EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Exploring the Dhamma, as understood from the perspective of the ancient Pali commentaries.
User avatar
Ṭhānuttamo
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:40 pm
Location: Kefenrod, Germany
Contact:

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by Ṭhānuttamo »

frank k wrote: Mon May 02, 2022 7:52 pm I don't see how that supports kāmehi of first jhāna as being 'objects of 5 senses', rather than the usual interpretation of 'sensual pleasure'.
I read AN 9.38 carefully. Basically, in all 9 attainments, one is still 'in the world (of suffering)', until one becomes an arahant after emerging from 9th.
Greetings, Frank!
The text itself defines what is meant here by kāmaguṇa: "forms that can be cognized by the eye" etc. (cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā etc). Compare that also with the entry for kāmaguṇa in the Critical Pāli Dictionary: "the five objects of sensual pleasure viz. rūpa, sadda, gandha, rasa, poṭṭhabba". This squares well with commentarial explanations of kāmaguṇa, e.g.: "The five strands of sensual pleasure: the parts that constitute objects of sensual pleasure, forms etc. (pañca kāmaguṇāti rūpādayo pañca kāmakoṭṭhāsā). Again, this is even reflected in uncontested Pāḷi literature (e.g. Majjhimanikāya 75), where it seems to have exactly this meaning, seemingly corresponding to the vatthukāmā that are defined as "likable forms" etc. (manāpikā rūpā), for example in Sāriputta's Niddesa. Here the text from the Majjhimanikāya:
Māgandiya, formerly when I lived the home life, I enjoyed myself, provided and endowed with the five cords of sensual pleasure: with forms cognizable by the eye…with sounds cognizable by the ear…with odours cognizable by the nose…with flavours cognizable by the tongue…with tangibles cognizable by the body that are wished for, desired, agreeable, and likeable, connected with sensual desire and provocative of lust.

ahaṃ kho pana, māgaṇḍiya, pubbe agāriyabhūto samāno pañcahi kāmaguṇehi samappito samaṅgībhūto paricāresiṃ cakkhuviññeyyehi rūpehi iṭṭhehi kantehi manāpehi piyarūpehi kāmūpasaṃhitehi rajanīyehi, sotaviññeyyehi saddehi ... pe ... ghānaviññeyyehi gandhehi... jivhāviññeyyehi rasehi... kāyaviññeyyehi phoṭṭhabbehi iṭṭhehi kantehi manāpehi piyarūpehi kāmūpasaṃhitehi rajanīyehi.
Of course, kāma and kāmaguṇa can also have the meaning that you highlighted, but it is not the be-all and end-all definition, in fact corresponding to what the tradition for a reason calls "sensual pleasures that are the kilesas" (kilesakāmā), defined as: "sensuality that is desire, greed, desire and greed, lustful intention" (chando kāmo rāgo kāmo chandarāgo kāmo; saṅkappo kāmo; Niddesa). As far as I can see, this is not what is intended in AN 9.38. Now you can maybe make a case that only "forms etc. that are connected with sensual desire" are what is meant and that this is the crucial factor; however, the commentary explains in another context that both types are what is meant by that: "connected with sensuality means: that which arises dependend upon sensuality owing to the twofold sensuality" (kāmūpasaṃhitanti kāmanissitaṃ duvidhe kāme ārabbha uppajjanakaṃ; AN-a)." This explanation occurs connected to this context -- rapture of solitude was said with reference to the first and second jhānas (paṭhamadutiyajjhānāni; AN-a):
When this was said, the Venerable Sāriputta said to the Blessed One: “It’s astounding and amazing, Bhante, how well that was said by the Blessed One. Bhante, whenever a noble disciple enters and dwells in the rapture of solitude, on that occasion five things do not occur in him. (1) Pain and dejection connected with sensuality do not occur in him. (2) Pleasure and joy connected with sensuality do not occur in him. (3) Pain and dejection connected with the unwholesome do not occur in him. (4) Pleasure and joy connected with the unwholesome do not occur in him. (5) Pain and dejection connected with the wholesome do not occur in him. Bhante, whenever a noble disciple enters and dwells in the rapture of solitude, on that occasion these five things do not occur in him.

evaṃ vutte āyasmā sāriputto bhagavantaṃ etadavoca — “acchariyaṃ, bhante, abbhutaṃ, bhante! yāva subhāsitaṃ cidaṃ, bhante, bhagavatā — ‘tumhe kho, gahapati, bhikkhusaṅghaṃ paccupaṭṭhitā cīvarapiṇḍapātasenāsanagilānappaccayabhesajjaparikkhārena. na kho, gahapati, tāvatakeneva tuṭṭhi karaṇīyā — mayaṃ bhikkhusaṅghaṃ paccupaṭṭhitā cīvarapiṇḍapātasenāsanagilānappaccayabhesajjaparikkhārenāti. tasmātiha, gahapati, evaṃ sikkhitabbaṃ — kinti mayaṃ kālena kālaṃ pavivekaṃ pītiṃ upasampajja vihareyyāmāti! evañhi vo, gahapati, sikkhitabban’ti. yasmiṃ, bhante, samaye ariyasāvako pavivekaṃ pītiṃ upasampajja viharati, pañcassa ṭhānāni tasmiṃ samaye na honti. yampissa kāmūpasaṃhitaṃ dukkhaṃ domanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. yampissa kāmūpasaṃhitaṃ sukhaṃ somanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. yampissa akusalūpasaṃhitaṃ dukkhaṃ domanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. yampissa akusalūpasaṃhitaṃ sukhaṃ somanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. yampissa kusalūpasaṃhitaṃ dukkhaṃ domanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. yasmiṃ, bhante, samaye ariyasāvako pavivekaṃ pītiṃ upasampajja viharati, imānissa pañca ṭhānāni tasmiṃ samaye na hontī”ti.
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2253
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by frank k »

I did a detailed research on the first jhāna gloss here and addresses the cmy. passage in question.
https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2 ... amehi.html
The key things to note, The Ab Vb Abhidhamma gloss for 1st jhana phrase, is exactly the same as AN 6.63, so even if it's not 'be all end all', it's pretty clear they didn't mention anything about plural kāmā and objects.
Also, Petakpadesa, Vimuttimagga, also gloss that similar to Abhidhamma.
Some of the strongest piece of evidence, are

KN Iti 72: escape from kāma is nekkhamma (right resolve’s renunciation), not going into a formless samādhi where 5 senses are shut off. Escape from rūpa is arūpa, where 5 senses are shut off. So again, KN iti 72 is also in agreement with above.

MN 150 describes seclusion from sensual pleasure objects, and it doesn't require 5 senses shut off.

and the strongest evidence, is
https://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/sound/index.html
AN 9.37 mind divorced from 5 body faculties are 3 formless attainments, NOT 4 jhanas!
MN 43 mind divorced from 5 body faculties can know what? (3 formless attainments, not 4 jhanas!)

The first jhāna, all four jhānas are very conspicuously missing from those 2 suttas that are very explicit in describing what samādhis have 5 senses disconnected.

So really, the evidence is just overwhelmingly clear.

Nevertheless, I would be interested to know what that commentary passage comes from (what sutta it was commenting on), the context, and how you made sense of Vism. where they support both the Abhidhamma gloss and plural kāmā as 'objects'. Reading Vism., that part still doesn't say to me clearly, "5 senses are shut off." Vism. of course has other places where they say 5 senses are shutoff for (their redefined) 4 jhānas, but not there.

