>
>I believe vitakka and vicára, if they lead to jhana, must be better
>translated as 'concentration' in which one "turns and returns one's
>mind," or "applies
>and reapplies" one's attention to one's meditation object. It is however
>possible that the Pali language might be inadequate to make the distinction
>between concentration and discursive thinking.

Hi Jeff,

Interesting topic.

These are some notoriously difficult terms, but at present I think
basically you're both right. What I mean is this; the terms would
make sense in the concept of an intellectual or discursive pursuit,
but also in the context of meditation. But as you say, in meditation
on an object like the breath, it wouldn't be discursive.

Here are a couple of examples, to show what I mean by each. This way,
if I'm mistaken, someone can correct me. I'm not entirely committed
to this interpretation, and am interested in alternatives. Still, I
lean towards believing this is the right way to understand the terms.

Suppose I'm reading a poem, to write a short paper about it for a
class. I will need to spend a lot of time with the poem, reading it
over and over and getting 'into' it, in order to have an aesthetic
experience which can then become the basis for the paper. This is a
discursive, intellectual activity, but in some ways it resembles
meditation because of the need for concentration. In this case,
vitakka is the act of turning the mind towards the poem, and forcing
it back if the mind wanders. It's how you tune out other thoughts,
and establish concentration. Vicara is what you do after your mind
has stabilized around the act of reading. You can scan back and
forth, read different parts, let your thoughts associate freely, turn
the poem back and forth in your mind, and yet you are always in the
vicinity of the act of reading. You are concentrated.. but with a
certain amount of freedom on your leash. From there you can explore
the poem and experience its beauty.

Now if you're meditating on an object like the breath, the factor of
language isn't really relevant. But you still need to establish and
maintain concentration with vitakka, and you can still reach a spot
where you are able to easily stay with the object, and can explore it
from different angles, vicara. So the same terms are applicable here,
even though it isn't discursive.

I think this makes sense because etymologically the two terms really
do appear to have their origin in thinking and reasoning, and only
secondarily have they become technical terms for jhaana meditation.

Criticism welcome,

/ET