Feeling jhana energy absorption

[Nobodyisspecial]

Greetings mediators
I find that when in jhana I can make a top tooth touch a bottom tooth of the jaw and feel the energy rush through those teeth.

The feeling for teeth energy is good for when you are not sure you are in jhana or communion with buddha. I find that after breaking a precept there is no ability for jhana. Hence no communion with Buddha.

What do you think?

[Ceisiwr]

Greetings mediators
I find that when in jhana I can make a top tooth touch a bottom tooth of the jaw and feel the energy rush through those teeth.

The feeling for teeth energy is good for when you are not sure you are in jhana or communion with buddha. I find that after breaking a precept there is no ability for jhana. Hence no communion with Buddha.

What do you think?

I don’t think this is Jhana, since when in Jhana you don’t experience any of the 5 senses.

[JamesTheGiant]

...communion with Buddha.

There is no communion with Buddha. He achieved the final parinibbana, he's not here anymore, he is gone. Maybe you are communing with some other being.

[BrokenBones]

Greetings mediators
I find that when in jhana I can make a top tooth touch a bottom tooth of the jaw and feel the energy rush through those teeth.

The feeling for teeth energy is good for when you are not sure you are in jhana or communion with buddha. I find that after breaking a precept there is no ability for jhana. Hence no communion with Buddha.

What do you think?

I don’t think this is Jhana, since when in Jhana you don’t experience any of the 5 senses.

Nobodyisspecial... you probably need to find a teacher to help you understand and work through your experiences.

Ceisiwr...

You don't rest do you... it's like DD with his no rebirth nonsense... although I think you're both in agreement on the 5 senses being absent drivel... that should give you pause for thought.

[Ceisiwr]

Greetings mediators
I find that when in jhana I can make a top tooth touch a bottom tooth of the jaw and feel the energy rush through those teeth.

The feeling for teeth energy is good for when you are not sure you are in jhana or communion with buddha. I find that after breaking a precept there is no ability for jhana. Hence no communion with Buddha.

What do you think?

I don’t think this is Jhana, since when in Jhana you don’t experience any of the 5 senses.

Nobodyisspecial... you probably need to find a teacher to help you understand and work through your experiences.

Ceisiwr...

You don't rest do you... it's like DD with his no rebirth nonsense... although I think you're both in agreement on the 5 senses being absent drivel... that should give you pause for thought.

I express my opinions, yes. So do you.

You and DD are in agreement on the Buddha being awakened. That should give you pause for thought. A stopped clock is right twice a day.

[DooDoot]

... it's like DD with his no rebirth nonsense...

what is the Pali word for "rebirth"? thanks

[Cause_and_Effect]

Greetings mediators
I find that when in jhana I can make a top tooth touch a bottom tooth of the jaw and feel the energy rush through those teeth.

The feeling for teeth energy is good for when you are not sure you are in jhana or communion with buddha. I find that after breaking a precept there is no ability for jhana. Hence no communion with Buddha.

What do you think?

What is the method of practice that you follow and which teacher?

I don’t think this is Jhana, since when in Jhana you don’t experience any of the 5 senses.

There is no sutta which describes jhana like this.

[Ceisiwr]

There is no sutta which describes jhana like this.

When I understood that doubt is a corruption of the mind, I gave it up. When I understood that loss of focus, dullness and drowsiness, terror, excitement, discomfort, excessive energy, overly lax energy, longing, perception of diversity, and excessive concentration on forms are corruptions of the mind, I gave them up.

- MN 128

This occurs before Jhāna.

First, take a mendicant who, quite secluded from sensual pleasures … enters and remains in the first absorption. While a mendicant is in such a meditation, should perceptions and attentions accompanied by sensual pleasures beset them, that’s an affliction for them.

Tassa ce, āvuso, bhikkhuno iminā vihārena viharato kāmasahagatā saññāmanasikārā samudācaranti, svassa hoti ābādho.

- AN 9.34

Having multiple attentions of perception, in other words the 5 senses, is a hindrance to the Jhāna ergo Jhāna are states without the 5 senses. In other words, absorption.

[Pondera]

Greetings mediators
I find that when in jhana I can make a top tooth touch a bottom tooth of the jaw and feel the energy rush through those teeth.

The feeling for teeth energy is good for when you are not sure you are in jhana or communion with buddha. I find that after breaking a precept there is no ability for jhana. Hence no communion with Buddha.

What do you think?

I don’t think this is Jhana, since when in Jhana you don’t experience any of the 5 senses.

How do you reckon the above with the third jhana?

“He feels pleasure with the body”?

[Ceisiwr]

Greetings mediators
I find that when in jhana I can make a top tooth touch a bottom tooth of the jaw and feel the energy rush through those teeth.