By the way, I have Vism. as a single file pali+eng, with bookmarks you can use the quicklink from my homepage.
https://lucid24.org/index.html
type "vism4.1" for example, that takes you directly to earth kasina.
If you can point out to me where the cmy passage for plural kāmā 1st jhāna is, I can even make a special bookmark just for that for future quicklink "vism j1kama" for example will jump right to there.



A. Bhikkhu wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 10:55 am
frank k wrote: Mon May 02, 2022 7:52 pm I don't see how that supports kāmehi of first jhāna as being 'objects of 5 senses', rather than the usual interpretation of 'sensual pleasure'.
I read AN 9.38 carefully. Basically, in all 9 attainments, one is still 'in the world (of suffering)', until one becomes an arahant after emerging from 9th.
Greetings, Frank!
The text itself defines what is meant here by kāmaguṇa: "forms that can be cognized by the eye" etc. (cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā etc). Compare that also with the entry for kāmaguṇa in the Critical Pāli Dictionary: "the five objects of sensual pleasure viz. rūpa, sadda, gandha, rasa, poṭṭhabba". This squares well with commentarial explanations of kāmaguṇa, e.g.: "The five strands of sensual pleasure: the parts that constitute objects of sensual pleasure, forms etc. (pañca kāmaguṇāti rūpādayo pañca kāmakoṭṭhāsā). Again, this is even reflected in uncontested Pāḷi literature (e.g. Majjhimanikāya 75), where it seems to have exactly this meaning, seemingly corresponding to the vatthukāmā that are defined as "likable forms" etc. (manāpikā rūpā), for example in Sāriputta's Niddesa. Here the text from the Majjhimanikāya:
Māgandiya, formerly when I lived the home life, I enjoyed myself, provided and endowed with the five cords of sensual pleasure: with forms cognizable by the eye…with sounds cognizable by the ear…with odours cognizable by the nose…with flavours cognizable by the tongue…with tangibles cognizable by the body that are wished for, desired, agreeable, and likeable, connected with sensual desire and provocative of lust.

ahaṃ kho pana, māgaṇḍiya, pubbe agāriyabhūto samāno pañcahi kāmaguṇehi samappito samaṅgībhūto paricāresiṃ cakkhuviññeyyehi rūpehi iṭṭhehi kantehi manāpehi piyarūpehi kāmūpasaṃhitehi rajanīyehi, sotaviññeyyehi saddehi ... pe ... ghānaviññeyyehi gandhehi... jivhāviññeyyehi rasehi... kāyaviññeyyehi phoṭṭhabbehi iṭṭhehi kantehi manāpehi piyarūpehi kāmūpasaṃhitehi rajanīyehi.
Of course, kāma and kāmaguṇa can also have the meaning that you highlighted, but it is not the be-all and end-all definition, in fact corresponding to what the tradition for a reason calls "sensual pleasures that are the kilesas" (kilesakāmā), defined as: "sensuality that is desire, greed, desire and greed, lustful intention" (chando kāmo rāgo kāmo chandarāgo kāmo; saṅkappo kāmo; Niddesa). As far as I can see, this is not what is intended in AN 9.38. Now you can maybe make a case that only "forms etc. that are connected with sensual desire" are what is meant and that this is the crucial factor; however, the commentary explains in another context that both types are what is meant by that: "connected with sensuality means: that which arises dependend upon sensuality owing to the twofold sensuality" (kāmūpasaṃhitanti kāmanissitaṃ duvidhe kāme ārabbha uppajjanakaṃ; AN-a)." This explanation occurs connected to this context -- rapture of solitude was said with reference to the first and second jhānas (paṭhamadutiyajjhānāni; AN-a):
When this was said, the Venerable Sāriputta said to the Blessed One: “It’s astounding and amazing, Bhante, how well that was said by the Blessed One. Bhante, whenever a noble disciple enters and dwells in the rapture of solitude, on that occasion five things do not occur in him. (1) Pain and dejection connected with sensuality do not occur in him. (2) Pleasure and joy connected with sensuality do not occur in him. (3) Pain and dejection connected with the unwholesome do not occur in him. (4) Pleasure and joy connected with the unwholesome do not occur in him. (5) Pain and dejection connected with the wholesome do not occur in him. Bhante, whenever a noble disciple enters and dwells in the rapture of solitude, on that occasion these five things do not occur in him.

evaṃ vutte āyasmā sāriputto bhagavantaṃ etadavoca — “acchariyaṃ, bhante, abbhutaṃ, bhante! yāva subhāsitaṃ cidaṃ, bhante, bhagavatā — ‘tumhe kho, gahapati, bhikkhusaṅghaṃ paccupaṭṭhitā cīvarapiṇḍapātasenāsanagilānappaccayabhesajjaparikkhārena. na kho, gahapati, tāvatakeneva tuṭṭhi karaṇīyā — mayaṃ bhikkhusaṅghaṃ paccupaṭṭhitā cīvarapiṇḍapātasenāsanagilānappaccayabhesajjaparikkhārenāti. tasmātiha, gahapati, evaṃ sikkhitabbaṃ — kinti mayaṃ kālena kālaṃ pavivekaṃ pītiṃ upasampajja vihareyyāmāti! evañhi vo, gahapati, sikkhitabban’ti. yasmiṃ, bhante, samaye ariyasāvako pavivekaṃ pītiṃ upasampajja viharati, pañcassa ṭhānāni tasmiṃ samaye na honti. yampissa kāmūpasaṃhitaṃ dukkhaṃ domanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. yampissa kāmūpasaṃhitaṃ sukhaṃ somanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. yampissa akusalūpasaṃhitaṃ dukkhaṃ domanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. yampissa akusalūpasaṃhitaṃ sukhaṃ somanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. yampissa kusalūpasaṃhitaṃ dukkhaṃ domanassaṃ, tampissa tasmiṃ samaye na hoti. yasmiṃ, bhante, samaye ariyasāvako pavivekaṃ pītiṃ upasampajja viharati, imānissa pañca ṭhānāni tasmiṃ samaye na hontī”ti.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
Ṭhānuttamo
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:40 pm
Location: Kefenrod, Germany
Contact:

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by Ṭhānuttamo »

frank k wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 3:41 pm AN 9.37 mind divorced from 5 body faculties are 3 formless attainments, NOT 4 jhanas!
Dear Frank,
would you mind giving direct quotes for your points? Now I would have to trace down everything you said within long suttas or texts, which is too time consuming for me. So, I will just respond to a few points based upon that:
AN 9.37 mind divorced from 5 body faculties are 3 formless attainments, NOT 4 jhanas!
The commentary to AN 9.37 states the following, knowing of course the context of the sutta:
Perceptions of forms in every respect: Why was this claimed? Is it that for someone endowed with the first jhāna etc. there is an experience of forms etc.? That is not so! But just as far as the object consisting of the [fine] materiality of the kasiṇa (kasiṇarūpaṃ) exists, form (rūpaṃ) is not said to be overcome. The cause for the state of not having surpassed will be able to be [there], and so (pana) this is not called the state of having surpassed [...].

