Achieving the ultimate samadhi without jhana.

[DeadBuddha]

Hi.

I have heard that one can attain ultimate samadhi without experiencing jhana. But I have also read that the first jhâna automatically follows from powerful concentration. Now, training for ultimate samadhi involves states of powerful concentration.

So I don't understand how one can reach the ultimate samadhi without having experienced jhâna.

Thank you in advance

[Goofaholix]

I'm not clear what you mean by ultimate samadhi, how does it differe from ordinary samadhi?

A quick google suggests its a Hindu concept.

[Ceisiwr]

Hi.

I have heard that one can attain ultimate samadhi without experiencing jhana. But I have also read that the first jhâna automatically follows from powerful concentration. Now, training for ultimate samadhi involves states of powerful concentration.

So I don't understand how one can reach the ultimate samadhi without having experienced jhâna.

Thank you in advance

There are the 4 Jhāna samādhis and there are the 3 samādhis of Emptiness (Suññato samādhi), Signless (Animitto samādhi) and Wishless/Intentionless (Appaṇihito samādhi). The Emptiness, Signless and Wishless samādhis all take an aspect of nibbāna as the object of the meditation. Was it these you were referring to? If so, it seems your question is about if awakening can occur with or without the 4 Jhānas.

[DeadBuddha]

By "ultimate samadhi", I mean the highest level of concentration that can be reached, and which, together with vipassana, allows one to reach nirvana.

Yes, I wonder if one can reach nirvana without having experienced the jhânas. And I wonder how it would be possible, given that to generate the concentration necessary to reach nirvana, we are obliged to pass through intermediate stages of concentration which automatically produce the first jhâna.

[santa100]

By "ultimate samadhi", I mean the highest level of concentration that can be reached, and which, together with vipassana, allows one to reach nirvana.

Yes, I wonder if one can reach nirvana without having experienced the jhânas. And I wonder how it would be possible, given that to generate the concentration necessary to reach nirvana, we are obliged to pass through intermediate stages of concentration which automatically produce the first jhâna.

Ven. Gunaratana in his excellent The Jhanas essay mentioned a type of samadhi practiced by "dry-insight" meditators called "momentary concentration" (khanikasamadhi) which might not necessarily requires the practitioner to attain the highest level of conventional jhanas. Now whether there's any direct mapping of khanikasamadhi to any level of conventional jhanas or not ( at least to the 1st jhana ), unfortunately you'd have to consult a dry-insight expert for some insight.

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

Read about Vipassanā Jhāna or concentration for insight.

See also: How to Proceed to Insight.

[Inedible]

Just to throw something else in the discussion, we know that Buddha was responsible for teaching Jhana. He remembered a spontaneous experience from childhood when he was under that tree during the plowing ceremony. His father was out in the field breaking ground. He was relaxed and comfortable and secluded. He remembered it after years of struggle and thought that it may be the way to go. It was pleasure that did not arise due to sense contact. Prior to developing Jhana as an adult he experienced 2 strong formless trances which were not Jhana. They would have qualified as some sort of Samadhi. I read that Buddha developed the word Samadhi as well and then everyone started using it. I'm thinking of Raja Yoga and it's coincidental 8 limbed formula. Dharana, Dhyana, Samadhi. Given that Buddha learned formless meditation before he created Jhana, it must be possible to enter into formless experiences of some sort without having Jhana first. It is not likely that they qualify as Right Concentration or it would be more common.

[Ceisiwr]

Just to throw something else in the discussion, we know that Buddha was responsible for teaching Jhana. He remembered a spontaneous experience from childhood when he was under that tree during the plowing ceremony. His father was out in the field breaking ground. He was relaxed and comfortable and secluded. He remembered it after years of struggle and thought that it may be the way to go. It was pleasure that did not arise due to sense contact. Prior to developing Jhana as an adult he experienced 2 strong formless trances which were not Jhana. They would have qualified as some sort of Samadhi. I read that Buddha developed the word Samadhi as well and then everyone started using it. I'm thinking of Raja Yoga and it's coincidental 8 limbed formula. Dharana, Dhyana, Samadhi. Given that Buddha learned formless meditation before he created Jhana, it must be possible to enter into formless experiences of some sort without having Jhana first. It is not likely that they qualify as Right Concentration or it would be more common.

The Buddha didn’t create or discover Jhana. Other ascetics at the time knew of them and experienced them. I mean, there was some serious meditation going on before the Buddha.

[Inedible]

There was serious meditation, but it wasn't Jhana.

[Ceisiwr]

There was serious meditation, but it wasn't Jhana.

DN 1 states the opposite.

[Goofaholix]

By "ultimate samadhi", I mean the highest level of concentration that can be reached, and which, together with vipassana, allows one to reach nirvana.

But that's jhana though.

[pegembara]

By "ultimate samadhi", I mean the highest level of concentration that can be reached, and which, together with vipassana, allows one to reach nirvana.

Yes, I wonder if one can reach nirvana without having experienced the jhânas. And I wonder how it would be possible, given that to generate the concentration necessary to reach nirvana, we are obliged to pass through intermediate stages of concentration which automatically produce the first jhâna.

You cannot get any "deeper" than the cessation of sense experience(consciousness) or the Zen equivalent of the zero.

As we sustain our attention on the mind, we see that all those labels are the outer petals of the lotus. When they open, we know that there is more to this, that there's a deeper reality which is certainly beyond words. If we can keep on sustaining our attention on this thing which we call "the mind", "experience", "the moment", or whatever we wish to call it, without moving, the innermost petals start to manifest and then finally the last, the thousandth petal, the innermost-of-the-innermost, opens up and reveals what is called "the jewel in the heart of the lotus" The beautiful jewel of Dhamma which is emptiness - nothing there! This will not be what you expect in the heart of a lotus, but that's what's there - the emptiness of all phenomena. Once you see that, it gives you a great shock that wakes you from the deep slumber of illusion.

https://www.dhammatalks.net/Books3/Ajah ... Things.htm

All we are trying to do is to find out that which ends all that suffering and finishes this Holy Life business. We want to end it and to see that the core of nothingness is where it is ended. Imagine what that might be like when you know, because you've seen to the very depth of all things, that there's nothing there. That which you've taken to be consciousness, that which knows, you find that it's completely empty.

[Microdose]

I'm not clear what you mean by ultimate samadhi, how does it differe from ordinary samadhi?

A quick google suggests its a Hindu concept.

I’m not sure samadhi is a concept

People makes concepts to try and describe an experience

[mjaviem]

...

... Imagine what that might be like when you know, because you've seen to the very depth of all things, that there's nothing there. That which you've taken to be consciousness, that which knows, you find that it's completely empty.

"There's nothing there" sounds very bleak for our deluded minds. Too much desolation for our selves. It's better to say "a thing is not there. That which we've taken to be a thing isn't a thing". This way it doesn't feel so doomed and depressing, I think.

[Goofaholix]

I’m not sure samadhi is a concept

People makes concepts to try and describe an experience

I'm referring to the concept "ultimate samadhi", but yes "samadhi" is also a concept that we use to label an experience.