As I get this question quite often, I will give you a copy of the last answer: "While I like to talk about Jhana as a lifestyle, the mind only really enters it when the body is also sufficiently withdrawn from external disturbances. You can be free from the hindrances mentally but the outside world can still "block you". As an example, loud noises, speaking, crowds and several other factors would make it very difficult if not impossible for the mind to enter Jhana. However, as long as you are free from the hindrances, the mind will automatically incline towards Jhana as long as the circumstances allow for it. The Buddha as a child did not yet hold his wrong view about asceticism leading to iberation and as such, he was free from the hindrances as far as I can tell. When his busy palace life allowed for the right circumstances, the mind could incline to Jhana. As he was not very well trained in it, it did not happen often. Had the Buddha heard about the 4NT in a previous life, he would not have been a self-awakened being. That is the "special perk" of a Buddha compared to an Arahant. That said, Jhana in itself is not special to Buddhas or his Dhamma. Many ascetics were practicing it at his time despite no one having the Right View yet back then. So no, the Buddha did not have the Right View yet, so he did not have "Samma" Samadhi but "only" Samadhi."
"Dhamma Hub Discord (now with a mild vetting process): discord.gg/AcDwZ78ybn " My Dhamma Book (also available on Paper): drive.google.com/file/d/1d8VYL5iOi76u1AEmyI7iGpgPP3T5FaNa/view?usp=sharing My Almanac (also available on Paper): drive.google.com/file/d/1VzAw8zHdhOsDDUzPEubTN64qhVmQhZ0m/view?usp=sharing
t makes a lot of sense. Pleasure arises naturally as a byproduct of letting go of everything, including the craving for pleasure itself. This experience emerges from the deeper layers of the mind. It’s worth noting that it wasn’t Leigth or others who first encouraged the acceptance of this pleasure, but the Buddha himself, as seen in texts like AN 5.28, MN 36, and AN 4.163. Achieving this state takes years of dedicated practice, and I strongly recommend the effort-it is, arguably, one of the most precious things you will learn in your life. The path outlined in the Visuddhimagga emphasizes this truth: the style of absorption it describes isn’t achievable without cultivating right view, right mindfulness, and right virtue to a significant degree. In my experience, reaching this level requires a deep understanding of the path, particularly the practice of letting go and observing the mind as it is. That said, I feel that you’re engaging in the very critique you are making: selectively quoting suttas to advocate a position that doesn’t reflect the entirety of the Dhamma. Such cherry-picking often arises from theorizing but not expericing. The path is not a sequence with right samadhi at it's end. Its an interweaved system: right samdhi encourages right mindfulnress encourages right view and vice versa. It is a spiral, not a line....
While I doubt that I will change your mind, I will give it one last try^^ So, what is the result of the training in virtue or "non-craving" in general? I would argue, that it is a mind that "withdraws" from the things that it usually desires. Normally, when we crave something, we tend to "lose perspective" and "zoom in" on the objects of our desires and have no eyes for anything else. In comparison, anything that does not relate to our objects of desire or aids in getting them becomes invisible and insignificant. If you give up that craving, the mind no longer gets lost in those things and as a result, it remains broad, detached, wide open and "unzoomed" when face with something that previously triggered us. The more we renounce, the "broader" and "more open" our perspective becomes. Fewer and fewer things have the capacity to catch us and draw us in. Naturally, the training in virtue leads to a more and more open and aware state. As a person who is intent on abandoning suffering through abandoning craving, you would surely agree that this is generally the state of being that "renunciation" would incline to? A calm and "detached", even "distanced" state of mind. The "thorough seclusion from sensuality" (craving/lust) that the Buddha mentioned as a precondition to entering Jhana would thus be a very lofty, open, detached and aware state of mind. So all of our efforts on the Path until Samadhi make the mind wider and wider, more and more "unabsorbed". Yet once this nearly perfectly lofty and unabsorbed state is reached, we should suddenly "zoom back in"... why? What I say is, that the _culmination_ of the training of becoming unabsorbed from the senses through abandoning craving is a perfectly unabsorbed state where everything "gathers in one place" as nothing truly sticks out any longer and interrupts this lofty state. You can interpret concentration in those two radically different ways. I am sure you can find lots of justification for both of them in the Suttas if you search for it. If you wish to practice absorption further, feel free to do so, and see where the training leads you. Again, I have only abandoned absorption after having practiced like that for several years. While you can surely say that I must have done it "wrongly", I have at least tried the common approach and found that it has not brought me closer to the unconditioned. The "other" kind of training however _did_ what it claimed to do. I no longer have to do _anything at all_ to remain in a state that is free from suffering, dispassionate, light, at ease, fully aware and open. Previously I had to regularly sit down to "combat" suffering on a moment to moment basis. I always had to "react" to it but it was always one step ahead. Now, my experience already arises _without_ the absolute vast majority of suffering. It arises "untainted" and I no longer have to "correct" it.