sabbaso rūpasaññānanti idaṃ kasmā gaṇhi, kiṃ paṭhamajjhānādisamaṅgino rūpādipaṭisaṃvedanā hotīti? na hoti, yāva pana kasiṇarūpaṃ ārammaṇaṃ hoti, tāva rūpaṃ samatikkantaṃ nāma na hoti. asamatikkantattā paccayo bhavituṃ sakkhissati. samatikkantattā pana taṃ natthi nāma hoti [...]
So it is only in the formless attainments that forms are overcome in every way, that is why they have been adduced. Compare this also with Vism (p. 321):
Now, although he has already surmounted gross physical matter by means of the fourth jhāna of the fine-material sphere, nevertheless he still wants also to surmount the kasiṇa materiality since it is the counterpart of the former.
As far as It 72 is concerned, which goes:
The escape form sensuality is, namely, renunciation. The escape from forms is, namely, formlessness.
kāmānametaṃ nissaraṇaṃ yadidaṃ nekkhammaṃ, rūpānametaṃ nissaraṇaṃ yadidaṃ āruppaṃ.
Its commentary says this:
From sensuality: From the sensuality that consists of the kilesas (kilesakāma) and the sensuality that are the objects [of sensuality] (vatthukāma). But “from sensuality” here rather means: “from the sensuality that consists of the kilesas.” Because due to the escape from sensuality that consists of the kilesas, there is even an escape from the sensuality that are the objects [of sensuality]. It is not otherwise. [...] Renunciation: The first jhāna [...] From forms: From the form objects (rūpadhammānaṃ), particularly together with (sense-)objects (ārammaṇehi) of the wholesome, resultant and functional types of all phenomena of the form sphere (rūpāvacaradhammānaṃ; referring to jhāna).

kāmānanti kilesakāmānañceva vatthukāmānañca. atha vā kāmānanti kilesakāmānaṃ. kilesakāmato hi nissaraṇā vatthukāmehipi nissaraṇaṃyeva hoti, na aññathā [...] nekkhammanti paṭhamajjhānaṃ [...] rūpānanti rūpadhammānaṃ, visesena saddhiṃ ārammaṇehi kusalavipākakiriyābhedato sabbesaṃ rūpāvacaradhammānaṃ.
frank k wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 3:41 pm So really, the evidence is just overwhelmingly clear.
That is indeed so! But from which side is the question. But I admit, the AN 9.37 passage really conveys this as an obvious and strong message, but the obvious is not always true.
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1113
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by Eko Care »

First of all, it is better to reflect whether one is qualified enough to start such a Comparative study.
frank k wrote: My fluency in pāḷi is not yet up to the level where I can read the commentaries unaided.
... I'm just not yet able to understand what (untranslated) commentary is saying.
Yet they engage in re-defining Pali terms like Pali experts.

It is not a surprise that the rejecters of Abhidhamma and Commentaries have never read it at least to see what they say.

And they have already made childish conclusions about the commentary even before reading them.
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2253
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by frank k »

A. Bhikkhu wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 5:35 pm ...

Dear Frank,
would you mind giving direct quotes for your points? ...
The sutta # refs that appear on this thread are just to quickly name them.
In the links I provided already, have direct pali+eng passages included
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2253
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by frank k »

A. Bhikkhu wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 5:35 pm ...
That is indeed so! But from which side is the question. But I admit, the AN 9.37 passage really conveys this as an obvious and strong message, but the obvious is not always true.
I address the whole rūpa of the kasina here:
https://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/ ... index.html

The part you want to compare with is how Vimuttimagga handles the same passage for infinite space (in same article).
Vimuttimagga is using an earlier abhidhamma, jhāna isn't redefined as a frozen state one has to emerge from, and one is percipient of kāya and adjhatta rūpa (meditator's own body) in 4 jhānas, but not in formless attainments.

Not in the above linked article:
If you study the 8 vimokkha and 8 abhiayatana carefully,
The Vism. redefinition of jhāna slots in there, but only if you use consistent, coherent definitions for
adjhatta and bahiddha rūpa. (
If you start trying to swap in the rūpa of a kasina for adjhatta and bahiddha rūpa,
you can't make sense of anything in 8 vimokkha and 8 abhiayatana.


Here I do a detailed audit of DN 2 showing how they essentially give very clear gloss of rūpa and kāya in 4 jhānas and 6 higher knowledge context, and show how it wouldn't work when you try to plug in vism. redefined kāya and kasina rūpa.

http://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/20 ... -rupa.html
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
Ṭhānuttamo
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:40 pm
Location: Kefenrod, Germany
Contact:

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by Ṭhānuttamo »

frank k wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 10:48 am The sutta # refs that appear on this thread are just to quickly name them.
In the links I provided already, have direct pali+eng passages included
What I meant is to insert it here to support what you are saying. Otherwise, as I mentioned, it will take me too long of a time to track down something that potentially supports your argument with a pointer to a at times long general text; it is actually not done like that in discussions. Either direct quotes or specific references to page numbers etc. are the norm. When you bring forth an argument, I would need that to continue, not just an instruction to look at a certain sutta or book where your argument is supported, as far you can see.

Mettā!
A. Bhikkhu
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2253
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by frank k »

The very first article I linked for you is not a general long article. It's pretty short, and It's only examining the gloss of the phrase 'kamehi' of first jhana,
https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2 ... amehi.html
Every single sutta, ab, vism. passage I provide quotes neatly in pali + eng, side by side, highlighting key words etc., in rich html formatted.
Every passage discussed there is specifically about 'vivicceva kamehi' and what kamehi means in that context.

You could view it in nicely formatted html, or I can just cut and paste the whole thing here.
You would also miss the many links withon, for example if you didn't think I snipped enough of the passage from a sutta and you wanted to quickly jump to the full sutta and get the full context.



Here it is in plain text:

Comprehensive gloss of vivicc’eva kāmehi from STED 1st Jhāna

'VIVICC’EVA KĀMEHI' OF FIRST JHANA = SECLUSION FROM SENSUALITY,
seclusion from desire for sensual pleasure,
seclusion from desire for sensual pleasure objects.

Surveying every reference of first jhana formula in the suttas, you can verify it yourself. Whenever first jhana occurs in a gradual samadhi training sequence, the kama/kamehi being referenced will also be explicitly explained prior to first jhana formula in the form of:
1. kāma sankappo or kāma vitakka, desire of sensual pleasure in opposition to nekkhamma sankappo/vitakka (renunciations thoughts and resolves). (AN 6.73, AN 6.74, AN 6.75).
2. 5kg = panca kāma-guṇā = 5 sensuality strings
3. kāmacchanda, the first of the 5niv⛅ = pañca nīvaraṇā = 5 hindrances
4. kāma, raga, or lobha of the 3am 😈🌱= 3 a-kusala mulani = 3 un-skillful roots, The Unholy Trinity, aka 3 aggi 🔥(fire)

⛔ Athough kāma in some contexts in Theravada scripture (not sure if it occurs in EBT?) can mean objects of the 5 senses, rather than desire for sensual pleasure objects, in first jhana context, this is never the case. Even in Abhidhamma Vibhanga.


AN 6.63 explains that in EBT, kāmā specifically means #1 and #2 from above
kāma (sensual pleasures) is slurped from AN 6.63Standard EBT Definitions. EBT = Early Buddhist Texts.
and equated with STED → 5kg kāma-guṇā
and this most important explicit explanation of that in the context of EBT and first jhana
...kāyaviññeyyā phoṭṭhabbā iṭṭhā kantā manāpā piyarūpā kāmūpasaṃhitā rajanīyā.
...Touches known by the body that are likable, desirable, agreeable, pleasant, sensual, and arousing.
Api ca kho, bhikkhave, nete kāmā kāmaguṇā nāmete ariyassa vinaye vuccanti—
However, these are not sensual pleasures. In the training of the noble one they’re called ‘kinds of sensual stimulation’.
Saṅkappa-rāgo purisassa kāmo,
Greedy intention is a person’s sensual pleasure.
Nete kāmā yāni citrāni loke;
The world’s pretty things aren’t sensual pleasures.
Saṅkapparāgo purisassa kāmo,
Greedy intention is a person’s sensual pleasure.
Tiṭṭhanti citrāni tatheva loke;
The world’s pretty things stay just as they are,
Athettha dhīrā vinayanti chandanti.
but a wise one removes desire for them.

