmā hi citrā madhurā manoramā,
"Because sensual objects are diverse, sweet, delightful"


From all of this it is clear that the grammar of the Pāli has kāmā as being external things, rather than "sensual pleasures". They are described as being either "pretty" or "manifold" and are in the world. Given the findings by Ven. Anālayo and many others regarding verse being the ancient core and prose being a commentary, for suttas with verse and prose, we have a strong case for accepting kāmā as being external objects. So to reiterate the 1st Jhāna is secluded from external objects. We also know that instead of saññāmanasikārā there needs to be 1 singular conceptual attention. From MN 28 we are further informed that in order for any sense experience to occur, attention is required. If there is 1 conceptual attention only then the other normal conceptual attentions such as hearing etc will not be experienced. From all of these bits of evidences it then follows that all of the Jhānā, not just the formless, are states where ordinary 5 sense consciousness does not occur. Regarding the formless themselves what is transcended is rūpa which is closer to "image" than "matter", unless of course you follow the Abhidhamma line.
“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.”
BrokenBones
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by BrokenBones »

Ceisiwr...[quote wrote:
Seems very convoluted. The peasant farmers receiving the teaching must have had a hard time grasping the nuances. All the talk about body, toes, heads and sensual desires would have had them thinking one thing while the Buddha meant another. Good that Ven Sujato cleared things up.
The simple answer is generally the best... grammatical gymnastics is generally a sign of having a wish to prove something that is, is not and vice versa...

If wishes were horses, beggars would ride...

If body meant mind and sensual desire meant the five senses... then a blind, deaf, anaphia & ageusia sufferer with no nose would rest resplendent in jhana.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by Ceisiwr »

BrokenBones wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 10:35 pm
Seems very convoluted. The peasant farmers receiving the teaching must have had a hard time grasping the nuances. All the talk about body, toes, heads and sensual desires would have had them thinking one thing while the Buddha meant another.
The “peasant farmers” as you put it would have been told that to enter jhāna they need to seclude themselves from the 5 senses by training the mind to focus on 1 conception and of course, they wouldn’t be foolish enough to mistake a clear smilie for an exact comparison. Since we are removed in time speaking in a different language and reading texts that have been stripped down it is absolutely essential to A) Read all of the texts in context, rather than focus on 1 and B) Have a understanding of the actual language both in terms of definitions and grammar. Understanding the context and how smilies, analogies and metaphors work is also obviously important. This leads to an understanding of the text and so, what the Buddha taught.
The simple answer is generally the best... grammatical gymnastics is generally a sign of having a wish to prove something that is, is not and vice versa...
This is completely wrong headed. A study of the grammar and language clarifies. Nothing in my post was “gymnastics”. I merely translated the sentence according to dictionary definitions and the grammar present. However, those who offer nothing but personal incredulity and snide remarks often have the weakest position. If they actually had an argument they wouldn’t have to rely upon them.
If body meant mind and sensual desire meant the five senses... then a blind, deaf, anaphia & ageusia sufferer with no nose would rest resplendent in jhana.
What would be missing would be the wholesome intentions of vitakka-vicāra, that is to say directed and sustained thought based on seclusion. They would also not be able to generate a stable conceptual image. Of course, you could apply your argument to the formless. Why don’t you? From a Dhammic point of view mere absence of the senses does not lead to an attainment. A tamed and trained mind is key. That being said, I’m not aware of any case of injury or birth defect where all senses are totally absent.
“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.”
waryoffolly
Posts: 346
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by waryoffolly »

Now that’s odd. It looks like the singular form of kamo has to switch meanings for the first two verses!

The first verse has (based on Bhikkhu Bodhi’s translation) desiring sensual pleasure where sensual pleasure is in the singular and clearly needs to be referring to the kamaguna, else we’d be desiring desires! (So here singular form of kama is referring to external beautiful sense objects in the first verse)

But in the second verse kama in singular cannot be referring to the kamaguna, because a person cannot be “full of the kamaguna”, so instead it has to mean sense desire here. (So here the singular must be referring to desires of sensuality and cannot mean external sense objects.)

So the meaning of kama in the singular for both the first and second verse has to switch from roughly kamguna -> sense desire! Ceiswir do you have any thoughts on this?


For the plural form in the third verse I doubt it means external senses in general, but probably means kamaguna since one is avoiding them. This is very explicit in the fourth verse. So from this poem kaamaa in plural means roughly the kamaguna, but the singular form seems to mean either kamaguna or sense desire itself.

