Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

The cultivation of calm or tranquility and the development of concentration
arkaprava
Posts: 129
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2019 12:13 pm

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by arkaprava »

“My body does become wonderfully light

(lahuko), on having been permeated by

(phuṭṭho) abundant (vipulena) zestful

happiness (pītisukhena).

Like unto cotton (tūla) moved (erita)

By the wind (nāluta), my body does but

float about (pilavati). - Translation by K.R Norman”
There, lahuko vata me kāyo means: my bodily form (rūpakāya) happens to be wonderfully (vata) light (sallhuka) by me putting a stop to (vikkhambana) the hindrances (nīvarana). etc., taming my mind by means of fourteen methods as well as by the excellent mastery (suṭṭhu cinnavasībhāva) of the development (bhāvanā) of four foundations of magical powers (iddhipāda); by means of which I turn to proper use (perināmemi) of this putrid body (karajakāya) which is slow (dandha) and known as also grounded on (paccaya) the four great elements (mahābhūta); thus, is the significance. Phuṭṭho ca pītisukhena vipulena means: my body had been permeated with immense happiness accompanied by enormous ecstatic zest, pervading everywhere; thus, is the interpretation. This also, according as the body became light, it has been said for the purpose of showing the same. Indeed, there is reaching of the sense of lightness even along with the approach of the perception of happiness. Here, the pervading also of happiness should be seen by way of the physical from (rūpa) originating from it (taṃsamuṭṭhāna). How, however, is there the pervading of zest and happiness connected with the fourth jhāna? Indeed, it is the transcending zestful happiness (samatikkantapītisukha), thus, if this is true; this however, has not been said by way of the moment of the fourth jhāna; as a matter of fact (atha kho) it is by way of the previous (pubbabhāga). “Pītisukhena, with zestful happiness;” thus, however, with such happiness as is similar to being accompained by (sahita) zest (pāti). Indeed, here, equanimity (upekkhā) is happiness (sukha) also from the point of view of being connected (yoga) with distinctive knowledge (ñānavisesa), because of its nature of being peaceful; thus, is the significance. Likewise, indeed, it has been said thus:– “Sukhasaññañ ca lahusaññañ ca okkamati (he reaches (okkamati) the perception of happiness as well as the sense of being light).” He approaches, enters, touches and well arrives at the idea of happiness as well as the sense of being light).” He approaches. Enters, touches and well arrives at the idea of happiness as well as the sense of being light which spring up together with the mind of magical power (iddhicitta), either with basic (pādaka) jhāna as object of thought (ārammana) or the body of physical form (rūpakāya) as the object of thought (ārammana); thus, this also is the meaning there. Likewise also the commentator said in his commentary (aṭṭhakathāyaṃ); - “The idea (saññā) of happiness (sukha), namely, is the perception (saññā) well connected with (sampayutta) equanimity (upekkhā). Indeed, equanimity has been said to be peaceful (santaṃ) happiness (sukhaṃ). That self-same sense (saññā) should be understood (veditabba) as perception of being light (lahusaññā) also because of being clearly free (vimuttatta) from hindrances (vīvarana) as well as from such adversaries as wild thought (vitakka) etc. To him, however, who has becomes excellently light (sallahuko) resembling cotton (tūlapicu). In this manner, similar to the cotton piece thrown by wind (vātakhittatūla picu), he goes to the world of brahmās with his body being seen as extremely light.” Therefore, he said thus; “Tūlamaiva eritaṃ sālutena, pilavati va me kāyo.” Its meaning is – when I am desirous of going to Brahmā world or any other (heaven) by means of my magic power, then, my body becomes but jumping over (laṅghanto) the sky resembling cotton (tūlapicu) and mind (cittaṃ) moved by the breezy wind. - Paramatthadipani
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by Sam Vara »

arkaprava wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 5:39 pm
“This very body:” this body born of action [i.e. born of kamma].
“He drenches:” he moistens,
he extends joy and pleasure everywhere.
“Steeps:” to flow all over.
“Fills:” like filling a bellows with air.
“Permeates:” to touch all over.
“His whole body:” in this monk’s body,
with all its parts, in the place where acquired [material] continuity occurs there is not even the smallest part consisting of
skin, flesh, and blood
that is not-permeated with the pleasure of the first-jhāna. - Manorathapūraṇī , Buddhaghosa
Yes, both this and the standard formula in MN 39 certainly read as though they are describing here-and-now physicality, the meditators experience of their own body.

