Excellent article about becoming too fixated on the Jhana Path

[Gerard]

Main points of discussion:

 

1. The analysis above represents a somewhat idealized interpretation of the eight jhanas. It works conceptually but, practically speaking, what will an adept experience and realize by following these quite unclear instructions? The truth is that two people who each practice according to this model will, in all likelihood, experience very different things, while using the same language to relate their experiences. These jhanas do not describe an objective path, but represent an artificially constructed vision of the meditative process. One can indeed go through this process with some level of success, but it lacks true efficiency and a depth of understanding of the dimensions beyond the mind.

 

2. Through the first jhanas with form, the observer begins to experience its own subjectivity through concentrating on thought or objects and developing the ability to sustain thought and one-pointedness. In a normal, unfocused condition our attention is constantly fluctuating and, because attention flows from the observer, our sense of me is also fluctuating. For those who are not ready to meet the essence of me, developing mindfulness or continuity of concentration can be a way to solidify their observer. The problem with this is that an over-developed observer becomes a hindrance, because it prevents us from moving into the deeper dimensions of our identity. The observer represents our lower subjectivity and, as much as it is necessary, it should only be employed in moderation, otherwise it will crystallize as a false center of self. This is a general problem with the very mind-oriented Buddhist path: the observer is too present. This is further exacerbated by the fact that Buddhist practitioners cling to the concept of no-self, thereby refusing to become conscious of themselves as that very light of me.

 

Then the author gives a summary about the remaining jhanas (formless).

 

3. The need to go beyond the 8th Jhana

 

Now that we have explored the intricacies of the eight jhanas, perhaps we can finally understand why Buddha was not content after having mastered them. The answer is quite simple: the realization of the eighth jhana does not go very deep, existentially speaking. Awakening conscious me is an important basis for our evolution and certainly a significant achievement, but it is not freedom; the access to our pure nature is still very narrow and limited. Awakening of conscious me (awareness) cannot alone serve as a portal of transcendence, since to begin the process of transcendence one has to have access to the universal reality. So, reaching the eighth jhana does not open us to the realm of I am and, as such, it is no wonder that Buddha decided to continue his inner search for a deeper realization. His final resolve to sit under the Bodhi tree until he reached true enlightenment was an expression of his desperation and deep inner conflict and struggle.

 

So what happened under the Bodhi tree? Did his contemplation of the chain of origination and the causes of suffering bring about the fruit of emancipation, as the legend goes? This seems highly unlikely. There is virtually no relationship between this contemplation and enlightenment (brilliant, fully agree with this!) The mind can contemplate whatever it likes for a thousand years, but it will not take us any closer to reality. That is the failure of insight meditation. It is sad that so many people hold the futile hope that by gaining insights into the realm of illusion they will be liberated. It is simply not going to happen.

 

So how did Buddha reach enlightenment if neither the eight jhanas nor vipassana could take him there? The most likely answer is grace. It was divine intervention that took him into the deeper dimension of his inner self, into pure consciousness and beyond that. Buddha created a system of teaching that was not a direct representation of how he reached freedom and enlightenment. Why would he do that? Because he wasn’t exactly sure how it happened, as it did not seem to be a direct result of his conscious efforts and understanding. It is common that a teacher will teach a path that he himself did not walk. When an eagle soars for a long time in the vast sky, he may forget the many ways he took to get there.

 

Like what a Theravadin monk friend of mine told me not too long ago: the opening (liberation from conditioned existence, reaching nirvana, whichever expression you may prefer) will only happen when you are ready (don't go around chasing dragons because you'll never catch one! ). Until then keep living calmly, morally and in utter simplicity helping others.

 

 

Source: Why Buddha was Discontent with the Eight Jhana

Edited October 19, 2015 by Gerard

[Seeker of Wisdom]

1) Actually, modern people have quite uniform experiences, not only in what they describe, but how they describe getting there. Cf. the first jhana thread on this forum.

 

2)

Buddhist practitioners cling to the concept of no-self, thereby refusing to become conscious of themselves as that very light of me. [...] To begin the process of transcendence one has to have access to the universal reality. So, reaching the eighth jhana does not open us to the realm of I am and, as such, it is no wonder that Buddha decided to continue his inner search for a deeper realization.

