hindrances and jhana factors...can they coexist?

[Tennok]

I just wrote something about hindrances and jhana factors in another thread, and I see I might be wrong...or at least unclear. But I don't want to hijjack the topic of Leigh's jhanas, so made a new post here.

Can the jhana factors appear, while the hindrances are still present?

I ve read somewhere, that each jhana factore has a particlar hindrance, which denies it, or prevents it from appearing. I think it is form the Commentaries. Like ill will, dosa, goes directly against piti. Does anyone well read in the commentaries knows, where exactly this relation in mentioned?

So Vitakka and Viccara are jhana factors. Both terms are very debatable, seen as verbal thinking by some folks, and as choosing and keeping the object by the others. I stick to the senond meaning, placating and maintaining, but that's not a point here, so let's not argue about that. It's about the relation of the meditation object and the mind anyway, with thinking involved, or without.

Anyway, it seems vittaka and viccara may be present together with the hindrances. I mean vitakka makes the whole meditation possible from the start. Any meditation with a chosen object. Choosing the object and working with it. Keeping it in the mind.

I mean, you don't usually experience piti, sukha and ekaggata from the start...unless you are some super accomplished meditator. It takes lot of time for me, at least.

But vittaka and viccara? The seem so accesible...so basic. . More like a functional tool, than any sort of achievment, sign of prgress.

On the other hand, when the mind stays with the object at ease, automatically, undisturbed by any straw thoughts, it is something good...something desirable. So perhaps that is when Vitakka and Viccara arrives...when the meditation is already rolling, mind fully settled on the object. Not from the start...

[Nobodyisspecial]

Thanks for reminding me all those teachings.

Hindrances, yeah well let me just say they are just like extra precepts. Control yourself and you control the hindrances.

Jhana factors, well there is breath meditation like anapanasati, (spell check) and the point is just keep concentration and mindfulness until jhana happens.

Some people say you can't want it to happen. I say (and other vipassana teachers) what would keep you motivated to practice if there was no wanting jhana to happen??

When the student is ready the teaching appears. There is Faith in Buddhism, it is just mostly only believing what you realize only.

[SarathW]

Can the jhana factors appear, while the hindrances are still present?

The short answer is no.
Some people have tried to link the attenuation of hindrances to each Jhana factors.

According to Buddhaghosa's fifth-century CE commentary to the Samyutta Nikaya (Sāratthappakāsinī), one can momentarily escape the hindrances through jhanic suppression or through insight while, as also stated in the Vimuttimagga, one eradicates the hindrances through attainment of one of the four stages of enlightenment (see Table 1).[f]

The five mental factors that counteract the five hindrances, according to the Theravada tradition:[3]

vitakka ("applied thought," "coarse examination") counteracts sloth-torpor (lethargy and drowsiness)
vicāra ("sustained thought," "precise investigation") counteracts doubt (uncertainty)
pīti (rapture, well-being) counteracts ill-will (malice)
sukha (non-sensual pleasure) counteracts restlessness-worry (excitation and anxiety)
ekaggatā (one-pointedness, single-pointed attention) counteracts sensory desire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_hindrances

[Tennok]

Thanx SarathW. That's exactly what I was looking for. I 've missed it it the wiki

[Tennok]

Some people say you can't want it to happen. I say (and other vipassana teachers) what would keep you motivated to practice if there was no wanting jhana to happen??

Yeas, that's the old paradox. Ajahn Brahm even says to be fascinated by your breath and send metta to it, before meditating.
I agree with you, that wanting is not always bad. We need wholesome obsessions, to deal with the bad ones.

But craving and pushing, forcing the concentration, ends badly for the one on the cushion...therefore a paradox

[DooDoot]

So Vitakka and Viccara are jhana factors. Both terms are very debatable, seen as verbal thinking by some folks, and as choosing and keeping the object by the others. I stick to the second meaning, placating and maintaining, but that's not a point here, so let's not argue about that.

It appears the 2nd meaning above is Sujato's meaning. However, there appears to be a 3rd meaning, namely, apprehending (drawing towards; noting; seizing) the object & exploring the object.

Anyway, it seems vittaka and viccara may be present together with the hindrances.

