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.
Jhanas and attachment to them
Vincenzi
Veteran
In some commentaries about the Dharma, I read about freely being a "breath-aholic" (anapanasati).
after experiencing jhanas, it was quite evident that I could become addicted to them.
one of my remaining fetters is specifically: thinking about how nice it will be to live in arupa-dhatu to forget about everything else.
the other may be sumarised: it will be nice to live as bodhisattva for many lives to change samsara into a jhanic-friendly place!
as far as adictions goes, this may be the best one... any opinions about what is the best practice?
after experiencing jhanas, it was quite evident that I could become addicted to them.
one of my remaining fetters is specifically: thinking about how nice it will be to live in arupa-dhatu to forget about everything else.
the other may be sumarised: it will be nice to live as bodhisattva for many lives to change samsara into a jhanic-friendly place!
as far as adictions goes, this may be the best one... any opinions about what is the best practice?
0
Comments
i feel that jhana states can be huge traps but they can also be the key to your awakening.
the higher you go, the harder you fall. and really the game of spirituality is surrendering to what is.
i have heard that lots of people have attained jhanas. but a jhana state does not equate as awakening. i might be wrong about this but thats what i feel. and jhana is all mind states aren't they? they develop concentration and occasionally insight into the true nature of reality.
but you can gain insight into the true nature of reality by an infinite of different ways.
since the true nature of reality is marked by no-self, impermanence, and unsatisfactory.
it is what it is though. whatever works for you!
Metta,
Guy
it refers to letting go of a type of pleasure, in the end it may be changing it for a "higher spiritual bliss". to this, one can become attached.
you desire enlightenment. and then you have to let go the desire for enlightenment.
you stop thinking. then you stop, stop thinking.
Kind of like the simile of the raft...we should leave the raft behind once we are on the Further Shore, but how many of us can honestly say we are on the Further Shore? Don't ditch that raft too soon!
Metta,
Guy
Pulling the plug is a metaphor for letting go.
Jhanas may certainly be reached through letting go however the mind may become absorbed in them so it resists doing other things.
This need not be an "egotistical attachment" but a pure mental tendency or flow.
Attachment to jhanas is always talking about them, as though they are the be all and end all of Buddhism.
This attachment to jhana can be so great that one regards them as Nibbana or regards states such as the cessation of perception & feeling as Nibbana.
When gurus teach like this, saying jhana is the be all and end all of Dhamma, to the point of justifying themselves by asserting "how is it possible to get attached to letting go", these gurus are attached.
Such gurus who regard mere "mental fabrications" as their "past lives" are certainly attached.
With metta
please, not the "mental fabrications" discussion...
you let go of a desire. then you need to let go of wanting to let go of a desire because that letting go is a desire.
this process is basically the same for everything.
when you see the buddha kill the buddha. you already are the buddha, so when you see an idea of the buddha in your head kill it. by killing i mean let go of it. then you need to let go of letting go.
so you let go. and then let go of letting go. most people get caught up in just letting go. let go to the end. let go of letting go. then see where you are standing.
Letting go is for stream-enterers. How else can one enter the stream that flows to the ocean of Nibbana if one does not let go and dive into the river?
Our problem is superstition. We have been taught so many superstitions. We wish to believe via morality & some intellectual understanding & faith that we a stream-enterer, with only "seven more lives"...etc
We need to kill the buddha. Killing the buddha is the same as killing the gurus.
Kill the buddha, kill the gurus, kill the Brahma monks, kill them all.
For stream entry, 100% refuge is required in the empty mind so emptiness can be seen.
:om:
The jhanas are stepping stones to enlightenment, you master one and then move onto the next. If you find yourself going after jhana states for reasons other than the cessation of suffering, then you're more off to the side of the path if not completely off of it. If you find yourself unable to let go and move on to the next jhana, then you are attached.
Imagine the mind having the unifying peace and equanimity of deep jhanic states all of the time. That's the enlightened mind, possessed of clarity and stillness, and it's not found in becoming stuck to or attached to jhana experiences. It's found in learning and letting go. Ask a teacher if you're unsure, or if you don't believe this to be the case. See just what they say.
The reason why I said I will "let go of this discussion" is because I lack sufficient experience to contribute further in any meaningful way, all I can do is point to what the Buddha said about Jhanas. But you all have access to accesstoinsight.org so there is no point in me saying anything more.
Metta,
Guy
For DD:
Is that Ajahn Brahm book you refer to " Mindfulness, Bliss, and Beyond"? I am currently reading it and am 1/3 of the way through. I like it very much
All the best,
Todd
I still don't understand your observation that telling stories of past lives is attachment to them. Are contemporary authors attached to the stories they tell? Not that they are buddhist. But couldn't a contemporary author tell a story? Based on a dream.. Or something they did that day?
