On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Bryan Levman bryan.levman@... [Pali] <Pali@yahoogroups.com> wrote:Dear Pāli Friends,In the Mahāvedallasutta, Sāriputta talks about attaining, maintaining and emerging from the signless deliverance of mind (animittā cetovimutti). He also compares the animittā cetovimutti to four other ceto-vimuttis, the immeasureable, and unshakeable liberations of mind, and the liberations through voidness and nothingness. From the sutta:"Friend, how many conditions are there for the attainment
of the signIess deliverance of mind?"
"Friend, there are two conditions for the attainment of the
signless deliverance of mind: non-attention to all signs and
attention to the signIess element. These are the two conditions
for the attainment of the signless deliverance of mind."
"Friend, how many conditions are there for the persistence
of the signIess deliverance of mind?"
"Friend, there are three conditions for the persistence of the
signless deliverance of mind: non-attention to all signs,
attention to the signless element, and the prior determination [of
its duration]. These are the three conditions for the persistence
of the signless deliverance of mind."
"Friend, how many conditions are there for emergence
from the signIess deliverance of mind?"
"Friend, there are two conditions for emergence from the signless deliverance of mind: attention to all signs and non-attention to the signless element. These are the two conditions for emergence from the signless deliverance of mind." (Majjhima Nikāya, Ñāṇamoli and Bodhi, 393-394)Buddhaghosa has the following commentary on this section which I find quite abstruse:idāni valañjanasamāpattiṃ pucchanto kati panāvuso, paccayā tiādimāha. nirodhato hi vuṭṭhānakaphalasamāpattiyā ṭhiti nāma na hoti, ekaṃ dve cittavārameva pavattitvā bhavaṅgaṃ otarati. ayañhi bhikkhu satta divase arūpapavattaṃ nirodhetvā nisinno nirodhavuṭṭhānakaphalasamāpatt iyaṃ na ciraṃ tiṭṭhati. valañjanasamāpattiyaṃ pana addhānaparicchedova pamāṇaṃ. tasmā sā ṭhiti nāma hoti. tenāha — “animittāya cetovimuttiyā ṭhitiyā”ti. tassā ciraṭṭhitatthaṃ kati paccayāti attho. vissajjane panassā pubbe ca abhisaṅkhāro ti addhānaparicchedo vutto. vuṭṭhānāyā ti idha bhavaṅgavuṭṭhānaṃ pucchati. vissajjanepissā sabbanimittānañ ca manasikāro ti rūpādinimittavasena bhavaṅgasahajātamanasikāro vutto.Tentative translation:Now, asking about the attainment of valañjana (“use”; ṭīkā: “the attainment of abiding by virtue ofthe noble abiding”), he says, (kati panāvuso, paccayā), “How many conditions are there, friend (for the attainment of the signless deliverance of mind, for the persistence of the signless deliverance, for the emergence…).” For what is called persistence of the attainment of the fruit of emergence does not exist, it continues for one or two mind-moments and descends into the life continuum.For this monk, having caused the cessation of his formless activity (arūpa-pavattaṃ) after seven days, sat down and did not remain long in the attainment of the fruit of the emergence from cessation. But in the attainment of velañja (use), just the determination of the time (of cessation) is the measure (pamaṇaṃ). Therefore that which is called persistence (ṭhiti) exists. Therefore he (Sāriputta) said , “(There are three conditions for) the persistence of the mental liberation of signlessness (as noted above). “For the purpose of long time (persistence) what are the conditions?” is the meaning (of the question). And in his answer re: persistence, ”The former preparation for it" (pubbe ca abhisaṅkhāro), that is, the determination of the time (of cessation) was cited. vuṭṭhānāya (conditions for the emergence from the signless meditation, as noted above); now he asks about the emergence from the life continuum (bhavaṅgavuṭṭhānaṃ). In the answer he says, “attention to all signs,” and because of signs, starting with form, etc., attention arises at the same time from the life continuum.Questions:Does anyone know what the valañja-samāpatti is?What is the relation between the animittā ceto-vimutti and the bhavaṅga? Buddhaghosa seems to be equating the two in the above passage.Are they the same or different? (or like the other ceto-vimuttis in the sutta, both the same and different).Is the commentator stating that the persistence of the attainment of the fruit of emergence will not last, unless one makes a pre-determination of the time of cessation, or am I misreading this?Any help would be appreciated,Mettā,Bryan