Vitakka & vicara in jhana have a different meaning than vitakka & vicara in ordinary use. Buddhadasa, Brahm & Sujato make this clear; although its not necessary for them to do this. Its quite straightforward.

I mean vitakka makes the whole meditation possible from the start. Any meditation with a chosen object. Choosing the object and working with it. Keeping it in the mind.

No. not really. The above sounds like "yogic" meditation. This clumsy "yogic" meditation is unrelated to the jhana factors.

I mean, you don't usually experience piti, sukha and ekaggata from the start...unless you are some super accomplished meditator. It takes lot of time for me, at least.

Are you claiming to have experienced the piti, sukha and ekaggata of real jhana?

But vittaka and viccara? They seem so accesible...so basic. . More like a functional tool, than any sort of achievment, sign of prgress.

No. Vitakka & vicara is not Sujato's translation.

On the other hand, when the mind stays with the object at ease, automatically, undisturbed by any straw thoughts, it is something good...something desirable. So perhaps that is when Vitakka and Viccara arrives...when the meditation is already rolling, mind fully settled on the object. Not from the start...

Vitakka & vicara in jhana is the mind apprehending & exploring the jhana factors. Jhana is like a huge dome of bliss. It can be compared to the Sistine Chapel with its dome ceiling in Rome. When a person visits the Sistine Chapel, their mind is drawn to certain paintings on the walls and ceilings and their mind explores the various paintings; looking around. It is the same in the 1st jhana. The mind is centred with ekaggata in a huge dome or ball of bliss however part of the mind looks around at the jhana, the rapture, the happiness. This apprehending (vitaka) and exploring (vicara) weaken the jhana; so mindfulness lets go, to weaken the vitakka & vicara and to strengthen the jhana.

Ajahn Brahm describes this in his book, but using some words such as "mindfulness" and "grasping" is a sloppy manner. I suggest, as always, to follow my explanation.

In Jhana, vitakka and vicar a are both sub-verbal and so don't qualify as thought. Vitakka is the sub-verbal movement of the mind back into bliss. Vicara is the sub-verbal movement of mind that holds onto the bliss. Outside of Jhana, such movements of mind will often generate thought, and sometimes even speech. But in Jhana, vitakka and vicara are too subtle to create any thought. All they are capable of doing is moving mindfulness back onto bliss, and holding mindfulness there. This movement is the wobble of the First Jhana, represented as the pair of First Jhana factors vitakka and vicara.

Because the bliss of First Jhana is fuelled by letting go, such involuntary grasping weakens the bliss. Seeing the bliss weaken, the mind automatically lets go of its grasping and the bliss increases in power again. The mind then grasps again, then lets go again.

Such subtle involuntary movement gives rise to the wobble of First Jhana.

https://www.dhammatalks.net/Books/Ajahn ... Jhanas.htm

[Sam Vara]

Can the jhana factors appear, while the hindrances are still present?

You rightly refer to the issues around competing definitions of what jhāna is, and it might help if people relaxed their grip on the veracity of their adopted interpretation in favour of what they find helpful in practice. Adopt a provisional and verifiable approach, and see how it goes. With that in mind, I think that the jhāna factors can coexist with hindrances during meditation. They may not be present at the same time, but I think that one can establish vitakka and vicāra while the mind is still prone to desire for sense experiences and ill will, for example. Again, it depends on what one considers the jhāna factors to be, but I think they can be established in a faltering and weak manner at first, and only later become "solid" enough to hang around for longer.

[samseva]

You rightly refer to the issues around competing definitions of what jhāna is, and it might help if people relaxed their grip on the veracity of their adopted interpretation in favour of what they find helpful in practice.

There aren't any "competing" definitions of jhāna, Sam Vara. Jhāna—as described throughout the Tipiṭaka—is a meditative state defined by the absence of the hindrances (nīvaraṇa) and the presence of the jhāna factors of vitakka, vicāra, pīti, sukha, and upekkhā.

might help if people relaxed their grip on the veracity of their adopted interpretation in favour of what they find helpful in practice

That's precisely the issue—"people relaxing the veracity... in favour of what they find helpful" (in "reaching jhāna").

Please do say: Why do you even have to "relax your grip on the veracity... in favour of" in the first place?