Buddhism doesn't have a concept of 'universal reality' or 'I am'. It's about directly perceiving the nature of experience - a key feature of which is anatta. If you're going to argue against jhana to Buddhists, assuming that there is a self and so we are clinging to some weird idea of no-self won't help your cause.

 

3) The jhanas were never claimed to be deep realisations, or realisations at all. They are merely progressive states which weaken fetters and strengthen samadhi to use in vipassana. It's quite explicitly stated in the suttas that the jhanas by themselves produce no realisation and don't go to awakening.

 

Did his contemplation of the chain of origination and the causes of suffering bring about the fruit of emancipation, as the legend goes? This seems highly unlikely. There is virtually no relationship between this contemplation and enlightenment. The mind can contemplate whatever it likes for a thousand years, but it will not take us any closer to reality.

Vipassana is not contemplation. Vipassana is direct observation of experience. Nobody said the Buddha thought about this stuff - he SAW it, through vipassana.

 

That is the failure of insight meditation. It is sad that so many people hold the futile hope that by gaining insights into the realm of illusion they will be liberated.

Realm of illusion? Ignorance is in the mind, running into another realm won't liberate you. You have to gain insight into your own experience, and avoiding looking at any part of it (even if it's just because you think it's mundane, insignificant) leaves a blind spot in which your mind can keep constructing ignorance. Vipassana exposes reality naked. Cf. modern people achieving stream-entry and higher *cough, Dan Ingram, Ken Folk, Ron Crouch, cough*

 

The whole 'grace' thing is just... what? The opening comes from detachment resulting from vipassana insight.

 

TL;DR - writer doesn't understand Buddhism, takes the assumptions of his own path to strawman Buddhism.

Edited October 19, 2015 by Seeker of Wisdom

[Seeker of Wisdom]

It was Anadi. http://anaditeaching.com/why-buddha-was-discontent-with-the-eighth-jhana/ Anadi doesn't get Buddhism or shamatha, and has probably never tried shamatha.

 

The reason he's so confused about all this, especially the formless jhanas, is because he's looking from his perspective of 'I am' and so on, which is antithetical to Buddhism. He looks at the jhanas and sees warped metaphysical perspectives which miss out on revealing the self - when the jhanas aren't even about having special insights into anything, and Buddhism considers all views of self a key part of the problem, not the solution.

 

Here's how I understand the formless jhanas (which are all just experiences, they don't reveal anything ultimate about reality):

 

- Infinite space - like the 4th jhana, but letting go of all sense of location so it feels like space extending boundlessly in all directions.

- Infinite consciousness - like the above, but tune out of the space and into the awareness of the space.

- Nothingness - like the above, but you sort of 'ignore' everything so you get focused on the perception of utter blankness. Try to imagine a void, and you'll see that blankness is itself a mental image. This jhana is sort of like that.

- Neither perception nor non-perception - tune out of the experience of attending to that nothingness, so experience becomes very refined. There's something there, vividly so, but it's like a wisp of smoke.

 

The most hilarious/sad thing is that he says the jhanas can't be pleasurable! Of course they are, because people attain them and say they are!

 

I wish Anadi the best on his journey, there's no beef here, I just wanted to clear up these misunderstandings.

Edited October 19, 2015 by Seeker of Wisdom

[RigdzinTrinley]

I read this superficially so maybe I am wrong - but this is utter non sense!

 

I follow a buddhist tradition that doesn't teach the jhanas - its still the buddhas path to enlightenment

 

Who ever wrote this probably read 3 books on buddha dharma and through ‘divine intervention’ fully understood what lord buddha experienced...

[Tibetan_Ice]

Main points of discussion:

 

1. The analysis above represents a somewhat idealized interpretation of the eight jhanas. It works conceptually but, practically speaking, what will an adept experience and realize by following these quite unclear instructions? The truth is that two people who each practice according to this model will, in all likelihood, experience very different things, while using the same language to relate their experiences. These jhanas do not describe an objective path, but represent an artificially constructed vision of the meditative process. One can indeed go through this process with some level of success, but it lacks true efficiency and a depth of understanding of the dimensions beyond the mind.

 

Just finished watching a video by Ajahn Brahm wherein he says that the Buddha said many times that the jhanas are the only way to enlightenment. Not only did Buddha practice the jhanas under the Bodhicitta tree but he also entered the fourth jhana on his death bed. Anadi is an arrogant intellectual who sells expensive retreats.

