Dear Frank,
This is interesting.
I think that in each of such practices, the practitioner's mind must be in some state of concentration, otherwise the practice cannot be done.
The level of concentration in each practice can be different, but is still considered jhaana, even though it may be just momentary jhaana.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Metta,
Chanida
--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Frank K <frank48k@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Pali friends,
>
> This part is interesting.
> I'm reading B.Bodhi's new AN translations book right now.
>
> from AN 1.382 to AN 1.554, it seems to qualify many activities as being
> "jhÄna",
> for example, AN 1.382 - AN 1.393
>
> 382*.* âaccharÄsaá¹
ghÄtamattampi ce, bhikkhave, bhikkhu paá¹hamaá¹ jhÄnaá¹
> bhÄveti, ayaá¹ vuccati, bhikkhave â" âbhikkhu arittajjhÄno viharati,
> satthusÄsanakaro ovÄdapatikaro, amoghaá¹ raá¹á¹hapiá¹á¸aá¹ bhuñjatiâ. ko pana vÄdo
> ye naá¹ bahulÄ«karontÄ«âti!
>
> ⦠383-389*.* âaccharÄsaá¹
ghÄtamattampi ce, bhikkhave, bhikkhu dutiyaá¹ jhÄnaá¹
> bhÄveti ... pe ... tatiyaá¹ jhÄnaá¹ bhÄveti ... pe ... catutthaá¹ jhÄnaá¹
> bhÄveti ... pe ... mettaá¹ cetovimuttiá¹ bhÄveti ... pe ... karuá¹aá¹
> cetovimuttiá¹ bhÄveti ... pe ... muditaá¹ cetovimuttiá¹ bhÄveti ... pe ...
> upekkhaá¹ cetovimuttiá¹ bhÄveti ... pe ....
>
> ⦠390-393*.* kÄye kÄyÄnupassÄ« viharati ÄtÄpÄ« sampajÄno satimÄ vineyya loke
> abhijjhÄdomanassaá¹; vedanÄsu vedanÄnupassÄ« viharati ... pe ... citte
> cittÄnupassÄ« viharati ... pe ... dhammesu dhammÄnupassÄ« viharati ÄtÄpÄ«
> sampajÄno satimÄ vineyya loke abhijjhÄdomanassaá¹.
>
>
> up to AN 1.564, they all share, if I'm interpreting the "pe" and ellisions
> correctly, this ending clause of "... he is called a bhikkhu who is not
> devoid of jhÄna ..."
> In the noble eightfold path, sammÄ samÄdhi is defined as the 4 jhÄnas, but
> how should we understand the "not being devoid of jhÄna" as it's used in
> these AN passages?
>
> metta,
> Frank
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>