Correct method regarding jhana?

The cultivation of calm or tranquility and the development of concentration
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1013
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

retrofuturist wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 5:14 am Greetings,
DooDoot wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:16 pm leigh brasington's ideas are unrelated to any reality of jhana. its too ridiculous to even discuss his superficial views
Agreed. The bloke is a grifter who monetizes the Dhamma for personal profit (despite the Buddha's instruction against doing so) and is woefully lacking in equanimity, as evidenced by his social media activities and his unhealthy aversion towards DW member Cittasanto.

Metta,
Paul. :)
Don't know where these somewhat conceited sounding dismissals of Leigh Brasington come from.

Secondly many secular dhamma teachers charge fees for teaching or 'encourage dana'.

Certainly the method he teaches is a bit different but not fundamentally opposed to the way other teachers describe jhana.

I personally practice according to the method of Ajahn Lee/Fuang/Thannissaro but I can respect his contributions and attainments.

He is also an advanced student of Ayya Khema, who I would certainly rate in practice and insight as above 98% of contributors to this site.

If people follow Leigh's method and have success with it good for them.
Last edited by Cause_and_Effect on Sun Aug 01, 2021 7:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
un8-
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:49 am

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by un8- »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 6:50 am If people follow Leigh's method and have success with it good for them.
Therein lies the problem, what is "success"? People assume orgasmic bodily feelings and flashing lights in their minds means jhanas, which sounds more like to me depraving oxygen to the brain, which actually even Leigh Brasington said that's what he thinks Jhana is, co2 build up. (he says it in the speaker series video on YouTube)

Real Samma Samadhi jhanas have consequences that result in dispassion and knowing and seeing things as they are. They're not some technique you execute.
There is only one battle that could be won, and that is the battle against the 3 poisons. Any other battle is a guaranteed loss because you're going to die either way.
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1013
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

un8- wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 7:08 am
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 6:50 am If people follow Leigh's method and have success with it good for them.
Therein lies the problem, what is "success"? People assume orgasmic bodily feelings and flashing lights in their minds means jhanas, which sounds more like to me depraving oxygen to the brain, which actually even Leigh Brasington said that's what he thinks Jhana is, co2 build up. (he says it in the speaker series video on YouTube)

Real Samma Samadhi jhanas have consequences that result in dispassion and knowing and seeing things as they are. They're not some technique you execute.
Actually I have seen some of his vids, he claims that some of the feelings of jhana come from stimulation of endogenous opioids.

Surprisingly there has been some research in support of his hypothesis

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27039954/

And some others not
https://www.nccih.nih.gov/research/rese ... n-the-body

Athough given the difficulty of evaluating conditions and various types of meditation it would be a hard subject to study.
Still there is some indirrct evidence of opioid agonism in some versions of meditation at least, and perhaps Leigh's method or more accurately Ayya Khemas method accesses this.

Like I said based on the profound depth of insight and authority of a very highly attained master such as Ayya Khema I don't think many here are in any position to critique him.
Certainly when I see the type of lay Pali langauge geeks on here making cursory comments about his practice it is unpleasant to say the least.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by DooDoot »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 6:50 amDon't know where these somewhat conceited sounding dismissals of Leigh Brasington come from.
Leigh Brasington does not teach anything resembling the reality of jhana. That's it. :spy:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 6:50 am Certainly the method he teaches is a bit different but not fundamentally opposed to the way other teachers describe jhana.
There are major differences between what he teaches and the sutta/commentarial teaching, or the teachings of the like of Ajahn Brahm or Sujato.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1013
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

DooDoot wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:41 am
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 6:50 amDon't know where these somewhat conceited sounding dismissals of Leigh Brasington come from.
Leigh Brasington does not teach anything resembling the reality of jhana. That's it. :spy:
And you know this through what? Psychic knowledge?
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by DooDoot »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:42 pm And you know this through what? Psychic knowledge?
The suttas refer to jhana has a superhuman state. What Leigh & you teach can be done by basically anyone. :smile:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1013
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

DooDoot wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 2:00 pm
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:42 pm And you know this through what? Psychic knowledge?
The suttas refer to jhana has a superhuman state. What Leigh & you teach can be done by basically anyone. :smile:
I don't practice according to the Leigh/Ayya Khemma method.

But I do know and respect the practice he teaches and know that it couldn't be done by 'anyone', and very unlikely someone such as you.

However based on my interactions with you thus far, for a Pali langauge nerd largely under the egoic mind with scarecly any practical meditation knowledge, ignorantly slandering highly regarded teachers like Leigh Brasington and by extension, Ayya Khema and accumulating much demerit seems to be almost an unavoidable reflex action for you and to be expected. :?

