Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
The Absorbtions in Buddhist Meditation
person
Don't believe everything you thinkThe liminal space Veteran
The Noble Eightfold Path -- the Buddha's prescription for attaining enlightenment -- is familiar. We have some idea what is meant by right speech, right action, right livelihood, and so forth. And we know that these are very important.
However, the one factor of the path that is often shortchanged is the eighth fold: Right Concentration. Here the Wanderling seeks to explain what "right concentration" is, how to practice it, and the role it plays on the road to enlightenment.
Right concentration (samma samadhi) is explicitly defined in the Mahasatipatthana Sutta (DN 22) and in other sutras (e.g., Saccavibhanga Sutta, MN 141) as jhanic meditation:
And what is right concentration? Here a [meditator] -- secluded from sense desires, secluded from unwholesome states of mind -- enters and remains in the first jhana, which is filled with rapture and joy born of seclusion accompanied by initial and sustained attention. With the stilling of initial and sustained attention, by gaining inner tranquility and oneness of mind, one enters and remains in the second jhana, which is without initial and sustained attention, born of concentration, and filled with rapture and joy. With the fading away of rapture, remaining imperturbable, mindful, and clearly aware, one enters and remains in the third jhana, and of such a person the Noble Ones declare, "Equanimous and mindful, one has a pleasant abiding." With the abandoning of pleasure and pain -- as with the earlier disappearance of elation and distress -- one enters and remains in the fourth jhana, which is beyond pleasure and pain and purified by equanimity and mindfulness. This is called right concentration.
Therefore, the jhanas are at the very heart of the Buddha's teaching. This fact is presented in not only one important sutra but in many as well as in commentaries and in personal meditation instructions with living masters...
http://wisdomquarterly.blogspot.com/2012/05/absorptions-buddhist-meditation.html
0
Comments
Well wishes,
Abu
The problem is that the guides don't agree, the debate gets polarised and important questions are fudged.
Is access concentration a sufficient basis for practising insight, or are the jhanas required ( as the suttas appear to suggest )?
Are the jhanas themselves a form of insight, even a glimpse of the enlightened mind?
Is the distinction between calm and insight really valid, or are they just 2 sides of the same coin when one is practising correctly?
Why do different traditions teach different approaches to meditation, and do they all lead to the same place, or not?
If you want to go into the answers though, we can.
I called them preliminary problems because it is like learning to surf. The surf masters whom we cannot even see yet perhaps out from the dry shore are out surfing the waves happily. They leave us some guides and other to be surf masters are busily adapting their methods to teach the new generation of surfers. And so it goes. You say the guides don't agree, but show me the source, and I will tell you if they agree or not.
The Buddha left a lot of different guidance for the different capacities and inherent characteristics of the manifold people. The guides are just that - the guides of the Master. But they can be distracting if one is focussed too much on the instruction booklet, rather than the point of the exercise - the surfing.
When you too dive in the waves, surf the monster wave, or glide peacefully on the surface of the ocean, will your doubts disappear or not?
OK I am spurting now but here is a short hand version for your answers, on a tentative basis --
The problem is that the guides don't agree, the debate gets polarised and important questions are fudged.
Personally speaking I have never seen guides disagree maybe because I prefer to go for authentic guidance and practice texts. Show me where it does not agree and I can look at it. Secondly, a phrase I have always used and still holds true is 'all contradictions resolve themself in practice.'
zenmyste is asking for the words of the Buddha as originally taught. But if he practiced, he would know that the genuine traditions are also saying the same thing, just using different words and pointers. For example, for the person who has reached a tourism point, they may use different words to relay an experience but it does not mean that tourism point was different.
That said, I do think it is important for a student to follow the procedures and system as made in a tradition as there is usually a reason for the 'whole basis of teaching' within particular traditions.
As to debate and such, complete waste of time. Who needs to be arguing on the shore, when the ocean beckons?
Is access concentration a sufficient basis for practising insight, or are the jhanas required ( as the suttas appear to suggest )?
Of course access concentration is sufficient. For insight, for learning, for Buddhism, yes. In one sutra which I cannot remember, concentration is equated to a flashlight, the more stable you are, the more steady and strong the flashlight is. Or as Ajahn Chah said, samadhi and insight are two sides of the same stick, you cannot pick one up without picking up the other.
Samadhi is the basis of our meditations because with stability, we can see much better. Clear seeing is key in our meditation practice and our chances for genuine Awakening in the Buddhist sense of things.
Are the jhanas themselves a form of insight, even a glimpse of the enlightened mind? Is the distinction between calm and insight really valid, or are they just 2 sides of the same coin when one is practising correctly?
Enlightened mind is not an experience, or a state of mind per se. Jhanas if I understand them correctly, are not a form of insight per se but they may allow the practitioner to rest a bit (always welcome), to see things clearer within investigations, and they can facilitate strong meditations, so they are definitely consistent with Buddhist practice and direction. In the example of the torch light, it can offer a different scope of light again. There are samadhi junkies, however, people who get stuck on and fixated with attaining certain states of mind but true Buddhism IMO is concerned with real life - and that means our gross and subtle states of being and aspects of it. It is not dependent on any condition, but it can work through and see through any condition - that is its genuine power.