 

 

2. Through the first jhanas with form, the observer begins to experience its own subjectivity through concentrating on thought or objects and developing the ability to sustain thought and one-pointedness. In a normal, unfocused condition our attention is constantly fluctuating and, because attention flows from the observer, our sense of me is also fluctuating. For those who are not ready to meet the essence of me, developing mindfulness or continuity of concentration can be a way to solidify their observer. The problem with this is that an over-developed observer becomes a hindrance, because it prevents us from moving into the deeper dimensions of our identity. The observer represents our lower subjectivity and, as much as it is necessary, it should only be employed in moderation, otherwise it will crystallize as a false center of self. This is a general problem with the very mind-oriented Buddhist path: the observer is too present. This is further exacerbated by the fact that Buddhist practitioners cling to the concept of no-self, thereby refusing to become conscious of themselves as that very light of me.

 

 

Here Anadi aptly demonstrates his lack of knowledge. One does not sustain thought in the practice of the jhanas, one calms the mind until thought disappears as indicated by bright light nimittas. The doer is thought, thinking, motion. The knower does not think or create thought.

 

Further, one does not solidify the observer as Anadi claims. The knower and the known fuse together revealing finer and finer powerful blissful states in which there is no ego, no hinderences, no senses...

 

And Anadi's claim that Buddhism is a mind-oriented discipline totally misses the great emphasis on Bodhicitta, both relative and absolute that is found in all Buddhist teachings.

 

 

Then the author gives a summary about the remaining jhanas (formless).

 

3. The need to go beyond the 8th Jhana

 

Now that we have explored the intricacies of the eight jhanas, perhaps we can finally understand why Buddha was not content after having mastered them. The answer is quite simple: the realization of the eighth jhana does not go very deep, existentially speaking. Awakening conscious me is an important basis for our evolution and certainly a significant achievement, but it is not freedom; the access to our pure nature is still very narrow and limited. Awakening of conscious me (awareness) cannot alone serve as a portal of transcendence, since to begin the process of transcendence one has to have access to the universal reality. So, reaching the eighth jhana does not open us to the realm of I am and, as such, it is no wonder that Buddha decided to continue his inner search for a deeper realization. His final resolve to sit under the Bodhi tree until he reached true enlightenment was an expression of his desperation and deep inner conflict and struggle.

 

 

Anadi is mistaken here. Buddha did learn how to enter the two highest jhanas from two teachers before reaching enlightenment but he wasn't satisfied, so he kept on searching. It was his revisitation of the form jhanas, his recollection of the blissful state he entered as a child which prompted home to revisit the jhanic progression starting with the form jhanas. This was his path to enlightenment, not something higher than the eighth jhana as Anadi is trying to sell.

 

In Buddhism you do not awaken "conscious me" for the conscious me is already awake. Buddhism is a task of clearing the hinderences, and the conscious me is just another hindernce.

 

And, what exactly does Anadi mean when he says that one must have acces to Universal reality? Is not the formless jhana of unlimited consciousness the same as universal reality? It is clear, even from Anadi's description of the jhanas on his web page that he does not understand the jhanic states.

 

 

So what happened under the Bodhi tree? Did his contemplation of the chain of origination and the causes of suffering bring about the fruit of emancipation, as the legend goes? This seems highly unlikely. There is virtually no relationship between this contemplation and enlightenment (brilliant, fully agree with this!) The mind can contemplate whatever it likes for a thousand years, but it will not take us any closer to reality. That is the failure of insight meditation. It is sad that so many people hold the futile hope that by gaining insights into the realm of illusion they will be liberated. It is simply not going to happen.

 

 

Anadi so missed it here. The jhanas empower the mind, grant super concentration, super powers, siddhis which make the knower capable of realizing the truth about reality. Once the truth is known, it liberates. Anadi is right. You can contemplate with a normal mind till the cows come home but it is no better than just thinking. Here he missed the fact that a mind empowered by the jhanas is not your everyday normal thinking mind.

 

So how did Buddha reach enlightenment if neither the eight jhanas nor vipassana could take him there? The most likely answer is grace. It was divine intervention that took him into the deeper dimension of his inner self, into pure consciousness and beyond that. Buddha created a system of teaching that was not a direct representation of how he reached freedom and enlightenment. Why would he do that? Because he wasn’t exactly sure how it happened, as it did not seem to be a direct result of his conscious efforts and understanding. It is common that a teacher will teach a path that he himself did not walk. When an eagle soars for a long time in the vast sky, he may forget the many ways he took to get there.