The feeling for teeth energy is good for when you are not sure you are in jhana or communion with buddha. I find that after breaking a precept there is no ability for jhana. Hence no communion with Buddha.

What do you think?

I don’t think this is Jhana, since when in Jhana you don’t experience any of the 5 senses.

How do you reckon the above with the third jhana?

“He feels pleasure with the body”?

This was somewhat interesting

Leigh Brassington: Nope, it’s the physical body - at least in the jhana pericope.

cdpatton: Aside from the concrete metaphors for the experience of bliss found in DN2 and MN 119, what was the basis for this definition? It isn’t the Abhidhamma because the gloss in the Vibhanga reads:

“Experiences pleasure by way of the body (of mental aggregates)” means: Therein what is pleasure? That which is mental ease, mental pleasure, easeful pleasant experience born of mental contact, easeful pleasant feeling born of mental contact.

This is called pleasure.

Therein what is the body (of mental aggregates)? The aggregate of perception, aggregate of mental concomitants, aggregate of consciousness. This is called the body (of mental aggregates). This pleasure he experiences by way of this body (of mental aggregates). Therefore this is called “experiences pleasure by way of the body (of mental aggregates)”.

This passage agrees with other early Abhidharma opinions found in Sarvâstivāda and Dharmaguptaka texts (and the Dharmaguptaka Abhidharma opinion is very similar to Theravada Abhidhamma, almost verbatim).

On top of this, in the Madhyama Agama of the Sarvâstivādins, the concrete metaphors that are set alongside the jhānas in Theravada suttas aren’t set directly with the dhyānas. Rather, they are associated with mindfulness of the body practice. But we find them associated with dhyāna in the Dharmaguptaka’s Dīrgha Agama parallel to DN 2 the same treatment of the dhyānas.

It may sound complicated, but the upshot is that those bliss metaphors appear meant to communicate the thoroughness of the experience, not the physicality, and associating them directly with jhāna wasn’t consistent across sectarian canons. But the Abhidharma opinions are consistent that kāya doesn’t mean the physical body. As you might know, there are many kāyas in Buddhist thought: A kāya of feelings, a kāya of perceptions, a kāya of cravings, etc.

[Edit: In the late Northern tradition, there was a controversy over how to read the kāya in the third dhyāna. Vasubandhu summarizes it in the Kośa, which can be read in English pp. 1231-1234 of the Poussin-Pruden translation. The logical issues that arise from claiming that mental happiness somehow permeates the physical body gets a bit difficult to maintain, but the Darstantikas doggedly tried nonetheless in Vasubandhu’s account of the debates.]

So, my question is, what other support have you found for taking kāya in the third jhāna as being specifically the physical body?

https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/le ... e/21304/75

How does one experience vedanā (a purely mental phenomenon) in the body?

[Pondera]

I don’t think this is Jhana, since when in Jhana you don’t experience any of the 5 senses.

How do you reckon the above with the third jhana?

“He feels pleasure with the body”?

This was somewhat interesting

Leigh Brassington: Nope, it’s the physical body - at least in the jhana pericope.

cdpatton: Aside from the concrete metaphors for the experience of bliss found in DN2 and MN 119, what was the basis for this definition? It isn’t the Abhidhamma because the gloss in the Vibhanga reads:

“Experiences pleasure by way of the body (of mental aggregates)” means: Therein what is pleasure? That which is mental ease, mental pleasure, easeful pleasant experience born of mental contact, easeful pleasant feeling born of mental contact.

This is called pleasure.

Therein what is the body (of mental aggregates)? The aggregate of perception, aggregate of mental concomitants, aggregate of consciousness. This is called the body (of mental aggregates). This pleasure he experiences by way of this body (of mental aggregates). Therefore this is called “experiences pleasure by way of the body (of mental aggregates)”.

This passage agrees with other early Abhidharma opinions found in Sarvâstivāda and Dharmaguptaka texts (and the Dharmaguptaka Abhidharma opinion is very similar to Theravada Abhidhamma, almost verbatim).

On top of this, in the Madhyama Agama of the Sarvâstivādins, the concrete metaphors that are set alongside the jhānas in Theravada suttas aren’t set directly with the dhyānas. Rather, they are associated with mindfulness of the body practice. But we find them associated with dhyāna in the Dharmaguptaka’s Dīrgha Agama parallel to DN 2 the same treatment of the dhyānas.

It may sound complicated, but the upshot is that those bliss metaphors appear meant to communicate the thoroughness of the experience, not the physicality, and associating them directly with jhāna wasn’t consistent across sectarian canons. But the Abhidharma opinions are consistent that kāya doesn’t mean the physical body. As you might know, there are many kāyas in Buddhist thought: A kāya of feelings, a kāya of perceptions, a kāya of cravings, etc.

