Hey Jhananda, thank you for your replies. I have a lot to say but I'm not sure the most organized way to say it.
I still believe most of our differences are minor compared to two major, huge, startling issues. The first one is I believe that you are not actually attaining all 8 stages of samadhi.
What is 6th, 7th and 8th jhana? What is nibbana/cessation?I was dismayed you did not reply to my queries to describe the "black hole" state more, as I think there is valuable discussion to be had there. I will just go by what you have written already. The summary is:
you are not attaining 8th jhana or cessation, but 7th jhana is your current upper limit, and you mistake it for Nibbana.Breaking down your
practice regimen:
Jhananda:
You may realize these stars are all beings. This is the infiinite psyche (6th jhana). Open yourself up to them. Resist noting. If you can remain in infinite time and space for an infinity, then you may become all of those infinite beings of light, if you do this is the 7th jhana.
I respectfully disagree. Becoming all of those infinite beings of light is not the 7th jhana. The 7th jhana is simply "The Sphere of Nothingness." There is simply nothingness enveloping you. Anywhere you might turn your perception, you merely perceive nothingness. You don't perceive infinite beings of light that you have become - you perceive nothingness. I think this is more of the 6th jhana.
Jhananda:
When you become all of those light beings (7th jhana), then let go of ever having been a being or ever becoming one again. If you can let go of ever having been a being or ever becoming again, then you arrive at no longer being able to tell who you are, this is the 8th jhana, then give up ever having been someone.
I disagree again. The 8th jhana is "The Sphere of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception." You no longer even perceive that nothingness - there is neither perception, nor non perception. I believe this not being able to tell who you are stage and what-not is just more of the 6th jhana. Furthermore, your earlier description of the "8th jhana":
Jhananda:
However, I agree that the experience that I described above from a strong kundalini rise certainly made me think of the 8th samadhi, which is neither-perception-nor-non-perception, 'Nevasannanasannnayatana,' because there was nothing but a dimensionless light that expanded out to infinity.
makes me think you have never attained the 8th jhana, as you would not describe it that way if you had.
Jhananda:
When the universe collapses around you into a black hole, that will swallow both you as an individual and as an infinite being from which you can never escape, then love it utterly and completely, because this is called nibbana . If you return from that my friend, you will be the Maitreya.
No, I believe this is merely "The Sphere of Nothingness", the 7th jhana.. Cessation isn't something you love utterly and completely. While in cessation, or saññá-vedayita-nirodha, there is not even what little perception that remained in the 8th jhana. As in the links I gave you, it is over in an instant even if it lasts 6 hours. However, the universe collapsing into a black hole, which swallows you and the infinite being you are not, that you can then love utterly and completely (meaning there is perception of the black hole) and that you can 'return from', sounds like a great description of the 7th jhana. I can also easily understand why someone would mistake the 7th jhana for Nibbana.
Thus even if you do not believe me when I talk about Enlightenment, consider that the black hole is just the 7th jhana, and realize there is something beyond that - at the very least, the 8th jhana.
Reading through the other links you gave, I see similar mistakes. From
experiental jhana:
Jhananda:
Stage 7; I have found if I remain in this domain unattached to anything then my awareness expands to embrace all of those beings and points of light. Those beings and points of light become the cells of my organism, and my psyche includes all of the other psyches in the universe. This stage the Buddha called "akincannayatana" which is often translated as the domain of No-Thingness. To me it is an infinite non-dual state in which one cannot distinguish between either this nor that, neither self nor other, neither self nor god. When Moses experienced this domain he said, "I am That, that I am." The Advaitans said, "Tat Twam Assi," which means the same thing. When Jesus said, "I and my father in heaven are one," he was most probably speaking of this experience. This is the 7th stage of meditative absorption (samadhi).
I don't see how you go from "The Sphere of
Nothingness" to "beings and points of light becoming the cells of my organism", and "my psyche includes all of the other psyches in the universe", the latter of which sounds like a great description of the 6th jhana.