One wonders what else "kāya" might denote. And perhaps just as importantly, why it is worth bothering with if it is not the meditator's body.
BrokenBones
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by BrokenBones »

Sam Vara wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 9:47 pm
arkaprava wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 5:39 pm
“This very body:” this body born of action [i.e. born of kamma].
“He drenches:” he moistens,
he extends joy and pleasure everywhere.
“Steeps:” to flow all over.
“Fills:” like filling a bellows with air.
“Permeates:” to touch all over.
“His whole body:” in this monk’s body,
with all its parts, in the place where acquired [material] continuity occurs there is not even the smallest part consisting of
skin, flesh, and blood
that is not-permeated with the pleasure of the first-jhāna. - Manorathapūraṇī , Buddhaghosa
Yes, both this and the standard formula in MN 39 certainly read as though they are describing here-and-now physicality, the meditators experience of their own body.

One wonders what else "kāya" might denote. And perhaps just as importantly, why it is worth bothering with if it is not the meditator's body.
It's probably why I have slightly less of a downer with Ayya Khema's (Leigh Brasington's) version of jhana than the 'other' sort. It certainly doesn't appear to follow sutta teachings but at least it retains the physical body in its system.

Case in point...
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

A whole sutta dedicated to mindfulness of body(physical) where according to some interpretations the body disappears... 🤪 defies belief & logic.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by Sam Vara »

BrokenBones wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 10:34 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 9:47 pm
arkaprava wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 5:39 pm
Yes, both this and the standard formula in MN 39 certainly read as though they are describing here-and-now physicality, the meditators experience of their own body.

One wonders what else "kāya" might denote. And perhaps just as importantly, why it is worth bothering with if it is not the meditator's body.
It's probably why I have slightly less of a downer with Ayya Khema's (Leigh Brasington's) version of jhana than the 'other' sort. It certainly doesn't appear to follow sutta teachings but at least it retains the physical body in its system.

Case in point...
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

A whole sutta dedicated to mindfulness of body(physical) where according to some interpretations the body disappears... 🤪 defies belief & logic.
I don't know too much about Lee B., and I haven't read any Ayya Khema since the 1990s, I'm afraid, so apologies for potentially derailing that aspect of the thread. But yes, elsewhere there is reference to "this fathom-long body" and its importance for practice (AN 4.45); the lack of any convincing candidates for what the alternative "body" might be; plus the entirely practical point that if such a candidate were to be removed from possible current experience, then the question becomes academic in the extreme. Angels dancing on the head of a pin, when we have yet to see any angels.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22383
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by Ceisiwr »

Sam Vara wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 11:13 pm

I don't know too much about Lee B., and I haven't read any Ayya Khema since the 1990s, I'm afraid, so apologies for potentially derailing that aspect of the thread. But yes, elsewhere there is reference to "this fathom-long body" and its importance for practice (AN 4.45); the lack of any convincing candidates for what the alternative "body" might be; plus the entirely practical point that if such a candidate were to be removed from possible current experience, then the question becomes academic in the extreme. Angels dancing on the head of a pin, when we have yet to see any angels.
The Sarvāstivādin version leans more towards a purely mental experience, which would make sense if the jhāna are hard to obtain and lofty states. How can the experience of the physical body in jhāna be squared with saññāmanasikārā being a hindrance to that very same jhāna?
“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
Tennok
Posts: 195
Joined: Sun May 02, 2021 2:02 am

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by Tennok »

Sam Vara wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 11:13 pm Angels dancing on the head of a pin, when we have yet to see any angels.
:goodpost:

We fight about definitions of the body...like medieval monks...

But suttas indicate that this particular "kaya" is born during meditation...when mind and body meet and condition each other. A dynamic, changable process to be watched and examined - while practicing Dhamma. It's not a solid, abstract dogma.