[Edit: In the late Northern tradition, there was a controversy over how to read the kāya in the third dhyāna. Vasubandhu summarizes it in the Kośa, which can be read in English pp. 1231-1234 of the Poussin-Pruden translation. The logical issues that arise from claiming that mental happiness somehow permeates the physical body gets a bit difficult to maintain, but the Darstantikas doggedly tried nonetheless in Vasubandhu’s account of the debates.]

So, my question is, what other support have you found for taking kāya in the third jhāna as being specifically the physical body?

To answer Leigh’s question: the metaphors found in the similes. All four jhanas state “there is not one part of his body he does not pervade with this pleasure [and/or rapture](born of seclusion; born of composure; divested of rapture; born of pure bright awareness).”

https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/le ... e/21304/75

How does one experience vedanā (a purely mental phenomenon) in the body?

I do not believe a clear separation can be made between the body and mind. I do believe that the body is a mental object made by past kamma. That is the way in which we are “heirs” to our kamma. I also believe that when we peer into that visual haze of consciousness which surrounds us, we are simply looking into the mental image of the body. And, without going into detail as to my personal experience with this, the Buddha has defined a “mind made body - complete with every limb. Being one, he becomes many. Being many, he becomes one.”

So the question of Vedana as either wholly “mind” or simply “body” is a wide open ground for debate. I think the mind-body connection is a complex one with facets pertaining to how the skhandas “work” - to how “kamma” is inherited, and passed over from one being in one life to another one in the next with a common thread and a common sense of personal accountability.

[Tennok]

So the question of Vedana as either wholly “mind” or simply “body” is a wide open ground for debate. I think the mind-body connection is a complex one with facets pertaining to how the skhandas “work” - to how “kamma” is inherited, and passed over from one being in one life to another one in the next with a common thread and a common sense of personal accountability.

I used to be 100 % sure about "jhana hard" interptation. It made sense and corresponded with my favorite teachers words, intuitions and glimpses into the subject. But recently I noticed , more and more, that map and the teritory are never the same...Sutta is not the experience. It's a map, receipe, suggestion.

For example, you can read about asanas of hatha yoga whole your life...and still have no clue, how it really feels, to be standing on your head for 5 minutes. Same with Jhana, I guess.

I don't deny possible experiences of anyone, btw. I just doubt they are always exactly same, as varying translations of ancient Pali writings.

This "Kaya" term could refer to a very particular, subtle way, in which the mind and body game is experieced by one, who approaches Samadhi. It may be less linear and clear edged, than daily life matters and definitions.

Let's start a new school. Jhana Pyrrhonism

[Sam Vara]

Let's start a new school. Jhana Pyrrhonism

I'm bookmarking that!

From wikipedia:

According to the Pyrrhonists, it is one's opinions about non-evident matters (i.e., dogma) that prevent one from attaining eudaimonia.

[un8-]

Let's start a new school. Jhana Pyrrhonism

I'm bookmarking that!

From wikipedia:

According to the Pyrrhonists, it is one's opinions about non-evident matters (i.e., dogma) that prevent one from attaining eudaimonia.

I only discovered Pyrrhonism recently (2 years ago) whereas I discovered the dhamma and stoicism over 17 years ago, and I must say Pyrrhonism has really helped me let go of views and to not take everything as factual or solid. It keeps one on the fence so to speak, and to maintain neutrality. The purpose is to suspend judgement. Really worth studying, there's a small community on reddit at /r/Pyrrhonism/

[Sam Vara]

Let's start a new school. Jhana Pyrrhonism

I'm bookmarking that!

From wikipedia:

According to the Pyrrhonists, it is one's opinions about non-evident matters (i.e., dogma) that prevent one from attaining eudaimonia.

I only discovered Pyrrhonism recently (2 years ago) whereas I discovered the dhamma and stoicism over 17 years ago, and I must say Pyrrhonism has really helped me let go of views and to not take everything as factual or solid. It keeps one on the fence so to speak, and to maintain neutrality. The purpose is to suspend judgement. Really worth studying, there's a small community on reddit at /r/Pyrrhonism/

At the risk of derailing the thread, here is Bill Vallicella's formal rejection of Pyrrhonism, which is done very economically:
https://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com ... trine.html

I'm not attacking Pyrrhonism, but it's useful for thinking around the issues. In other blog posts he addresses the apparent failures of Pyrrhonism as an approach to the spiritual life. Interesting stuff, which I can direct you to if interested.

Closer to home, Tennok's post got my attention because it raises two important issues. The scepticism that one might have towards a claim that an experience is correctly labelled (i.e. "This is first jhāna") and the fact that one must rely upon dogma (i.e. opinions about non-evident matters, what Vallicella calls a proposition describing a feature of the external world) in order to justify that scepticism.