:focus:
I would be happy to discuss with any legit Dhamma practicioners who feel Leigh's method is not 'legit' Jhana on why they feel that is so and why I believe that to be incorrect.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
un8-
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:49 am

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by un8- »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 8:07 am ...
Like I said based on the profound depth of insight and authority of a very highly attained master such as Ayya Khema I don't think many here are in any position to critique him.
Certainly when I see the type of lay Pali langauge geeks on here making cursory comments about his practice it is unpleasant to say the least.

How do you know she's a master? Did you have access to her mind when she was alive?

How do you know what she attained?

How do you know she attained Samma Samadhi and not some Kundalini technique?

Your post is nothing but shallow assumptions stacked upon more shallow assumptions.
There is only one battle that could be won, and that is the battle against the 3 poisons. Any other battle is a guaranteed loss because you're going to die either way.
User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 3060
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by Pondera »

un8- wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 7:08 am
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 6:50 am If people follow Leigh's method and have success with it good for them.
Therein lies the problem, what is "success"? People assume orgasmic bodily feelings and flashing lights in their minds means jhanas, which sounds more like to me depraving oxygen to the brain, which actually even Leigh Brasington said that's what he thinks Jhana is, co2 build up. (he says it in the speaker series video on YouTube)

Real Samma Samadhi jhanas have consequences that result in dispassion and knowing and seeing things as they are. They're not some technique you execute.
What you’ve mentioned at the end is important. Your Jhana practice means little if it doesn’t lead to “knowledge and vision of things as they really are”; “disenchantment”; “dispassion”; “release”; and “knowledge and vision of ending”.

Little more needs to be said except that samma samadhi is produced (in the first three jhanas) by sukha. Sukha is produced by tranquility. Tranquility by rapture. Rapture by joy. And joy by faith.

The Buddha has not spoken a single thing of “access” concentration. As if there is a “preliminary” type of concentration which may not produce knowledge and vision - but according to Brasington is essential in moving on to “the pleasant sensation” (which from what I’ve read is apparently joy, piti, sukha - with no particular distinction. He kind of lops all three as the “next step” after establishing “access concentration” by attending to the breath).

What Brasington has done is taken Buddha taught Anapanasati - added a term that seemingly takes the place of mindfulness - and then conflates this part
[4] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication.'[3] He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication.'

"[5] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to rapture.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to rapture.' [6] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to pleasure.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to pleasure.' [7] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to mental fabrication.'[4] He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to mental fabrication.' [8] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming mental fabrication.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming mental fabrication.'
With a “pleasant sensation”. Ie. he makes a mess of a well taught meditation method (maybe the ONLY method taught by the Buddha).

Access concentration doesn’t produce rapture. And rapture is to be distinguished from sukha.

In fact joy produces rapture and tranquility produces sukha.

None of the above require “concentration”. They require “letting go”. And (moreover) they PRODUCE concentration. THAT IS THEIR PURPOSE!

🧐
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1013
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

un8- wrote: Mon Aug 02, 2021 7:13 am
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 8:07 am ...
Like I said based on the profound depth of insight and authority of a very highly attained master such as Ayya Khema I don't think many here are in any position to critique him.
Certainly when I see the type of lay Pali langauge geeks on here making cursory comments about his practice it is unpleasant to say the least.

How do you know she's a master? Did you have access to her mind when she was alive?

How do you know what she attained?

How do you know she attained Samma Samadhi and not some Kundalini technique?

Your post is nothing but shallow assumptions stacked upon more shallow assumptions.
The same holds true for your views about whomever's method you follow and indeed anyone who follows any method.

We have our personal practice as a reference.

We can listen to dhamma talks and observe someone's demeanour over time to get a sense of their level of development and insight.

We can cross check what they say with what we see in the suttas and with what other teachers say.

These all contribute to the sense we have or someone's authenticity and attainments.

Ayya Khema herself claimed to have attained to all 8 rupa and arupa jhanas and I personally have confidence in her that she did, although the method I practice is not primarily based in her instruction but I have drawn some insight and advice from her and hold the view that she was very highly attained.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
un8-
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:49 am

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by un8- »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Mon Aug 02, 2021 8:15 am
un8- wrote: Mon Aug 02, 2021 7:13 am
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 8:07 am ...
Like I said based on the profound depth of insight and authority of a very highly attained master such as Ayya Khema I don't think many here are in any position to critique him.
Certainly when I see the type of lay Pali langauge geeks on here making cursory comments about his practice it is unpleasant to say the least.

How do you know she's a master? Did you have access to her mind when she was alive?

How do you know what she attained?

How do you know she attained Samma Samadhi and not some Kundalini technique?

Your post is nothing but shallow assumptions stacked upon more shallow assumptions.
The same holds true for your views about whomever's method you follow and indeed anyone who follows any method.

We have our personal practice as a reference.

We can listen to dhamma talks and observe someone's demeanour over time to get a sense of their level of development and insight.

We can cross check what they say with what we see in the suttas and with what other teachers say.