Is the issue telling a story = attachment? That seems to be your primary argument. As you haven't touched on cognitively disproving the possibility, much like I cannot disprove the possibility that...insert random possible unproving thing randomly stacking or weakening the deck of my argument. Such as suppose I had said that I had X for dinner last night which I won't reveal because I fear lying and I don't want to divulge what I ate!
Again the issue is I am trying to understand. It is my style to analyze, and I understand that some things are hard to make clear.
they are just ideas we construct. all these ideas relate to a past and future, though we can only tell a story right here and right now. what is true is our immediate experience of what is right now. thus using language or telling a story is removed from the actual experience of right now. well in a way it isn't because you can only tell a story in the present moment.
but people cling to the stories and ideas.
its okay to make stories up. for that's what we all do. but one must realize that all stories aren't real right now. and thus they are not worth holding onto. grasping onto anything will cause suffering.
Anyway, his meditation instructions have helped me a great deal, I am not yet free from suffering, but I have certainly lessened my suffering somewhat since I started practicing his method of meditation. So the confidence I have in him as a teacher is not blind faith. Furthermore, that which he teaches that I cannot confirm through my own experience I usually check against the Suttas to see if it is in line with the Buddha's words.
Metta,
Guy
How long was Ajahn Jagaro a monk, before he disrobed?
Time means little. Many were monks for over twenty years and disrobed.
Often the suttas are understood subjectively and are mistranslated
Often Ajahn Brahm helps people free their minds from anger, etc. But this is not the same as realising emptiness
Brahm is the Brahma God. He is teaching the way to heaven rather than to Nibbana.
I have never gained the impression Brahm is saliently teaching about emptiness, as Ajahn Chah did.
He is very knowledgeable in all aspects of Buddhism. I think there is a reason why he doesn't speak directly about emptiness. Actually not a lot of people really talk about emptiness. Each schools/teacher place emphasis on what they feel is necessary for the group. But I am sure one on one teachings are quite different.
So he teaches for lay persons and everyone else in a dynamic way. Practical. Simple. And easy to digest.
But I agree with DD. It is like putting a band aid on our wounds. We all have to start somewhere though.
On Friday nights (the talks you see on youtube) he is teaching to a wide range of people, so he has to make his talks relevant to Buddhists at all stages and also non-Buddhists.
When he is teaching a meditation retreat the talks tend to be a bit deeper (you can download these at http://www.dhammaloka.org.au). On Wednesdays he gives talks to monks, nuns and lay people who are staying at the monastery, these talks definitely have a lot of depth to them (some of these talks are available in his book "Simply This Moment").
Metta,
Guy
The whole reason the mind reaches unification is that the mind tends toward happiness. When that bliss begins to arise, the mind goes there of its own accord, all you have to do is remain aware of it. This is the nature of a mind that craves. The wisdom that this bliss is suffering, is not-self and transitory, must give rise to detachment. If the mind is still ignorant, it may not do so.
Getting stuck in first jhana and never progressing further is the danger zone. I'm really not just speaking out of my ass here or from book-learning, and I only say it so that danger can be recognized and it doesn't happen to you, but if you'd like to ignore it because of interpretations/perceptions of that being what the Buddha taught... that's up to you. More than enough has been said by now, there must be some clinging already to something!
Thanks + Metta,
Guy
You can always rely on DD for a critical review.
DD, you will do really well in MBA for critical thinking.
That plus my own experience. I'm sure if you were able to ask Ajahn Brahm or any teacher this specific question, they would say "yes, this is a common trap...". You'd best serve yourself to assume it quite possible to become a "jhana junkie" rather than reject it out of hand, until you actually are able to physically ask a meditation teacher about this. The only one standing to lose anything is you, no one else. Do you want to be one of the people, like in the bold statement above, that waste decades in first jhana?
If you want me to, you can write down your specific question here and I can give it to Ajahn Brahm tonight. If you are lucky he may even decide to give a talk about it.
Metta,
Guy
translated from the Pali by
Bhikkhu Bodhi
Anyway, to get on topic...
In Mahamudra tradition (as per Mind as Ease) meditative experiences are treated as "neither good nor bad". Letting go of the experiences allows us to see beyond the the experiences to allow stable insight to develop. Insight is not "wow" in result, it is a strong shift in our inner view, it doesn't fluctuate like experiences. Experiences have more of the "wow" factor. Traleg Rinpoche describes this much better in Mind as Ease than I can. An analogy of a meditative experience could be like looking at a blazing fire, whereas the insight could be who/what is looking at the fire, where the fire is located, what is burning, what is the fire. If you attached to watching the flames then you may miss these other things. You know there is an interesting analogy of Samsara where Samsaric beings are likened to a moth drawn to a fire to its demise- burnt by the flames that its attracted to.
I am reading "Simply this Moment". The talks for the monastics here are nothing like what he teaches to the lay people. It does sound like Aj Chah's teachings.
Regards