The issue of "kaya" on Dhamma Wheel reminds me of the religious wars in Swift's novel about Gulliver. When the pygmeans waged bloody religious wars for centuries, and the issue was, how to eat a soft boiled egg...is it proper to crack it's shell from the top...or the base.

But where is the egg? :smile: .
BrokenBones
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by BrokenBones »

Tennok wrote: Sun Sep 05, 2021 2:25 am
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 11:13 pm Angels dancing on the head of a pin, when we have yet to see any angels.
:goodpost:

We fight about definitions of the body...like medieval monks...

But suttas indicate that this particular "kaya" is born during meditation...when mind and body meet and condition each other. A dynamic, changable process to be watched and examined - while practicing Dhamma. It's not a solid, abstract dogma.

The issue of "kaya" on Dhamma Wheel reminds me of the religious wars in Swift's novel about Gulliver. When the pygmeans waged bloody religious wars for centuries, and the issue was, how to eat a soft boiled egg...is it proper to crack it's shell from the top...or the base.

But where is the egg? :smile: .
👍 it's good to 😂

But the analogy would have to be rephrased...

Which is the better tasting... egg or no egg.
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2106
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by Assaji »

arkaprava wrote: Sat Aug 28, 2021 6:28 pm The updated translation, most probably by Ven. Nyanatusita, is different :
And again, seclusion from sense-pleasures is to go beyond the torrent of sense-desire (Kāmogha,'dod pa'i chu bo, 欲流 )
entirely
. Seclusion from unwholesome states is the transcending of all other defilements which cause
rebirth in sensuous existence (kámabhava) and the material realm (rúpávacara or rúpadhátu)
Thank you, this is very helpful :anjali:
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by Sam Vara »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Sep 05, 2021 12:16 am
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 11:13 pm

I don't know too much about Lee B., and I haven't read any Ayya Khema since the 1990s, I'm afraid, so apologies for potentially derailing that aspect of the thread. But yes, elsewhere there is reference to "this fathom-long body" and its importance for practice (AN 4.45); the lack of any convincing candidates for what the alternative "body" might be; plus the entirely practical point that if such a candidate were to be removed from possible current experience, then the question becomes academic in the extreme. Angels dancing on the head of a pin, when we have yet to see any angels.
The Sarvāstivādin version leans more towards a purely mental experience, which would make sense if the jhāna are hard to obtain and lofty states. How can the experience of the physical body in jhāna be squared with saññāmanasikārā being a hindrance to that very same jhāna?
I'm not sure what the "Sarvāstivādin version" would involve, and again apologies if that were dealt with upthread somewhere. But unless it suggested a new and plausible denotation for kāya; which was more consistent with the figurative language used to describe processes it is involved in; and was more consistent with the actual experience of meditation as I've been taught it - then I would consider it to be of merely academic interest.
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 3853
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by Modus.Ponens »

BrokenBones wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 10:34 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 9:47 pm
arkaprava wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 5:39 pm
Yes, both this and the standard formula in MN 39 certainly read as though they are describing here-and-now physicality, the meditators experience of their own body.

One wonders what else "kāya" might denote. And perhaps just as importantly, why it is worth bothering with if it is not the meditator's body.
It's probably why I have slightly less of a downer with Ayya Khema's (Leigh Brasington's) version of jhana than the 'other' sort. It certainly doesn't appear to follow sutta teachings but at least it retains the physical body in its system.

Case in point...
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

A whole sutta dedicated to mindfulness of body(physical) where according to some interpretations the body disappears... 🤪 defies belief & logic.
Hard jhana DESTROYED with FACTS and LOGIC.

Seriously, though, a straightforward reading of the suttas tells us that we feel the body during jhana and we also intentionally pervade it with piti, sukha, and awareness. If people want to reinterpret that, and condemn us for taking what is in front of us at face value, they have a lot of explaining to do. The burden of proof is on them.
'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' - Jhana Sutta
BrokenBones
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by BrokenBones »

Modus.Ponens wrote: Sun Sep 05, 2021 10:49 am
BrokenBones wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 10:34 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 9:47 pm
Hard jhana DESTROYED with FACTS and LOGIC.