Jhananda:
Further, I have found if I remain in absorption attached to nothing then my awareness enters into a domain in which there is no perceivable object. It is as if all the non-material senses have completely gone as dead as the physical senses. There is not even a sense of time or dimension or location in space. I believe this domain the Buddha called "nevasannanasannnayatana," which translates as the domain of neither-perception-nor-non-perception. I believe this is cessation (nibbana/nirvana) union (yoga) with the Infinite in which there is no sensible dimension, blackness, the full enlightenment. The Sufis called this absorption state "fana" which means annihilation.
Your descriptions were good until you mentioned there was blackness. How can there be blackness if there is no perceivable object? Blackness is a perceivable object.
Jhananda:
Further, I have found if I remain in absorption attached to nothing then my awareness enters into a domain in which there is no perceivable object. It is as if all the non-material senses have completely gone as dead as the physical senses. There is not even a sense of time or dimension or location in space. I believe this domain the Buddha called "nevasannanasannnayatana," which translates as the domain of neither-perception-nor-non-perception. I believe this is cessation (nibbana/nirvana) union (yoga) with the Infinite in which there is no sensible dimension, blackness, the full enlightenment. The Sufis called this absorption state "fana" which means annihilation.
I don't understand how you went from Buddha calling the domain nevasannanasannnayatana, to believing it is cessation, which is always described as something entered after exiting the 8th jhana. Further I don't see how you can consider it to be cessation when there is still an awareness that can enter into a domain. Further, how can it be a "state" if it is cessation? It is not a state at all. There is no perception or feeling present at all. Based on your earlier statements of what you believed saññá-vedayita-nirodha to be, I further assert you have never experienced cessation, as you would never have said those things if you truly had. And indeed, you probably would have a better understanding of the upper jhanas if that were the case.
This is why I wanted to see descriptions! They reveal a lot - and that we are indeed talking about different things, as when you say 6th, 7th, and 8th jhana, you mean variations on/deepening of the 6th jhana, and when you say cessation you mean 7th jhana. I believe this is a
far more pressing issue than when you simply brush us off for doing something "cognitive" instead of "true jhana."
I urge you to consider my statements here, and see for yourself whether you cannot deepen the state you claim to be cessation, and go beyond it into nevasannanasannnayatana, and from there, perhaps even cessation, though that will not be possible if you are not investigating the arising & passing away of all sensations along the way.
Also if I am indeed correct that you are mistaken here, isn't it interesting that someone with 14 months of meditative experience is more accurate at describing and recognizing descriptions of these states than someone with 40 years? Indeed there may be something more to this than attaining jhana. But please do not be predisposed to disbelieve what I'm saying based on the length of time I have been meditating - just read my words and tell me what you think.
Big Picture (What is Enlightenment):The other huge issue is just of what Enlightenment is. Hopefully not to beat a dead horse, but let me just re-iterate my point, and re-iterate that I don't have any stake in "winning" this debate, and it's only for your benefit (and those you teach) to try out the following advice:
You currently have a practice which temporarily frees you of neuroses. As long as you maintain your practice, you are free of neuroses. It works for you, and that's great - keep it up. I, and others, are simply saying there is more to what the Buddha was saying, that you have really dumbed down what Enlightenment is, and we say this not only based on suttas but on our own personal experiences. If you think there is any possibility that this is true - and I ask you to investigate this claim sincerely - then it might benefit you to try something else. And by 'try something else', I do not mean abandon your meditation practice cause it makes you a "jhana junkie" or whatever. I mean simply investigate your experience a little more, like in MN111 like I listed above. Through investigation I believe you can find permanent release. Buddha did not say Sariputta was wise because he attained the jhanas - he said Sariputta was wise because of his discernment while abiding in the jhanas, which discernment led to his release. If you think there is absolutely nothing to these claims, then do not attempt to do anything differently for even a day. But I urge you to experiment and try it for yourself, as you will maintain your Enlightenment requirements of at least 3 hours across at least 3 sits per day of abiding in 4th jhana while doing so, so you will remain as Enlightened as you are now. If you find the added investigation 'taints' your jhanas too much, then do your Enlightenment-requirement practice, and then try a half hour of a more investigative approach. Just see for yourself!