These all contribute to the sense we have or someone's authenticity and attainments.

Ayya Khema herself claimed to have attained to all 8 rupa and arupa jhanas and I personally have confidence in her that she did, although the method I practice is not primarily based in her instruction but I have drawn some insight and advice from her and hold the view that she was very highly attained.
That's not true. I don't claim to know things about a particular person with the amount of certainty you claim to know, and I certainly don't make the claim that someone is a master.

People make claims all the time about their experiences which they think is an attainment, doesn't mean it's true. As I said in my first response, Brasington may have attained Wrong Jhanas, but not Samma Samadhi, as someone who actually attains Samma Samadhi doesn't have the obsessions about politics and the world, as he does, as Samma Samadhi requires a lifestyle change and seclusion from the world and Right View that is Supermundane.

Furthermore, theres many different interpretations, so how can you know if the person you consider a master has the right interpretation? Take for example the word Parimukkham in Anapanasati, there's like 20 different interpretations and meanings for that word. Some people, like Brasington, think it means focusing on the nose. Not to mention Nimitta, and other ambiguous words. So you're too overconfident in your faith about people who may have the wrong interpretation.

You're basing it all on reputation and claims made by the person.

Your faith doesn't mean you actually know.
There is only one battle that could be won, and that is the battle against the 3 poisons. Any other battle is a guaranteed loss because you're going to die either way.
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1013
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

un8- wrote: Mon Aug 02, 2021 8:32 am
That's not true. I don't claim to know things about a particular person with the amount of certainty you claim to know, and I certainly don't make the claim that someone is a master.

People make claims all the time about their experiences which they think is an attainment, doesn't mean it's true. As I said in my first response, Brasington may have attained Wrong Jhanas, but not Samma Samadhi, as someone who actually attains Samma Samadhi doesn't have the obsessions about politics and the world, as he does, as Samma Samadhi requires a lifestyle change and seclusion from the world and Right View that is Supermundane.

Furthermore, theres many different interpretations, so how can you know if the person you consider a master has the right interpretation? Take for example the word Parimukkham in Anapanasati, there's like 20 different interpretations and meanings for that word. Some people, like Brasington, think it means focusing on the nose. Not to mention Nimitta, and other ambiguous words. So you're too overconfident in your faith about people who may have the wrong interpretation.

You're basing it all on reputation and claims made by the person.

Your faith doesn't mean you actually know.
I think that too many people at the base camp try to form opinions about those who have ascended the mountain. Whether they reached the summit is something they would know, and could discuss with others who have ascended some way.
It is easy to be critical and to make assumptions or interpretations based on the suttas.

As the saying goes, 'the Dhamma is not found in books'.

As said above there can be criteria for forming a valid opinion on a teacher. The rest is up to us, and there is significant overlap in all methods at the earlier stages in any case.

With regards to Leigh and his apparent interest in politics, I would not put that down as an exclusionary factor for his attainments. That is also an assumption. He is a lay person not a monastic and further having been taught by a Theravada nun there is some controversy there itself which can be 'political'.

Furthermore, it may be that one could maintain a worldly identity and personality that is somewhat apart from the mind that attains to jhana. Again, you are not in a position to make such an assumption or not.

For Ayya Khema, she dedicated a significant amount of her life to meditation as a nun and spent years and thousands of hours practicing, far more than most lay people would ever do other than the rare dedicated practicioners, Leigh being one of them.

So again, just put the meditation hours in and worry about your practice according to the method you feel is correct and suitable for you. What others have attained and interpretations of their practice or the suttas can't be resolved fully on an intellectual level anyway.

Imagine if the amount of time that is put into thinking and arguing about different textual interpretations and jhana was instead put into practicing, once one had gained an understanding of the fundamentals.

I can see why the Thai Ajahns give so little instruction and instead would ask you to simply return when the mind can be kept continuously with the breath for an extended period.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Cause_and_Effect wrote: Mon Aug 02, 2021 1:46 pm [It is easy to be critical and to make assumptions or interpretations based on the suttas.

As the saying goes, 'the Dhamma is not found in books'.
If we don’t compare meditation methods, experiences and explanations of the Dhamma in general with the suttas then the Dhamma or Jhana can just mean whatever somebody wants it to mean, which means it’s nothing really at all. The suttas are our standard. If we find something contradicts them then we should reject it. The rather soft “Jhana” that Leigh et al. teach finds little support from said texts, whilst the absorbed models do.

We have to have a way of separating the wheat from the chaff, or all we have instead is a plethora of meaningless “personal truths”.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
shoenhad
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:16 am

Re: Correct method regarding jhana?

Post by shoenhad »

Pondera wrote: Mon Aug 02, 2021 7:36 am
Access concentration doesn’t produce rapture. And rapture is to be distinguished from sukha.
I know bhante gunaratana and others saying jhanic factors do manifest in access concentration.
Post Reply