@@TheDhammaHub Nah ok. Of course you won't. I hope I can convince you or at least stop some watchers from starting to believe this. So thank you very much for your description of right effort. It is one part of the noble path and very important. The path itself consists of seven other parts. One is right samadhi. What you are doing here is trying to suttic cherypick against absorption. Which is possible because the suttic are vague and very technical. But it's of course wrong and also a bit intellectual dishonest. First, even if the original mediation technique is not absorbtive, that doesn't mean that's wrong. Meditation is a science, and there is development. The sutras are filled with tones of hints. Magical practice, deep states, kasinas. Things which are not practicable without deep concentration. Your examples are mostly examples of the extraordinary samadhi capabilities of Buddha and the disciples you simply misunderstood. Of course you practice it all the time and not only on the cushion. You are also ignoringa all the aharants and masters after the Buddha. There is no single one attained nibbana without concentration. I understand the intuition. Samadhi practice is die hard. You need to spend hundreds of hours. The benefits comes late. And then you have to learn to practice it all the time, together with right mindfulness and right effort.But then you understand how perfectly everything fits together. There is no dry vipasana and there is no dry wisdom. Mind simply forgets and play stories. You need to sharp the sword before going into the battle. I think you are just a victim of the modern dry sects. Probably you have not had the right teacher.
@@metamurk To be honest, I am not even sure what people mean when they say "dry practice" or "dry sect". I do not put my faith in any modern teachers^^ Further, I have never advocated for a practice that is without concentration. What I say is, that the "real deal", the "Jhana-level concentration" comes basically when you attain the fruit of Stream Entry, at least when we talk about _Samma_ Samadhi. You obviously try to cultivate this kind of concentration before you get it right. I get the impression that the practice I describe here seems joyless or bland to you but that is absolutely not the case. The practice of virtue (purification of speech and bodily conduct) alone brings great joy and peace. If you start _cultivating_ the mind in addition to that and restrain all the unwholesome mental actions (no focusing on any object necessary), then the result will be even more joy, peace, and happiness. This practice is a joyful one and there is nothing "dry" about it. In addition, this kind of Samadhi does not require an elaborate setup and the performance of a special mental ritual. The mind simply automatically inclines towards Jhana once you have thoroughly deconditioned all unwholesome mental actions and unwholesome views that _block_ it. You just have to be somewhat alone and automatically enter Jhana. Now I would prefer this kind of concentration any day over a kind that requires me to perform a specific mental ritual basically each and everyday. Which one of the Jhanas seems closer to being "unconditioned" to you? The one that you can only attain while sitting for certain lengths under very specific constraints of the one that basically requires you to be alone and in silence?
@TheDhammaHub by dry sects I mean groups like hillside or mahasi which are trying to ban shamata out of the practice and tell the people they could accomplish anything without concentration. I doubt the most of you say and I think you you have a deeply wrong understanding of what the dharma is. It is indeed a yogic program. Buddha was a shmata Yogi, his disciples were. The sutras are full of hints, without any commentary. What does that mean? It means it is a program of changing how the mind interacts with reality, on a deeply fundamental and subconscious level. Therefore just practicing virtue is simply not enough. You don't have any chance. I have never seen somebody who has reached anything by just virtue. But I have seen a lot of people who practiced concentration. This calmed their mind and they were able to practice constant mindfulness. This enabled them to practice virtue. Which deepened their shamata. Which enabled them to practice insight meditation. Which again empowered disenchantment and virtue.... I rarely practice shamata on cushion outside of retreat. I practice it all the time, while walking, programming....