VIVEKA, VIVICC'EVA MEANS:
Secluded. Specifically in this context, secluded from sensuality, sensual pleasure and desire for them. There can be both mental and physical seclusion, but by far the only one that matters in the end, is mental seclusion from sensuality based on wisdom.

Where physical seclusion may be implied in the EBT, would be in passages such as MN 150, where the physical seclusion is meant as a preliminary training aid to develop the samadhi and practice.

⛔ It absolutely never means the 5 senses of the body are shut off, that one has entered an arupa/formless attainment as late Theravada Abhidhamma such as Vism. claims (in contradiction to EBT and even early Abhidhamma).

(MN 150):

te āyasmanto araññavanapatthāni pantāni senāsanāni paṭisevanti. Natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā ye disvā disvā abhirameyyuṃ, natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā sotaviññeyyā saddā ye sutvā sutvā abhirameyyuṃ, natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā ghānaviññeyyā gandhā ye ghāyitvā ghāyitvā abhirameyyuṃ, natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā jivhāviññeyyā rasā ye sāyitvā sāyitvā abhirameyyuṃ, natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā kāyaviññeyyā phoṭṭhabbā ye phusitvā phusitvā abhirameyyuṃ.

[T]hose venerable ones resort to remote jungle-thicket resting places in the forest. For there are no forms cognizable by the eye there of a kind that they could look at and delight in. There are no sounds cognizable by the ear there of a kind that they could listen to and delight in. There are no odors cognizable by the nose there of a kind that they could smell and delight in. There are no flavors cognizable by the tongue there of a kind that they could taste and delight in. There are no tactual objects cognizable by the body there of a kind that they could touch and delight in.


STED 1ST JHĀNA
🚫💑 vivicc’eva kāmehi
🚫💑 Quite-withdrawn (from) sensuality,
🚫😠 vivicca a-kusalehi dhammehi
🚫😠 withdrawn (from) un-skillful Dhamma [teachings & qualities],
(V&V💭) sa-vitakkaṃ sa-vicāraṃ
(V&V💭) With-directed-thought, with-evaluation,
😁🙂 viveka-jaṃ pīti-sukhaṃ
😁🙂 withdrawal-born rapture-&-pleasure,
🌘 paṭhamaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati.
🌘 first Jhāna (he) enters, dwells.
STED 5KG: KĀMA-GUṆĀ
STED 5kg: sensuality-strings
pañc'-ime, bhikkhave,
(There are) five-of-these, ***********,
kāma-guṇā.
sensuality-strings.
katame pañca?
Which five?
(1) cakkhu-viññeyyā rūpā
(1) Eye-cognizable forms -
iṭṭhā kantā manāpā piya-rūpā
agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing-form,
kām-ūpasaṃhitā rajanīyā
sensual-desire--(it)-fosters, lust-it-provokes.
(2) sota-viññeyyā saddā
(2) Ear-cognizable sounds - …
(3) ghāna-viññeyyā gandhā
(3) Nose-cognizable aromas - …
(4) jivhā-viññeyyā rasā
(4)Tongue-cognizable flavors - …
(5) kāya-viññeyyā phoṭṭhabbā
(5) body-cognizable tactile-sensations -
iṭṭhā kantā manāpā piya-rūpā
agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing-form,
kām-ūpasaṃhitā rajanīyā
sensual-desire--(it)-fosters, lust-it-provokes.
STED 5NIV: NĪVARAṆĀ
STED 5niv: hindrances
♦ 219. “pañc-ime, bhikkhave,
(there are) "Five-(of)-these, *********,
āvaraṇā nīvaraṇā
obstructions, hindrances,
cetaso upakkilesā
mental corruptions,
paññāya dub-balī-karaṇā.
wisdom weakeners.
katame pañca?
which five?
kāmac-chando, bhikkhave,
1. sensual desire, monks,
āvaraṇo nīvaraṇo
(is an) obstruction, (a) hindrance,
cetaso upakkileso
(a) mental corruption,
paññāya dubbalīkaraṇo.
(a) wisdom-weakener.
byāpādo, bhikkhave, …
2. ill-will, monks, …
Thina-middhaṃ, bhikkhave, …
3. sloth-(and)-torpor, monks, …
Uddhacca-kukkuccaṃ, bhikkhave, …
4. restlessness-(and)-remorse, monks, …
vicikicchā, bhikkhave,
5. doubt, monks,
āvaraṇā nīvaraṇā
(is an) obstruction, (a) hindrance,
cetaso upakkilesā
(a) mental corruption,
paññāya dubbalīkaraṇā.
(a) wisdom-weakener.

STED SAMMĀ-SAṄKAPPO
STED right-resolve
Nekkhamma-saṅkappo,
Renunciation-resolve,
A-byāpāda-saṅkappo,
Non-ill-will-resolve,
A-vihiṃsā-saṅkappo —
Non-harmfulness-resolve
(whenever you see nekkhamma, especially in jhāna context, it's being contrasted against its akusala/unskillful opposite, kāma, sensuality)



People often forget the 👑-8fold-☸ noble-eightfold-path
is a causal sequence, where thoughts of renunciation based on samma sankappo's nekkhama-sankappo, feed directly into samma samadhi's first jhana formula's "with directed thought and evaluation". For example, in first jhana, you may have the thought, "wow, I'm free of lust and 5 hindrances, and it feels GREAT!", so long as the excitement and intensity of that thought does not block kaya-passadhi (bodily pacification of 7 awakening factor sequence).

正見 zhèng jiàn
1👁 sammā-diṭṭhi
right-view
正思惟 Zhèng sīwéi
2💭 sammā-saṅkappo
right-resolve
正語 Zhèng yǔ
3💬 sammā-vācā
right-vocalization
正業 zhèng yè
4🏃 sammā-kammanto
right-action
正命 zhèng mìng
5👑 sammā-ājīvo
right-livelihood
正精進 zhèng jīngjìn
6🏹 sammā-vāyāmo
right-effort
正念 zhèngniàn
7🐘 sammā-sati
right-remembering
正定 zhèngdìng
8🌄 sammā-samādhi
righteous-undistractible-lucidity





KN Iti 72: escape from kāma is nekkhamma (right resolve’s renunciation)
KN Iti 72
♦ “tisso imā, bhikkhave, nissaraṇiyā VAR dhātuyo.
“Monks, there are these three properties for escape.
katamā tisso?
Which three?
kāmānam-etaṃ nissaraṇaṃ yadidaṃ nekkhammaṃ,
This is the escape from sensuality: renunciation.1
rūpānam-etaṃ nissaraṇaṃ yadidaṃ āruppaṃ,
This is the escape from form: formlessness.
yaṃ kho pana kiñci bhūtaṃ
And as for whatever has come into being,
saṅkhataṃ paṭiccasamuppannaṃ
is fabricated & dependently co-arisen,
nirodho tassa nissaraṇaṃ —
the escape from that is cessation.
imā kho, bhikkhave, tisso nissaraṇiyā dhātuyo”ti.
These are the three properties for escape.”
♦ “kāma-nissaraṇaṃ ñatvā,
Knowing the escape from sensuality,
rūpānañca atikkamaṃ.
& the overcoming of forms
♦ sabba-saṅkhāra-samathaṃ,
–ardent always– touching the stilling
phusaṃ ātāpi sabbadā.
of all fabrications:
♦ “sa ve sammaddaso bhikkhu,
he is a monk who’s seen rightly.
yato tattha vimuccati.
From that he is there released.
♦ abhiññā-vosito santo,
A master of direct knowing,
sa ve yogātigo munī”ti.
at peace, he is a sage gone beyond bonds.
First of all notice that the escape from kāma in this passage, is renunciation/nekkhamma [sankappo
or vitakka resolves or thoughts]. NOT going into 'rupa' avacara (rupa sphere of consciousness) or entering into an arupa samadhi where the 5 senses of the body are shut off.