[Sam Vara]

You rightly refer to the issues around competing definitions of what jhāna is, and it might help if people relaxed their grip on the veracity of their adopted interpretation in favour of what they find helpful in practice.

There aren't any "competing" definitions of jhāna, Sam Vara.

I see quite a few here on DW and elsewhere. That's what causes a lot of the acrimonious and seemingly interminable debates between posters. You might think that your definition is such that it precludes taking any of the others seriously, but that's something different.

Jhāna—as described throughout the Tipiṭaka—is defined by the absence of the hindrances (nīvaraṇa) and the presence of the jhāna factors of vitakka, vicāra, pīti, sukha, and upekkhā. That's all.

Yes, I guess lots of people would agree with that, but then there are the different opinions as to what each of those hindrances and factors actually mean, and whether their absence and/or presence is momentary, short-term, long-term or permanent, etc.....

Please do say: Why do you even have to "relax your grip on the veracity... in favour of" in the first place?

You don't have to. I merely said "it might help". And so it might.

[samseva]

I see quite a few here on DW and elsewhere. That's what causes a lot of the acrimonious and seemingly interminable debates between posters. You might think that your definition is such that it precludes taking any of the others seriously, but that's something different.

Maybe competing interpretations, but definitely not definitions. The definition of jhāna is written in black and white in all of the Nikāyas—and the stock passage is repeated if not close to a hundred times.

Yes, I guess lots of people would agree with that, but then there are the different opinions as to what each of those hindrances and factors actually mean, and whether their absence and/or presence is momentary, short-term, long-term or permanent, etc.....

And the result of this is people appearing on the Internet and saying things like "I believe such a Pāḷi term means X, therefore, I've reached jhāna!"

[Sam Vara]

I see quite a few here on DW and elsewhere. That's what causes a lot of the acrimonious and seemingly interminable debates between posters. You might think that your definition is such that it precludes taking any of the others seriously, but that's something different.

Maybe competing interpretations, but definitely not definitions. The definition of jhāna is written in black and white in all of the Nikāyas—and the stock passage is repeated if not close to a hundred times.

Yes, I'm happy with the term "interpretations", if that's your issue. As I said above, I guess most people here on DW would agree with the "dictionary definition", any differences being over what the words denote, rather than what other words they equate to.

And the result of this is people appearing on the Internet and saying things like "I believe such a Pāḷi term means X, therefore, I've reached jhāna!"

Gad, shouldn't there be a law to stop them, or something?!

[Spiny Norman]

Can the jhana factors appear, while the hindrances are still present?

You rightly refer to the issues around competing definitions of what jhāna is, and it might help if people relaxed their grip on the veracity of their adopted interpretation in favour of what they find helpful in practice. Adopt a provisional and verifiable approach, and see how it goes. With that in mind, I think that the jhāna factors can coexist with hindrances during meditation. They may not be present at the same time, but I think that one can establish vitakka and vicāra while the mind is still prone to desire for sense experiences and ill will, for example. Again, it depends on what one considers the jhāna factors to be, but I think they can be established in a faltering and weak manner at first, and only later become "solid" enough to hang around for longer.

[samseva]

Gad, shouldn't there be a law to stop them, or something?!

Just have to tell them they're making stuff up. A forum rule disallowing claims of spiritual attainment (i.e., jhāna, being Enlightened), would be nice, though.

[Sam Vara]

Gad, shouldn't there be a law to stop them, or something?!

Just have to tell them they're making stuff up.

Trouble is, on the internet, there's no way of telling. But if anyone thinks that someone else is making something up, they are at liberty to say so.

A forum rule disallowing claims of spiritual attainment (i.e., jhāna, being Enlightened), would be nice, though.

The ToS do proscribe some claims (i.e. being a Samma SamBuddha, etc.) but I can't see much wrong with people making lesser claims. They might be right, or they might spark useful discussion. And a major difficulty would be that some people are quite keen on implying that they have attainments, while retaining plausible deniability.

[samseva]

They might be right

If someone actually can reach jhāna, or is Enlightened, I doubt they would go around telling it on Internet forums.

or they might spark useful discussion.

I guess, for those who think they're fully Enlightened, them going around saying it to people, and then being told it's likely not the case, maybe is a good thing.