The distinction can be used tentatively because tentatively we humans like concepts and analysis but the reality is that you are using and cultivating both in your meditation and also even in ordinary daily life.
Use the tradition's method if you are going for this type of training as the traditions will usually tailor it to offer a comprehensive method of training for their students. Zen is certainly perceived to be more bare bones but its profundity is not spoken of, but as inherent as Dzogchen etc.
Why do different traditions teach different approaches to meditation, and do they all lead to the same place, or not?
People have different tendencies and capacities. The limitless Dharma doors are for the inherent capacities and traits of the unlimited sentient beings. If practiced correctly, all genuine traditions will lead the student to the same point. And we can all learn from each other.
I will say one more time that I agree with the Buddha on the concept of sceptical doubt. People can debate and argue and question anything (anything - I am serious) for their whole lives, but it is like learning to ride a bike. You learn by doing. You have read the guides, you can read the bike forums with peoples' views on different techniques and speed preferences etc, but for someone who is riding this is no longer relevant. The point is to glide, it is not to get stuck on any specific point. And -- as it gets easier, over time, it will also get harder, particularly as we start to think 'we know'. A good guide will then come in handy but it will be hard to find a genuine one who has also gone the distance. Nevertheless, you could be lucky. Align yourself to practice traditions if you can.
Best wishes,
Abu
My question (not my teacher's) is how the jhanas after the 1st can have insight when there is no conceptual thought as a result of thought dropping away.
A lot of times the Tibetan perspective is just that the jhanas are states. I am not sure exactly how they interpret the Pali Canon portions which say Buddha entered enlightenment via the jhanas. Perhaps they would say that scripture was mundane or provisional or whatever.
In any case I rarely (maybe twice) have entered the jhanas. One time I was very buoyant and then me and my mom grieved my grandfathers death and the jhana ended. This stood out as the difference between jhana and insight because I couldn't stay in the jhana. It evaporated. Yet the need for a caring voice did not evaporate.
Thus I think the jhanas are a tool rather than enlightenment itself. I don't think that there is any argument over that point. I do think the jhana gave me confidence in meditation and made me feel joy.
http://www.amaravati.org/
you just won't find reference on a website discussing events and activities at a Theravada Buddhist monastery.
You have to be there.....
They give you schedules of meditation sessions, who's at the monastery, and retreats.
if you want to know more, it would be best you attend.
I have, I used to live 20 minutes away from there.
At high levels of jhana super-normal powers may occur. There are even reports of walking on water and other super human feats by gurus and monks who had attained high levels of jhana.
“Having been one, you become many; having been many, you become one; you appear and vanish; you go unhindered through a wall, through a rampart, through a mountain as though through space; you dive in and out of the earth as though it were water; you walk on water without sinking as though it were earth; seated cross-legged, you travel in space like a bird; with your hand you touch and stroke the moon and sun so powerful and mighty; you exercise mastery with the body as far as the brahma world.”
Samyutta Nikaya 12.70
http://www.jhanas.com/
I think your #not interested# is misunderstood with these teachers not giving the wrong impression about the jhanas.
Big difference IMO -- and better Theravadan teachers you would be hard pressed to find IMO.
Abu
I've had experience with the Thai Forest tradition over a long period of time - they view jhana as a distraction.
http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/On_Meditation1.php
Ajahn Sumedho on the jhanas: So ajahn Sumedho and others in the tradition do not put jhana in the center of their meditation teachings because the jhanas arise naturally as a result of the practice.
Other students of Chah that teach jhana more on the forefront are Ajahn Anan and Ajahn Brahm for example.
I've not been to Amaravati, but a monk who resides there told me it is a good place to practice samatha. So whatever is taught there now, is not just "dry insight".
Metta!
:-/
"Some people find it hard to enter samādhi because they don't have the right tendencies. There is samādhi, but it's not strong or firm. However, one can attain peace through the use of wisdom, through contemplating and seeing the truth of things, solving problems that way. This is using wisdom rather than the power of samādhi. To attain calm in practice, it's not necessary to be sitting in meditation, for instance. Just ask yourself, ''Eh, what is that?... '' and solve your problem right there!"
Also: http://www.buddhanet.net/bodhiny2.htm
I think the most important sentence of the quote above, is the last one.
Metta!
Do we believe the suttas, or do we believe the view of a particular teacher or tradition?
And what does it all mean?
"'I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana.' Thus it has been said. In reference to what was it said? There is the case where a monk, secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
Though for me it's important that the the approach of contempary teachers is broadly consistent with the suttas.
Watch the doubt, dear porpy.
Watch that in meditation.
As one of my friends used to say, it all flowers from that - watching.
Best wishes,
Abu
Let's keep it for PMs and just focus on the thread, not at how clever we can be with our ripostes, people, ok?
Thanks.
Thanks,
Abu
Metta!