There are those who mistakenly misinterpret this phrase 'vivicceva kamehi' as meaning the body disappears, that the mind becomes divorced from the 5 sense faculties, one can not move the body, feel pain, hear sounds in first jhāna. They base that on interpreting kāmehi as sensual pleasure objects, and that seclusion from those objects means mind separates from the physical body. This is not the case. If you look at ever single occurrence of the first jhana in the suttas, right before first jhana, it always mentions 5kg or 5niv (5 strands of sensual pleasure and/or 5 hindrances). For the mind to be divorced from the body, the Buddha has a more specific way to make that clear. See the article “rūpa is not a-rūpa, 4 jhānas operate in rūpa”.

kāma is frequently contrasted against 5kg in gradual training passages with first jhana. Ariya still tempted by sensuality until they attain jhanas MN 14, MN 75 (buddha, leper, life as prince).
From studying every reference to STED 4j🌕 formula, and examining what happens right before first jhāna, we can see the pattern. Whenever first jhana occurs in a gradual training context, almost always what comes right before the first jhana formula is a contrast with 5kg, or 5niv (full STED above).





THERE ARE ONLY 2 SUTTAS IN THE CANON TITLED "FIRST JHANA"
So it's worth taking a close look at what it has to say regarding 'vivicceva kamehi'.

(AN 6.73, AN 6.74, AN 6.75).

You can click the links above to carefully study the full suttas (they're short), but in summary, the 3 wrong and right samma sankappos are contrasted against each other, and the 5 hindrances are listed. Here is a particularly important part of AN 6.73 that most people will miss. Most people will just look at it quickly and go, "ok, 5 hindrances, let's move on...", and miss this very important point:

(item #6 is method 2 of MN 20, i.e. first jhana purifying itself to qualify for 2nd jhana)
Cha, bhikkhave, dhamme pahāya bhabbo paṭhamaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharituṃ.
But after giving up these six [bad] dharmas you can enter and remain in the first jhāna.
Katame cha?
What six?
Kāma-c-chandaṃ,
1. Desire for sensual pleasures,
byāpādaṃ,
2. ill will,
thina-middhaṃ,
3. dullness and drowsiness,
uddhacca-kukkuccaṃ,
4. restlessness and remorse,
vicikicchaṃ,
5. doubt,
kāmesu kho panassa ādīnavo
6. And the drawbacks of sensual pleasures
na yathā-bhūtaṃ samma-p-paññāya su-diṭṭho hoti.
have not been {well-seen}, as-they-actually-are, (with) right-discernment.
Ime kho, bhikkhave, cha dhamme pahāya bhabbo
After giving up these six [bad] dharmas
paṭhamaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharitun”ti.
you can enter and remain in the first jhāna.”


The sixth item is method #2 from MN 20, the type of skillful thoughts we think to purify our mind, our view, to properly learn to notice, acknowledge, and gain an intuitive understanding that lust, passion, sensual thoughts are dangerous, lead directly to dukkha. And their skillful kusala opposite, 'nekkhama' thoughts of renunciation, lead to and feed the fire of first jhana. Vitakka thoughts have a crucial role in first jhana. They're like the kindling used to stoke and build up a fire before it's a big blaze and can sustain itself. It's a critical part of gradual samadhi training, before one has learned the skill of entering into samadhi directly by pacification (passaddhi-sam-bojjhanga).

So to destroy the meaning of vitakka (thinking) in first jhana, as Vism. and Ajahn Brahm do, is doing great harm to Buddhism. In the EBT, samatha and vipassana in jhana are conjoined, not separate entities to be practiced at different stages independently of each other, as the passage above clearly shows.


KN PE 7.72: WORD CMY ON FOUR JHĀNAS
is the earliest Theravada 4 jhana formula gloss. It agrees completely with the pure EBT passages quoted above. (first paragraph 72. talks about tīṇi akusala-mūlāni (3 unskillful roots) and 5niv (hindrances) removal.
♦ tattha a-lobhassa pāripūriyā nekkhamma-vitakkaṃ vitakketi.
576. Here, for non-greed fulfillment, renunciation-thoughts (he) thinks.
tattha a-dosassa pāripūriyā abyāpāda-vitakkaṃ vitakketi.
for non-hatred fulfillment, non-ill-will-thoughts (he) thinks.
tattha a-mohassa pāripūriyā avihiṃsā-vitakkaṃ vitakketi.
for non-delusion fulfillment, non-harm-thoughts (he) thinks.
tattha a-lobhassa pāripūriyā vivitto hoti kāmehi.
577. “Here, for fulfilling non-passion he is secluded from sensual pleasures.
tattha a-dosassa pāripūriyā
Here, for fulfilling non-aggression and
a-mohassa pāripūriyā ca vivitto hoti pāpakehi akusalehi dhammehi,
fulfilling non-delusion he is secluded from unskillful phenomena.
savitakkaṃ savicāraṃ vivekajaṃ pītisukhaṃ
And so he enters and remains in the first jhāna,
paṭhamaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati.
which includes directed thought and evaluation, as well as joy and pleasure born of seclusion.
♦ vitakkāti tayo vitakkā —
578. Directed thought: There are three kinds of directed thought, namely
nekkhammavitakko
the thought of renunciation,
abyāpādavitakko
the thought of non-aversion,
avihiṃsāvitakko.
and the thought of harmlessness.
tattha paṭham-ābhinipāto vitakko,
579. Here, directed thought is the first instance
paṭiladdhassa vicaraṇaṃ vicāro.
while evaluation is the evaluation of what is thereby received.



B. Thanissaro commentary from his sutta footnotes, circa 2000 C.E.
... the Buddha defined sensuality not as the objects of the senses, but as the passion and delight that one feels for ones intentions toward such objects [ AN 6.63 ]. Although the objects of the senses are neither good nor evil per se, the act of passion and delight forms a bond on the mind, disturbing its immediate peace and ensuring its continued entrapment in the round of rebirth and redeath. Only by separating the desire from its object can one directly perceive the truth of these teachings.