Also, why does this only have six verses if it’s in the octads?
waryoffolly
Posts: 346
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by waryoffolly »

Later on in the octads in Magandiya Sutta Verse 10 we have “ Kāmehi ritto apurakkharāno” which Bhikkhu Bodhi translates as “void of sensual pleasures, without preferences”. So here’s another plural form of kama, but in this case it most definitely cannot be external beautiful sense objects (kamaguna), but must mean sense desires instead- a person can’t be “void of beautiful sense objects”! Unless the pali here is being oddly figurative or something...

So combined with my previous post this suggests that the plural form of kama can mean both the kamaguna and sense desires depending on the context.

Which means that kama regardless of in plural or singular can have either meaning depending on the context. Ie kama in singular and plural can mean sense desire(s) or beautiful external sense objects.... weird, maybe there’s something incorrect with my reasoning here?
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by pitithefool »

Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 12:31 pm
I mean this with with a loving heart, dear friend,

Your argument seems to read

1. Kama(pl) means pretty external sense objects, and vivicceva means seclusion [?]
2. Sound is a "thorn to jhana"[?]
3. Na te kama citrani loke means not whatever diverse kama there are in there world[?]
4. Sannamanasikara is a "thorn to jhana" [?]
5. Ven Analayo agrees with your reading of Kama [?]
6. The formless attainments or of one perception [?]
7. Rupa somehow does not mean matter but "image"[?!]
Therefore, there is no contact at the five senses.

This is probably a partial list, but the thing that glares at me is that a lot of the premises can be better explained with other means, do not provide any support to your conclusion or aren't relevant[?] and some of them just aren't true. [!?]

Still though, the suttas provide that your conclusion could be a valid form of jhana practice, but what I'm more interested in is seeing how it works to get rid of Tanha. I've given explanations on how the non-absorbed model does this and how vipassana and all of the path factors are present therein. What is yours? How does not having contact at the senses end craving and how does it do it better than the non-absorbed model?
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: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by pitithefool »

pitithefool wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 2:14 am
Here, I'm going to enumerate some of my premises in a similar way, just so you don't think I'm trying to set up a strawman.

1. Vivicceva kamehi does not equate to no contact at the senses
2. The sutta pitaka contains references to meditators hearing sound while in jhana
3. The bathman, lake, lotus pond and head-to-toe cloth simile most likely refers to the physical body
4. It provides a better framework for explaning how tanha is extinguished
5. Tanha is directly conditioned by feeling, so piti-sukha is of paramount importance to contact.
6. Piti can arise due to a wide variety of dhamma-vicaya, including contemplation of salayatana, which is naturally outside of sensuality and unskillful states because it is not connected with seeking pleasure directly from contact at the five senses.
Therefore, can be allowable and the non-absorbed model stands (but this does not mean the absorbed model is incorrect)

I can actually extract a pretty solid deductive line out of this and I've heard these same arguments used quite a bit:

A. If the suttas are telling the truth, and there are suttas stating that one can hear sound while in jhana or that multiple perceptions occur in jhana, then the non-absorbed model stands.
B. If the suttas are telling the truth and there are suttas which describe not hearing sound while in jhana, or that there is only one perception in jhana, then the absorbed model stands.
C. If both A and C are true, the both models are true and neither models are false.

Another one:

A.The mahavedalla sutta describes the entry into jhana as marked by the arising of the five jhana factors and the falling away of the five hindrances.
B. If a concentration satisfies those requirements, then according to the sutta, one is in the first jhana.
C. If a concentration that satisfies those requirements comes about while including contemplation of salayatana or anapanasati, then one is in the first jhana.
D. If the above statements are true and salayatana or anapanasati contemplation involves observing contact originating from the five senses, then one is in a first jhana which includes contact at the five senses, according to the Mahavedalla sutta.

If all of the deductive lines above are valid and true, then both modes of pravtice must be correct.
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
suaimhneas
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:02 am

Re: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by suaimhneas »

*Duplicate post removed*
Last edited by suaimhneas on Wed Apr 07, 2021 10:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
suaimhneas
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:02 am

Re: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by suaimhneas »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 9:50 pm
I take this text to be referring to absorption via ānāpānasati. On such a reading, attendance to the physical breath (rather than the conceptual image) would be a thorn to the attainment since it is a return to diverse conceptual attentions (saññāmanasikārā). As AN. 934 states that saññāmanasikārā is an obstacle to any attainment, and since MN 28 has attention being a key ingredient in experiencing the 5 sense (no attention, no experience of them) it follows that all attainments are without experience of the 5 senses. That, of course, coupled with the pericope for the very 1st Jhāna:

Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu vivicceva kāmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi savitakkaṁ savicāraṁ vivekajaṁ pītisukhaṁ paṭhamaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati.