@@metamurk I do not advicate "just" virtue, I explain that everything _else_ you do in the practice is _based_ on virtue and limited by underdeveloped virtue. I very much am in favour of the development of concentration it is just that I interpret concentration in a different way than you that is just as well supported by the Suttas, if not better. I also do not say that "calm" is not a art of the practice. I very much say it is, but it is a _product_ and not something you actively cultivate. The Sutas could not be learer on the fact that virtue comes first in the develoment of the Path and there are countless Suttas that confirm this. Those Suttas that leave our virtue are typically spoken to extremely advabced individuaks wqho akready HAD the virtue. And concerning HH or Mahasi, I do not think they "ban" tranquility, they just attribute a different role to those Path factors. I am not a big fan of Mahasi but I mostly agree with HH. I would emphasize the importance of joy though, that is VERY MUCH part of such a practice. Same for calm. Same for concentration. It is just that what they understand as concentrartion is the polar opposite of what many modern schools understand as concentration^^ And in the end, you can doubt however much you wish - that is not on me. I do not force anyone to practice what I say. I _offer_ those things for those who are interested and willing to try them out. If you are not among them, then that is fine by me. You are not part of the target audience just like I am not part of the target audience of modern absorption schools. Different communities serve different interestes and practice in line with their inclinations. It has always been like that and will always be like that and the Buddha also had a few Suttas on just this fact xD
Chapter Table of Contents
1. Prior Training - 3:06
2. Storytime - 6:39
3. Wrong Jhana - 11:01
4. Samadhi - 28:22
5. The 5 Hindrances - 37:33
6. The 4 Jhanas - 55:08
7. Jhana Meditation - 1:16:37
8. Immaterial Jhanas - 1:22:07
9. Brahmaviharas - 1:28:24
10. Iddhis - 1:34:52
11. Summary - 1:37:11
🙏
What a wonderful teaching. Thank you.🙏🙏🙏
Did the buddha have right view when he reached the jhana as a child meditating under a tree?
As I get this question quite often, I will give you a copy of the last answer:
"While I like to talk about Jhana as a lifestyle, the mind only really enters it when the body is also sufficiently withdrawn from external disturbances. You can be free from the hindrances mentally but the outside world can still "block you". As an example, loud noises, speaking, crowds and several other factors would make it very difficult if not impossible for the mind to enter Jhana.
However, as long as you are free from the hindrances, the mind will automatically incline towards Jhana as long as the circumstances allow for it. The Buddha as a child did not yet hold his wrong view about asceticism leading to iberation and as such, he was free from the hindrances as far as I can tell. When his busy palace life allowed for the right circumstances, the mind could incline to Jhana. As he was not very well trained in it, it did not happen often. Had the Buddha heard about the 4NT in a previous life, he would not have been a self-awakened being. That is the "special perk" of a Buddha compared to an Arahant. That said, Jhana in itself is not special to Buddhas or his Dhamma. Many ascetics were practicing it at his time despite no one having the Right View yet back then. So no, the Buddha did not have the Right View yet, so he did not have "Samma" Samadhi but "only" Samadhi."
"Dhamma Hub Discord (now with a mild vetting process): discord.gg/AcDwZ78ybn "
My Dhamma Book (also available on Paper): drive.google.com/file/d/1d8VYL5iOi76u1AEmyI7iGpgPP3T5FaNa/view?usp=sharing
My Almanac (also available on Paper): drive.google.com/file/d/1VzAw8zHdhOsDDUzPEubTN64qhVmQhZ0m/view?usp=sharing
Wow, thank you so much!! 🪷☸️💕
t makes a lot of sense. Pleasure arises naturally as a byproduct of letting go of everything, including the craving for pleasure itself. This experience emerges from the deeper layers of the mind. It’s worth noting that it wasn’t Leigth or others who first encouraged the acceptance of this pleasure, but the Buddha himself, as seen in texts like AN 5.28, MN 36, and AN 4.163.