Lets look at some Theravada Non EBT glosses
Te Ab Vb 10: Bojjhaṅga
Te Ab Vb 12: Jhana
Vimt. Vimutti-magga
Vism. Vi-suddhi-magga



Abhidhamma Vibhanga 12 first jhana gloss
“Vivicceva kāmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehī”ti tattha katame kāmā? Chando kāmo, rāgo kāmo, chandarāgo kāmo, saṅkappo kāmo, rāgo kāmo, saṅkapparāgo kāmo— ime vuccanti “kāmā”.
“Aloof from sense pleasures, aloof from unskilful dhammas” means: Therein what are sense pleasures? Wish is sense pleasure, lust is sense pleasure, lustful wish is sense pleasure, thought is sense pleasure, lust is sense pleasure, lustful thought is sense pleasure. These are called sense pleasures.
Tattha katame akusalā dhammā? Kāmacchando, byāpādo, thinaṃ, middhaṃ, uddhaccaṃ, kukkuccaṃ, vicikicchā—ime vuccanti “akusalā dhammā”.
Therein what are unskilful dhammas? Wish for sense pleasure, ill-will, sloth, torpor, distraction, remorse, doubt. These are called unskilful dhammas.
Iti imehi ca kāmehi imehi ca akusalehi dhammehi vivitto hoti. Tena vuccati “vivicceva kāmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehī”ti.
Thus from these sense pleasures and from these unskilful dhammas he is aloof. Therefore this is called “aloof from sense pleasures, aloof from unskilful dhammas”.

conclusion: Abhidhamma agrees with EBT on what kamehi means in first jhana: lust, passion, sensual desire, etc., and not "5 sense faculties shutting off"

VIMUTTI-MAGGA (J1 GLOSS: VIVICCEVA KAMEHI)
Q. Since separation from demeritorious states is preached and lust as a demeritorious state is already within it, why should separation from lust be separately preached?
A. Lust is conquered through emancipation. Every Buddha's teaching can remove the defilements well. “The separation from lust is renunciation'. This is the teaching of the Buddha. It is like the attainment of the first meditation, jhāna. The thought connected with the perception of lust partakes of the state of deterioration.
Thereby lust is connected with the defilements. With the dispersion of lust all defilements disperse. Therefore, separately, the separation from lust is preached.
And again, thus is separation from lust: After gaining emancipation, a man accomplishes the separation from lust.


conclusion: vimt., which is based on canonical abhdhamma, also agrees with EBT and does not contradict it. No mention of "5 body senses shut off" here.


VISUDDHI-MAGGA
Their gloss is quite long, so will not be reproduced in this article. The latter portion of the first jhana gloss, seems to quote Abhidhamma gloss above. Prior to that, they seem to support the idea of kamehi referring to objects of sensual pleasure rather than 'desire for sensual pleasures' as the Earlier Buddhist texts, and Abhidhamma and Vimt. states. But note that it's an ADDITIONAL meaning of kamehi, not REPLACING the existing incontrovertible meaning of 'desire for sensual pleasures'.



From the Nyanatiloka's dictionary: (summarize Theravada including Vism. understanding of seclusion)
VIVEKA
'detachment', seclusion, is according to Niddesa, of 3 kinds:
(1) bodily detachment (kāya-viveka), i.e. abiding in solitude free from alluring sensuous objects;
(2) mental detachment (citta-viveka), i.e. the inner detachment from sensuous things;
(3) detachment from the substrata of existence (upadhi-viveka).
In the description of the 1st absorption,
the words "detached from sensuous things" (vivicc' eva kāmehi) refer, according to Vis.M. IV, to 'bodily detachment';
the words "detached from karmically unwholesome things" (vivicca akusalehi dhammehi) refer to 'mental detachment';
the words "born of detachment" (vivekaja), to the absence of the 5 hindrances.

http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/u_v/viveka.htm


Rupert Gethin glosses vivicc’ eva kāmehi of first jhāna

vivicc’ eva kāmehi must mean ‘quite separated / secluded from kāma-s’; so the question is what are kāma-s exactly. I don’t think kāma means ’sense pleasures’. Early on (e.g. already in Peṭ and in NiddI) the exegetical tradition explains kāma-s as twofold: (1) ‘desires' as affliction/defilement (kilesa-kāma), namely taṇhā for the objects of the five senses, and (2) ‘desires’ as the objects of those desires (vatthu-kāma), namely the objects of the five senses themselves (visible forms, sounds, smells, tastes, the objects of touch). So I take vivicc’ eva kāmehi to mean ‘quite separate/secluded from desires for the objects of the senses / from the objects of sense-desires. That certain words in Pali/Sanskrit can mean both the action and the object that action is directed towards is quite common. In fact this happens in all languages. So in English ’thought’ can mean both ’thinking’ and the object of thinking (what is thought about); ‘attachment’ can mean both being attached and then thing one is attached to; kāma in Pali is exactly like this, even though the English word ‘desire’, which is often used to translate kāma, is not so.


That jhāna is separate or secluded from the objects of the five sense is, of course, why it is rūpāvacara as opposed to kāmāvacara. The attainment of jhāna marks a radical transformation of mind.


GLOSS OF AVACARA (SPHERES OF CONSCIOUSNESS)
excerpt:
the sensuous sphere (kāmāvacara),
the fine-material sphere (rūpāvacara),
the immaterial sphere (arūpāvacara).

B. Thanissaro notes that:
I was curious about your statement that kāma in some contexts can mean objects of the senses. What are those contexts? Is it unequivocal that that’s what the word kāma means in those contexts? Margaret Cone’s Pali dictionary does not give the meaning “sense object” under the entry for kāma at all.

Rupert Gethin responds:
As for Thanissaro Bhikkhu’s query, one of the contexts in which Buddhaghosa explains that kāma-s refer to the objects of sense-desire is precisely the phrase vivicc’ eva kāmehi introducing the first jhāna. At Vism IV.83 he cites the authority of the Niddesa (a late canonical text, but nonetheless likely to predate the Peṭakopadesa) where kāma-s are explained as objects (vatthu) and as referring to “agreeable visible forms, etc.” and concludes (in Ñāṇamoli’s translation):

[T]he words “quite secluded from sense desires” properly mean “quite secluded from sense desires as object,” and express bodily seclusion, while the words “secluded from unprofitable things” properly mean “secluded from sense desires as defilement or from all unprofitable things,” and express mental seclusion.

He elaborates on this in IV.84, before going on to say (IV.85) that kāma-s here can also be taken as referring to defilements (kilesa).

B. Thanissaro notes that:
I don’t see how kāma in kāmāvacara has to mean sense object. Don’t the Brahmas who live in the rūpāvacara realm see sights, hears sounds, etc.? if they didn’t, how would Brahma Sahampati make requests of the Buddha?


my comment:
Even if Vism. is glossing kamehi to mean 'object', it seems to be adding that meaning as an addition to the main meaning of kamehi as 'defilement', rather than replacing it. In other words, for first jhana one being in an empty hut or wilderness has physical seclusion from sensual 'objects', as a bonus meaning, not a replacement meaning for kamehi as 'defilement'.


In the Chinese EBT Agamas, 'kāmehi" translated as 5kg, agreeing with Pali EBT
Dr. William Chu says:
Five strands of sensuality is almost invariably translated as wuyu (lit. "five desires"). In other words, the Chinese makes it clear that it is the "desire" that is renounced, and not the "sensual stimulation" (i.e. the sensory experience itself, as Sujato would have it) that is renounced.

other Relevant articles

vimt. gloss of 'vivicceva kamehi' is DESIRE for sensual pleasures, not "5 sensual pleasure objects"

MN 111, jhana 'lite', and simile of spaceship to mars:
https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2 ... sutta.html


A. Bhikkhu wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 11:26 am
frank k wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 10:48 am The sutta # refs that appear on this thread are just to quickly name them.
In the links I provided already, have direct pali+eng passages included
What I meant is to insert it here to support what you are saying. Otherwise, as I mentioned, it will take me too long of a time to track down something that potentially supports your argument with a pointer to a at times long general text; it is actually not done like that in discussions. Either direct quotes or specific references to page numbers etc. are the norm. When you bring forth an argument, I would need that to continue, not just an instruction to look at a certain sutta or book where your argument is supported, as far you can see.