With "kāmehi" being external sense objects. I've recently wrote some further thoughts regarding this, which I will share here:

...

I've previously seen the Pali-based arguments regarding "vivicceva kāmehi” etc. I have little Pali so the ins-and-outs of that particular line of argumentation is beyond my pay grade! :) Though, when I did see this argument in the past, this objection on breathing did come to mind. I did ask then, how is this consistent with the AN10.72 "thorns" sutta. IIRC the answer I received was that breath in this sutta is one of a number of a preconditions to jhana and that giving up of the breath or bodily formation could happen outside of jhana (perhaps between such states or before?).

However, the association between fourth jhana and cessation of breathing is reasonably well attested in the suttas (I can think of five places in the suttas where this is evident and I haven't done an exhaustive search), which weakens the argument of it happening outside of jhana. Also, I don't think limiting it to anapanasati holds up (perhaps for AN10.72 but not for all five suttas). Apart from direct references in AN10.72, SN41.6 and AN9.31, MN44 and SN36.11 pretty much imply it also. They describe the successive cessation of the verbal, bodily and mental formations as a practitioner goes through the four jhanas and higher attainments. The bodily formation is defined in these as the physical process of breathing. Even if the earlier three suttas didn't exist, then since the verbal formation hasn't truly ceased until the second jhana, then cessation of the breath (bodily formation) logically has to come at this point, or more plausibly later. Of course, given the three earlier suttas, IMO the likely cessations points would be quietening of the bodily formation at 1st jhana and full cessation at the 2nd jhana with "noble silence" being referred there in other suttas, quietening of the bodily formation at the 4th jhana and full cessation at the 1st immaterial attainment, and quiescence of the mental formation at the state of neither-perception-nor-non-perception and its full cessation in the state of the cessation of feeling and perception. Having this messy physical process, breathing, as a marker of the fourth jhana does appear to be a reasonably well-attested aspect of jhana in the suttas.

Of course, what cessation of breathing actually means is another question. Some have interpreted this as cessation of perception of breathing (though just breathing itself seems likelier). Or maybe it means that breath becomes too subtle to be detected by the meditator. Anyway, I don't think this really matters either way to my question.

The Pali based arguments may well be reasonable but I've previously wondered, well, then why then do we have this fourth jhana association with physical breathing? I guess a possible fix would be that others can observe this, e.g. someone comes out of meditation where he was in the fourth jhana and a fellow monastic tells them that their breathing stopped there for a while (hence the link is established because of external observation). Logically possible, I guess, if rather convoluted. Another possibility is that the emphatic "eva" in "vivicceva kāmehi” is not absolute. Or maybe "kāmehi", whatever it is, doesn't exclude perception of physical breathing (because even if it is a bodily sense, it is internal?). Anyway, I've never really received a satisfactory explanation to this tension between these five suttas and this "vivicceva kāmehi” Pali-based argument. To me, the simplest explanation is that perception of breathing is still there (at least before the fourth jhana).

Finally, I had a quick look at AN. 934 (AN9.34 I presume) and MN 28 but didn't really follow your argument there. Specifically what bits of those are you referring to?
ToVincent
Posts: 1839
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: Proposed solution to the Jhana Wars debate

Post by ToVincent »

On thorns:

Let's take the quite perfect parallel in MA 84.
... to one cultivating loving-kindness, anger is a thorn; to one abstaining from liquor, drinking liquor is a thorn; to one leading a celibate life, looking at the female form is a thorn; to one entering the first absorption, noise is a thorn...
We see that one is in a particular state, and gets pricked by the corresponding thorn.

The same goes for AN 10.72.
E. g. "Seeing shows, is a thorn to someone restraining the senses."
In that example, one is in the state of sense-restraint, and gets pricked (distracted) by the thorn of seeing a show.

In the same way, one is in the state of the first jhana — then get pricked by the thorn of a sound.

I would therefore abstain from poor reading (and logic), that could lead to crummy deductions like: " it follows that all attainments are without experience of the 5 senses".

_______

Also, nirodha does not always mean "cessation" — but can also just mean "restraint".
.
.
In this world, there are many people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; and very few for the Unborn.
Post Reply