Seriously, though, a straightforward reading of the suttas tells us that we feel the body during jhana and we also intentionally pervade it with piti, sukha, and awareness. If people want to reinterpret that, and condemn us for taking what is in front of us at face value, they have a lot of explaining to do. The burden of proof is on them.
What mystifies me is that some of the hard jhana flag wavers are obviously intelligent... I guess that once a view is cemented it's very hard to change.

A lot of blame needs to go to the 'Ancients' redefining the Dhamma.
Mr. Seek
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 5:45 am

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by Mr. Seek »

Can someone please summarize/describe the meditation/liberation method advocated by Leigh to me--in brief, like a sentence or two? Thank you.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22383
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by Ceisiwr »

Sam Vara wrote: Sun Sep 05, 2021 9:22 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Sep 05, 2021 12:16 am
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 11:13 pm

I don't know too much about Lee B., and I haven't read any Ayya Khema since the 1990s, I'm afraid, so apologies for potentially derailing that aspect of the thread. But yes, elsewhere there is reference to "this fathom-long body" and its importance for practice (AN 4.45); the lack of any convincing candidates for what the alternative "body" might be; plus the entirely practical point that if such a candidate were to be removed from possible current experience, then the question becomes academic in the extreme. Angels dancing on the head of a pin, when we have yet to see any angels.
The Sarvāstivādin version leans more towards a purely mental experience, which would make sense if the jhāna are hard to obtain and lofty states. How can the experience of the physical body in jhāna be squared with saññāmanasikārā being a hindrance to that very same jhāna?
I'm not sure what the "Sarvāstivādin version" would involve, and again apologies if that were dealt with upthread somewhere. But unless it suggested a new and plausible denotation for kāya; which was more consistent with the figurative language used to describe processes it is involved in; and was more consistent with the actual experience of meditation as I've been taught it - then I would consider it to be of merely academic interest.
You didn’t answer the question.
“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: 22383
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by Ceisiwr »

Modus.Ponens wrote: Sun Sep 05, 2021 10:49 am
BrokenBones wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 10:34 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 9:47 pm

Yes, both this and the standard formula in MN 39 certainly read as though they are describing here-and-now physicality, the meditators experience of their own body.

One wonders what else "kāya" might denote. And perhaps just as importantly, why it is worth bothering with if it is not the meditator's body.
It's probably why I have slightly less of a downer with Ayya Khema's (Leigh Brasington's) version of jhana than the 'other' sort. It certainly doesn't appear to follow sutta teachings but at least it retains the physical body in its system.

Case in point...
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

A whole sutta dedicated to mindfulness of body(physical) where according to some interpretations the body disappears... 🤪 defies belief & logic.
Hard jhana DESTROYED with FACTS and LOGIC.

Seriously, though, a straightforward reading of the suttas tells us that we feel the body during jhana and we also intentionally pervade it with piti, sukha, and awareness. If people want to reinterpret that, and condemn us for taking what is in front of us at face value, they have a lot of explaining to do. The burden of proof is on them.
The burden of proof is on whomever makes a claim. If someone wants to claim that “body” here means the physical body, the burden of proof is on them. If someone wants to claim it doesn’t mean the physical body, the same. What would be, I think, poor reasoning would be to argue that body must mean the physical body simply because it says body. Seems a tad circular to me, especially since we know that “body” can mean different things in both Pali and English.
“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
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Leigh Brasington and "Jhana-Lite" (Why there is no such thing as "jhāna-lite")

Post by Sam Vara »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Sep 05, 2021 12:21 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Sep 05, 2021 9:22 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Sep 05, 2021 12:16 am

The Sarvāstivādin version leans more towards a purely mental experience, which would make sense if the jhāna are hard to obtain and lofty states. How can the experience of the physical body in jhāna be squared with saññāmanasikārā being a hindrance to that very same jhāna?
I'm not sure what the "Sarvāstivādin version" would involve, and again apologies if that were dealt with upthread somewhere. But unless it suggested a new and plausible denotation for kāya; which was more consistent with the figurative language used to describe processes it is involved in; and was more consistent with the actual experience of meditation as I've been taught it - then I would consider it to be of merely academic interest.
You didn’t answer the question.
Sorry. I'm not sure what the question is, exactly. Is it based on the idea that being aware of the body is incompatible with jhāna?
Post Reply