Mettā!
A. Bhikkhu
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2253
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by frank k »

Dear Bhante,
A couple of things I think you have not addressed yet or explained in enough detail, that I asked about previously.

1. Even if we assume kāmehi in first jhāna is plural, and is referring to objects instead of desire for objects,
why do you suppose it must mean 5 senses shutoff?
MN 150, (it's a short sutta, and I quote relevant part in the 'kamehi' article)
https://lucid24.org/mn/mn150/index.html

MN 150 show how those arahants are secluded from 5 objects by going into a forest, where contact with those 5 sense concsciousness wouldn't happen
te āyasmanto araññavanapatthāni pantāni senāsanāni paṭisevanti. Natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā ye disvā disvā abhirameyyuṃ, natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā sotaviññeyyā saddā ye sutvā sutvā abhirameyyuṃ, natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā ghānaviññeyyā gandhā ye ghāyitvā ghāyitvā abhirameyyuṃ, natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā jivhāviññeyyā rasā ye sāyitvā sāyitvā abhirameyyuṃ, natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā kāyaviññeyyā phoṭṭhabbā ye phusitvā phusitvā abhirameyyuṃ.
That sutta says nothing about entering a formless samadhi with 5 senses shut off.
So seclusion from 'objects' can simply mean that. Going into an empty hut or forest.

2. In your previous answer you admit AN 9.37 and MN 43 (where 4 jhānas are very conspicuously omitted from states where 5 senses are shut off), but still imply that's not conclusive evidence. Why not?
There's also this comprehensive DPR search and audit I did, looking at a few lines before every occurrence of the first jhāna formula.
https://lucid24.org/sted/4j/allref/index.html
It's a relatively short article, considering what it does.
So between AN 9.37 and MN 43 not listing jhānas, and many times studying EVERY SINGLE reference to first jhāna in the nikāyas, and finding nothing that hints of kāya being missing, that's pretty conclusive to me. Does it really seem plausible the Buddha would not just clearly, and in several places, say kāya is a nāma kāya (mind only 'body) if that were the case for the 4 jhānas?

metta,
Frank




A. Bhikkhu wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 11:26 am
frank k wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 10:48 am The sutta # refs that appear on this thread are just to quickly name them.
In the links I provided already, have direct pali+eng passages included
What I meant is to insert it here to support what you are saying. Otherwise, as I mentioned, it will take me too long of a time to track down something that potentially supports your argument with a pointer to a at times long general text; it is actually not done like that in discussions. Either direct quotes or specific references to page numbers etc. are the norm. When you bring forth an argument, I would need that to continue, not just an instruction to look at a certain sutta or book where your argument is supported, as far you can see.

Mettā!
A. Bhikkhu
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1113
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by Eko Care »

Does it really seem plausible the Buddha would not just clearly, and in several places, say kāya is a nāma kāya (mind only 'body) if that were the case for the 4 jhānas?
If one is very rigid in already grasped opinion, then how can others convince him?
User avatar
Ṭhānuttamo
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:40 pm
Location: Kefenrod, Germany
Contact:

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by Ṭhānuttamo »

frank k wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 3:52 pm natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā ye disvā disvā abhirameyyuṃ
Hmm, as far as I can see, the relevant Pāḷi passage that you adduced simply refers to forms etc. that do not become the objects of delight, saying, as its basic import, that only forms are present in remote forest lodgings that are not the objects of delight, such as fallen leaves. It is not embedded in a context describing jhāna, or does it? It definitely points to the fact that they have vanished, just in another context. It doesn't mean that they cannot vanish because the five senses are shut off in a context that speaks about jhāna. The passage reads: "For those venerable ones resort to secluded resting places that are isolated jungle thickets. And so, then, there are no such forms cognizable by the eye that they would, having seen these, delight in ( tathā hi te āyasmanto araññavanapatthāni pantāni senāsanāni paṭisevanti. natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā ye disvā disvā abhirameyyuṃ).

The commentary identifies these as the five kāmaguṇa, which points again clearly to the fact that these may constitute objects, "such as bodies of women" (itthirūpādīni). As mentioned earlier, in the context where it is said that in the first an second jhānas "forms etc. that are connected with sensuality" do not occur, the respective commentary explains what is meant by that with the following: "connected with sensuality means: that which arises dependend upon sensuality owing to the twofold sensuality" (kāmūpasaṃhitanti kāmanissitaṃ duvidhe kāme ārabbha uppajjanakaṃ; AN-a), that is, the objects as well as the desire towards them.
frank k wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 3:52 pm Even if we assume kāmehi in first jhāna is plural, and is referring to objects instead of desire for objects,
why do you suppose it must mean 5 senses shutoff?
Some resemblance to the consciousness of the five senses is still there and the commentaries explicitly stating that this is what is meant, right? I mean that proper sense experience does not take place ... Wouldn't you be able to even verify with your own experience to some degree? I mean for me it appears to be cogent when we assume a state that is so absorbed into a physical object so as to lift this experience completely on the plane of refined materiality that is experienced on a purely mental level, with some resemblance remaining to sense consciousness. Compare also Bodhi's "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma", p. 56:
The object of the jhāna-consciousness is a mental image called the counterpart sign (paṭibhāganimitta). This sign is considered a conceptual object (paññatti), but it generally arises on the basis of a visible form, and hence these jhānas pertain to the fine-material sphere. The meditator aspiring to jhāna may select as the original object of concentration a contemplative device called a kasiṇa, such as a coloured disk, on which attention is fixed. When concentration matures, this physical device will give rise to a visualized replica of itself called the “learning sign” (uggahanimitta), and this in turn gives rise to the counterpart sign apprehended as the object of jhāna
frank k wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 3:52 pm In your previous answer you admit AN 9.37 and MN 43 (where 4 jhānas are very conspicuously omitted from states where 5 senses are shut off), but still imply that's not conclusive evidence. Why not?
Because I believe that how the commentary explains it is definitely a feasible way of understanding the passage at issue. Just the formless attainments get rid of every trace of forms, that is why the four jhānas are not mentioned ... Now that may not make sense to you, but as far as I can see, it is possible. Be fair, Frank! I just also don't treat commentarial explanations as merely another opinion but rather as additional evidence, and not a weak one. But I think we won't be able to convince each other. Unfortunately, the Blessed One is not around anymore to whom we could go to clarify who is right: the ancient elders or ancient and modern-day Suttantikas. But I value your brining up things that may prompt questions. I myself also still want to delve a bit deeper into the issue later, and quite likely then I will get back to your material that you collected.
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2253
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by frank k »

Responding to your 3 sections below:
1. AFAIK it's not a jhāna context. But the point is, that their seclusion 'viveka' does not involve 5 senses shut off. They're 'secluded' because they're in a remote jungle away from 'desire' and 'objects of desire'. We can put aside this sutta ref., the real heart of the matter is in your next section.