Achieving this state takes years of dedicated practice, and I strongly recommend the effort-it is, arguably, one of the most precious things you will learn in your life. The path outlined in the Visuddhimagga emphasizes this truth: the style of absorption it describes isn’t achievable without cultivating right view, right mindfulness, and right virtue to a significant degree. In my experience, reaching this level requires a deep understanding of the path, particularly the practice of letting go and observing the mind as it is.
That said, I feel that you’re engaging in the very critique you are making: selectively quoting suttas to advocate a position that doesn’t reflect the entirety of the Dhamma. Such cherry-picking often arises from theorizing but not expericing. The path is not a sequence with right samadhi at it's end. Its an interweaved system: right samdhi encourages right mindfulnress encourages right view and vice versa. It is a spiral, not a line....
While I doubt that I will change your mind, I will give it one last try^^
So, what is the result of the training in virtue or "non-craving" in general? I would argue, that it is a mind that "withdraws" from the things that it usually desires. Normally, when we crave something, we tend to "lose perspective" and "zoom in" on the objects of our desires and have no eyes for anything else. In comparison, anything that does not relate to our objects of desire or aids in getting them becomes invisible and insignificant. If you give up that craving, the mind no longer gets lost in those things and as a result, it remains broad, detached, wide open and "unzoomed" when face with something that previously triggered us.
The more we renounce, the "broader" and "more open" our perspective becomes. Fewer and fewer things have the capacity to catch us and draw us in. Naturally, the training in virtue leads to a more and more open and aware state. As a person who is intent on abandoning suffering through abandoning craving, you would surely agree that this is generally the state of being that "renunciation" would incline to? A calm and "detached", even "distanced" state of mind. The "thorough seclusion from sensuality" (craving/lust) that the Buddha mentioned as a precondition to entering Jhana would thus be a very lofty, open, detached and aware state of mind. So all of our efforts on the Path until Samadhi make the mind wider and wider, more and more "unabsorbed". Yet once this nearly perfectly lofty and unabsorbed state is reached, we should suddenly "zoom back in"... why?
What I say is, that the _culmination_ of the training of becoming unabsorbed from the senses through abandoning craving is a perfectly unabsorbed state where everything "gathers in one place" as nothing truly sticks out any longer and interrupts this lofty state.
You can interpret concentration in those two radically different ways. I am sure you can find lots of justification for both of them in the Suttas if you search for it.
If you wish to practice absorption further, feel free to do so, and see where the training leads you. Again, I have only abandoned absorption after having practiced like that for several years. While you can surely say that I must have done it "wrongly", I have at least tried the common approach and found that it has not brought me closer to the unconditioned. The "other" kind of training however _did_ what it claimed to do. I no longer have to do _anything at all_ to remain in a state that is free from suffering, dispassionate, light, at ease, fully aware and open. Previously I had to regularly sit down to "combat" suffering on a moment to moment basis. I always had to "react" to it but it was always one step ahead. Now, my experience already arises _without_ the absolute vast majority of suffering. It arises "untainted" and I no longer have to "correct" it.
@@TheDhammaHub Nah ok. Of course you won't. I hope I can convince you or at least stop some watchers from starting to believe this.
So thank you very much for your description of right effort. It is one part of the noble path and very important. The path itself consists of seven other parts. One is right samadhi.
What you are doing here is trying to suttic cherypick against absorption. Which is possible because the suttic are vague and very technical. But it's of course wrong and also a bit intellectual dishonest.
First, even if the original mediation technique is not absorbtive, that doesn't mean that's wrong. Meditation is a science, and there is development.
The sutras are filled with tones of hints. Magical practice, deep states, kasinas. Things which are not practicable without deep concentration. Your examples are mostly examples of the extraordinary samadhi capabilities of Buddha and the disciples you simply misunderstood. Of course you practice it all the time and not only on the cushion.
You are also ignoringa all the aharants and masters after the Buddha. There is no single one attained nibbana without concentration.