 

 

If Anadi believes that his defective understanding of shamatha and vispassana cannot produce enlightenment, no wonder he has twisted conclusions. What he is proposing is just a bunch of crap. And it is an insult to use the term Legend, isn't it?

 

 

Like what a Theravadin monk friend of mine told me not too long ago: the opening (liberation from conditioned existence, reaching nirvana, whichever expression you may prefer) will only happen when you are ready (don't go around chasing dragons because you'll never catch one! ). Until then keep living calmly, morally and in utter simplicity helping others.

 

 

What a defeatist attitude. Just because one labeled monk prefers to overlook the ability to ripen through practice, conduct and understanding doesn't mean that such possibilities don't exist. What a load of crap.

 

I've listened to many talks by Anadi and I found them to be complex, difficult to understand and they left a bad taste in my mouth. It is like he has a super stringent path which is fraught with obstacles and is impossible to describe in one complete sitting. You keep going back hoping to find some clarity but eventually you feel like you are in a never ending roller coaster in need of more information.

 

On the positive side, despite his anal teaching style, I did hear from two people that Anadi is very accomadating and will let you attend half a retreat at half the price.

Edited October 20, 2015 by Tibetan_Ice

[Tibetan_Ice]

I read this superficially so maybe I am wrong - but this is utter non sense!

 

I follow a buddhist tradition that doesn't teach the jhanas - its still the buddhas path to enlightenment

 

Who ever wrote this probably read 3 books on buddha dharma and through ‘divine intervention’ fully understood what lord buddha experienced...

You know, after listening to this talk about the jhanas, I would say that there is very little difference between the jhanas and dzogchen. They are both about letting go, relaxing in the natural state, not "doing"... the higher you go.

 

 

When you first realized rigpa, did you see any lights? Did you feel any bliss? Did you realize that motion of the mind was counterproductive?

Edited October 20, 2015 by Tibetan_Ice

[RigdzinTrinley]

I should have written ‘i follow a buddhist lineage that doesn't emphasize the jhanas or teach them explicitly’

 

That doesn't mean they are not there

 

I goes the nyams of clarity, non thought and bliss are similar

 

Those experience get stronger the more you sit with the correct view

 

There is no emphasis on mental images (cant remember the name)

 

I mean this phenomena when the mind gets so absorbed on the object of medtation that the object becomes a dot of light etc.

 

Thats not emphasized in dzogchen

 

The states of bliss non thought etc. Still happen though

 

They are a hindrance if you grasp them to be rigpa but also a sign of warmth → you do something right

[RigdzinTrinley]

I will watch the video later it sounds great

 

Ajahn brahm no? That dude abides

[Creation]

For those who are interested, here is a piece by Thanissaro Bhikkhu that explains the difference between jhana as described in the suttas and jhana as described in the Visuddhimagga.

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/wings/part3.html#part3-f

 

 

Part of the controversy over this question may be explained by the fact that the commentaries define jhāna in terms that bear little resemblance to the canonical description. The Path of Purification — the cornerstone of the commentarial system — takes as its paradigm for meditation practice a method called kasina, in which one stares at an external object until the image of the object is imprinted in one's mind. This image then gives rise to a countersign that is said to indicate the attainment of threshold concentration, a necessary prelude to jhāna. The text then tries to fit all other meditation methods into this mold, so that they too give rise to countersigns, but even by its own admission, breath meditation does not fit the mold very well. With the other methods, the stronger one's focus, the more vivid the object and the closer it is to producing a countersign; but with the breath, the stronger one's focus, the more subtle the breath and the harder it is to detect. As a result, the text states that only Buddhas and Buddhas' sons find the breath a congenial focal point for attaining jhāna.
...
So it would seem that what jhāna means in the commentaries is something quite different from what it means in the Canon. Because of this difference we can say that the commentaries are right in viewing their type of jhāna as unnecessary for Awakening, but Awakening cannot occur without the attainment of jhāna in the canonical sense.

 

 

Some teachers teach sutta style jhana, others Visuddhimagga style jhana.  Ajahn Bram teaches a kind of hybrid. 

 

A really untapped source is the Chinese tradition, which has its own understanding of dhyana.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Creation