Dear Chanida and NIna and all,


Earlier in AN 1.53 (English is bodhi trans.)
AN 1.53: “Bhikkhus, if for just the time of a finger snap a bhikkhu pursues
a mind of loving-kindness, he is called a bhikkhu who is not devoid of
jhāna, who acts upon the teaching of the Teacher, who responds to his
advice, and who does not eat the country’s almsfood in vain. How much
more, then, those who cultivate it!”

At that point as I was reading, it wasn't so puzzling, since metta bhāvana
is a well known way to launch into first jhāna.

At AN 1.382, it starts off reasonably enough, with the four jhanas as the
objects of not "being devoid of jhāna", then mentions not just mettā
bhāvana but all 4 brahmavihāras. Then it mentions the 4 satipatthana, 4
aspects of right effort, all part o the samādhi group, so again not too
surprising and still closely related to jhāna. Then it starts to enumerate
more topics under "not devoid of jhana", what seems like most of the 37
bodhipakkiya, and then even 10 kasinas for samatha development, vipassana
themes, and it seems like everything and the kitchen sink.

So what is meant by these passages on Jhāna?

These are the possibilities I can think of:

1. jhāna is meant here as meditation in general, and not specifically
sammā samādhi definition for four jhānas.
2. jhāna (as sammā samādhi) is a prerequisite to bring all of those
meditation topics mention to their culmination.
3. sammā samādhi, jhāna and the entirety of the eightfold noble path are
closely intertwined, so that no part of the buddha's system of practice can
be devoid of jhāna (sammā samādhi) if one expects to succeed.

But none of those explanations feels very satisfying. Sometimes the suttas
seem amazingly precise and specific, and other times like this example,
vague and confounding.

p.s. Nina, I posted my original question and this post as well on this page
here in case the pali diacritics don't appear properly.

https://sites.google.com/a/audtip.org/pali/pali-discussion-group-questions


Metta,

frank

On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Dear Chanida and Frank,
> Op 24-dec-2012, om 7:37 heeft Chanida het volgende geschreven:
>
>
> > 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.
> ------
> N: As I understand, it is always right understanding that is
> foremost, also when developing samatha to the stage of jhaana. If one
> does not know the citta that arises, kusala or akusala, how could one
> develop samatha.
> As to the development of vipassanaa, insight, understanding of
> whatever appears now is developed, so that one knows that it is just
> a reality, a dhamma. Lobha may appear: it is just a reality. Sadness
> may appear: it is just a reality, a dhamma. It is not owned by a
> person, there is no person there. Visible object appears: it is only
> a dhamma, not a person in the visible object. Very gradually we can
> understand what anattaa means.
> I cannot read the quoted text by Frank, it is all warbled. Neither
> can I look up the text since I do not have yet Venerable Bodhi's
> translation.
> ------
> Nina.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]