I understand the intuition. Samadhi practice is die hard. You need to spend hundreds of hours. The benefits comes late. And then you have to learn to practice it all the time, together with right mindfulness and right effort.But then you understand how perfectly everything fits together. There is no dry vipasana and there is no dry wisdom. Mind simply forgets and play stories. You need to sharp the sword before going into the battle.
I think you are just a victim of the modern dry sects. Probably you have not had the right teacher.
@@metamurk To be honest, I am not even sure what people mean when they say "dry practice" or "dry sect".
I do not put my faith in any modern teachers^^
Further, I have never advocated for a practice that is without concentration.
What I say is, that the "real deal", the "Jhana-level concentration" comes basically when you attain the fruit of Stream Entry, at least when we talk about _Samma_ Samadhi.
You obviously try to cultivate this kind of concentration before you get it right.
I get the impression that the practice I describe here seems joyless or bland to you but that is absolutely not the case.
The practice of virtue (purification of speech and bodily conduct) alone brings great joy and peace.
If you start _cultivating_ the mind in addition to that and restrain all the unwholesome mental actions (no focusing on any object necessary), then the result will be even more joy, peace, and happiness. This practice is a joyful one and there is nothing "dry" about it.
In addition, this kind of Samadhi does not require an elaborate setup and the performance of a special mental ritual.
The mind simply automatically inclines towards Jhana once you have thoroughly deconditioned all unwholesome mental actions and unwholesome views that _block_ it.
You just have to be somewhat alone and automatically enter Jhana.
Now I would prefer this kind of concentration any day over a kind that requires me to perform a specific mental ritual basically each and everyday.
Which one of the Jhanas seems closer to being "unconditioned" to you?
The one that you can only attain while sitting for certain lengths under very specific constraints of the one that basically requires you to be alone and in silence?
@TheDhammaHub by dry sects I mean groups like hillside or mahasi which are trying to ban shamata out of the practice and tell the people they could accomplish anything without concentration.
I doubt the most of you say and I think you you have a deeply wrong understanding of what the dharma is. It is indeed a yogic program. Buddha was a shmata Yogi, his disciples were. The sutras are full of hints, without any commentary.
What does that mean? It means it is a program of changing how the mind interacts with reality, on a deeply fundamental and subconscious level. Therefore just practicing virtue is simply not enough. You don't have any chance.
I have never seen somebody who has reached anything by just virtue. But I have seen a lot of people who practiced concentration. This calmed their mind and they were able to practice constant mindfulness. This enabled them to practice virtue. Which deepened their shamata. Which enabled them to practice insight meditation. Which again empowered disenchantment and virtue....
I rarely practice shamata on cushion outside of retreat. I practice it all the time, while walking, programming....
@@metamurk I do not advicate "just" virtue, I explain that everything _else_ you do in the practice is _based_ on virtue and limited by underdeveloped virtue.
I very much am in favour of the development of concentration it is just that I interpret concentration in a different way than you that is just as well supported by the Suttas, if not better.
I also do not say that "calm" is not a art of the practice. I very much say it is, but it is a _product_ and not something you actively cultivate.
The Sutas could not be learer on the fact that virtue comes first in the develoment of the Path and there are countless Suttas that confirm this. Those Suttas that leave our virtue are typically spoken to extremely advabced individuaks wqho akready HAD the virtue.
And concerning HH or Mahasi, I do not think they "ban" tranquility, they just attribute a different role to those Path factors. I am not a big fan of Mahasi but I mostly agree with HH. I would emphasize the importance of joy though, that is VERY MUCH part of such a practice. Same for calm. Same for concentration. It is just that what they understand as concentrartion is the polar opposite of what many modern schools understand as concentration^^
And in the end, you can doubt however much you wish - that is not on me. I do not force anyone to practice what I say. I _offer_ those things for those who are interested and willing to try them out. If you are not among them, then that is fine by me. You are not part of the target audience just like I am not part of the target audience of modern absorption schools. Different communities serve different interestes and practice in line with their inclinations. It has always been like that and will always be like that and the Buddha also had a few Suttas on just this fact xD