2. You're still not answering the heart of the question. That there can be a subtle body in some samādhis is beside the point. The real issue is, first jhāna formula says vivicca kāmehi, secluded from sensual (objects of desire for the sake of this discussion). What makes you think 5 senses are shut off? based on that instruction? There's no other precedent in the suttas of 'viveka' being used that way. I can be secluded from you by walking to another room and closing the door. I don't have to enter a disembodied samādhi. Just as in the satipatthana formula it says "vineyya loke abhijjha domanasaa" (having removed greed and distress from the world). That doesn't make one think, one must be at least a non-returner because only they have completely removed greed and distress. Similarly, I don't think anyone would ever think being secluded means being in a disembodied samādhi.

3. I don't follow what you're saying here. But I think if you go through the 8vimokkha and 8abhiayatana carefully, how it differentiates between internal and external rūpa, you're going to reevaluate your position on this. Let's put this section aside from now and focus on #2 previous section.
A. Bhikkhu wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 11:39 am
frank k wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 3:52 pm natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā ye disvā disvā abhirameyyuṃ
Hmm, as far as I can see, the relevant Pāḷi passage that you adduced simply refers to forms etc. that do not become the objects of delight, saying, as its basic import, that only forms are present in remote forest lodgings that are not the objects of delight, such as fallen leaves. It is not embedded in a context describing jhāna, or does it? It definitely points to the fact that they have vanished, just in another context. It doesn't mean that they cannot vanish because the five senses are shut off in a context that speaks about jhāna. The passage reads: "For those venerable ones resort to secluded resting places that are isolated jungle thickets. And so, then, there are no such forms cognizable by the eye that they would, having seen these, delight in ( tathā hi te āyasmanto araññavanapatthāni pantāni senāsanāni paṭisevanti. natthi kho pana tattha tathārūpā cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā ye disvā disvā abhirameyyuṃ).

The commentary identifies these as the five kāmaguṇa, which points again clearly to the fact that these may constitute objects, "such as bodies of women" (itthirūpādīni). As mentioned earlier, in the context where it is said that in the first an second jhānas "forms etc. that are connected with sensuality" do not occur, the respective commentary explains what is meant by that with the following: "connected with sensuality means: that which arises dependend upon sensuality owing to the twofold sensuality" (kāmūpasaṃhitanti kāmanissitaṃ duvidhe kāme ārabbha uppajjanakaṃ; AN-a), that is, the objects as well as the desire towards them.
frank k wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 3:52 pm Even if we assume kāmehi in first jhāna is plural, and is referring to objects instead of desire for objects,
why do you suppose it must mean 5 senses shutoff?
Some resemblance to the consciousness of the five senses is still there and the commentaries explicitly stating that this is what is meant, right? I mean that proper sense experience does not take place ... Wouldn't you be able to even verify with your own experience to some degree? I mean for me it appears to be cogent when we assume a state that is so absorbed into a physical object so as to lift this experience completely on the plane of refined materiality that is experienced on a purely mental level, with some resemblance remaining to sense consciousness. Compare also Bodhi's "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma", p. 56:
The object of the jhāna-consciousness is a mental image called the counterpart sign (paṭibhāganimitta). This sign is considered a conceptual object (paññatti), but it generally arises on the basis of a visible form, and hence these jhānas pertain to the fine-material sphere. The meditator aspiring to jhāna may select as the original object of concentration a contemplative device called a kasiṇa, such as a coloured disk, on which attention is fixed. When concentration matures, this physical device will give rise to a visualized replica of itself called the “learning sign” (uggahanimitta), and this in turn gives rise to the counterpart sign apprehended as the object of jhāna
frank k wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 3:52 pm In your previous answer you admit AN 9.37 and MN 43 (where 4 jhānas are very conspicuously omitted from states where 5 senses are shut off), but still imply that's not conclusive evidence. Why not?
Because I believe that how the commentary explains it is definitely a feasible way of understanding the passage at issue. Just the formless attainments get rid of every trace of forms, that is why the four jhānas are not mentioned ... Now that may not make sense to you, but as far as I can see, it is possible. Be fair, Frank! I just also don't treat commentarial explanations as merely another opinion but rather as additional evidence, and not a weak one. But I think we won't be able to convince each other. Unfortunately, the Blessed One is not around anymore to whom we could go to clarify who is right: the ancient elders or ancient and modern-day Suttantikas. But I value your brining up things that may prompt questions. I myself also still want to delve a bit deeper into the issue later, and quite likely then I will get back to your material that you collected.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
Ṭhānuttamo
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:40 pm
Location: Kefenrod, Germany
Contact:

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by Ṭhānuttamo »

frank k wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 4:14 pm What makes you think 5 senses are shut off? based on that instruction?
Because the commentary without doubt says so in what I believe to be a context that doesn't proof conclusively otherwise. It also stands in relation to vivicca akusalehi dhammehi, which, obviously, must refer to the mental aspect alongside the preceding physical, perfectly in line with, for example, the Itivuttaka commentary quoted earlier ... In any case, I think we have laid out enough material so that everyone could see for him- or herself. So, I would withdraw from further discussion for now since I believe it wouldn't really move the needle for both of us.
frank k wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 4:14 pm But I think if you go through the 8vimokkha and 8abhiayatana carefully, how it differentiates between internal and external rūpa, you're going to reevaluate your position on this.
I think just if I would ignore the explanations of the ancient elders contained in the commentaries and try to come up with some of my own. :)
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22536
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by Ceisiwr »

A. Bhikkhu wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 5:06 pm
I believe the commentaries take “eva” in “vivicceva kāmehi” to mean “completely secluded from sensual pleasures”, as in the 5 senses are temporarily suspended.
“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
frank k
Posts: 2253
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: EBT-People Don't Have a Base. (An Evidence)

Post by frank k »

Last question Bhante, then I agree to withdrawal.

I'd like to look at the commentary again. Does it actually say 5 senses are shut off? Or does it simply say both mental desire, and physical objects of desire are not present in that moment?

In SN 46.3, which is going through the conditional sequence for 7 awakening factors, it has something similar
https://lucid24.org/sn/sn46/sn46-003/index.html
(0. 👂 Bhikkhūnaṃ dhammaṃ sutvā)
Tathārūpānaṃ, bhikkhave, bhikkhūnaṃ
The-reason-is, ***********, from-those-monks
dhammaṃ sutvā
[giving] Dhamma-[teachings], having-heard-(it),
dvayena vūpakāsena
(by) two-kinds-of withdrawal,
vūpakaṭṭho viharati—
withdrawn (one) dwells -
kāya-vūpakāsena ca
body-withdrawal and
citta-vūpakāsena ca.
mind-withdrawal **.

Now the above in SN 46.3 doesn't mean 5 senses are shut off, since rest of the sutta wouldn't work otherwise. It's a different word there, not viveka, but just to give an example of how one can be 'secluded' with the body and mind without 5 senses are shut off.


A. Bhikkhu wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 5:06 pm
frank k wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 4:14 pm What makes you think 5 senses are shut off? based on that instruction?
Because the commentary without doubt says so in what I believe to be a context that doesn't proof conclusively otherwise. It also stands in relation to vivicca akusalehi dhammehi, which, obviously, must refer to the mental aspect alongside the preceding physical, perfectly in line with, for example, the Itivuttaka commentary quoted earlier ... In any case, I think we have laid out enough material so that everyone could see for him- or herself. So, I would withdraw from further discussion for now since I believe it wouldn't really move the needle for both of us.
frank k wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 4:14 pm But I think if you go through the 8vimokkha and 8abhiayatana carefully, how it differentiates between internal and external rūpa, you're going to reevaluate your position on this.
I think just if I would ignore the explanations of the ancient elders contained in the commentaries and try to come up with some of my own. :)
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
Post Reply