I want to add that I believe you entirely. Your method leads to your results. So why do I not drop everything and ask you for a one-on-one session? Because I believe your results are not Enlightenment. Again I urge you to find a properly-translated sutta, translated by yourself if necessary, which supports your claims - a single one! Any discourse where Buddha talks about Enlightenment as something that must be maintained! There are tens of thousands of suttas - I'm sure he would've mentioned it at least once. And I'm sure it is never mentioned, because that is not what Enlightenment is.
Jhananda:
Beoman Claudiu Beoman:
... And furthermore I believe that in reading the suttas, it is pretty clear that Enlightenment is not JhEnlightenment, as it is never mentioned as being a state that must be maintained by the daily practice of jhana, and it is mentioned numerous times as something that can happen in few moments, and even something that can happen without being in jhana.
This assumption is based upon reading poorly translated suttas, and looking at an all too narrow groups of suttas that support your belief.
Well, translate the Bahiya Sutta yourself, then, and tell me how Bahiya was not released upon hearing Buddha's words. Also if you believe I am reading too narrow a group of suttas that support my belief, please show me a wider group of suttas that supports your belief, or indeed any group of suttas, or even one sutta.
Also it is not based upon reading suttas, as my understanding of the "moment of realization" came most importantly from my first-hand experience of it, and it is further corroborated by the experience of many people on DhO and KFD, not to mention numerous other stories of how people attained Enlightenment.
Again I want to point out that I believe all your claims - that everything you do leads to everything you say it does, and that I find that entirely believable. Yet I am not asking for your phone number so I can get one-on-one lessons on attaining jhana and thus becoming JhEnlightened.
Jhananda:
We can thus conclude that attaining the 4th jhana is all about being free from dhukkha, which I define as being liberated from anxiety, neuroses and addictions, because once I had established my meditation level to attaining the 4th jhana every day, and I meditated at least three times a day, then I found all of my anxiety, neuroses and addictions had left me.
...
My premise is, if they maintained at least 3 hours of meditation a day, then they are very likely to have sustained the level of samadhi and liberation they found at the retreat where they had an experience of "enlightenment."
Let me just try to spell out why we do not buy this...
You say attaining 4th jhana 3 times a day for at least 3 hours a day is the definition of Enlightenment. The Buddha sure loved numbers, but not in this way! Does that not sound kind of strange to you? Why does that particular configuration work, but not 2 times a day for 4 hours, or one stretch for 3 hours, or 5 times a day but only 20 minutes each time, or 5th jhana, or 3rd jhana, or whatever? Show me the karmic reasoning - the cause and effect, straight up. I can tell you why what we at the DhO and at KFD do works, and if you read
Mastering the Core Teachings of Buddha, you might, too.
Minor Issues:
I believe the other issues are not at the root of any of our differences, and all our differences can be attributed to the fact that you just do a lot more jhana than most people - see "Big Picture" previously.
Jhana is not "doing":Jeffrey S Brooks:
Beoman Claudiu Beoman:
You say doing jhana, and nothing more, is enlightenment, and that enlightenment fades when one stops practicing.
No, I do not say this. The crucial difference between our concepts of jhana is you think it has something to do with "doing;" and I say jhana is not at all anything doing about doing. It is an attainment, which is characterized by bliss, joy and ecstasy, is the product of the practice of meditation and self-awareness, but is absolutely NOT the same thing.
OK, when you sit down and attain the jhanas, you are doing something - namely, attaining the jhanas. When I say "doing jhana" I mean, sitting down and attaining the jhanas - "doing jhana". I get it - you're not visualizing or imagining or worshipping faeries. You're not "doing" something - you are attaining the jhanas. That is what I mean.
Jhananda:
Beoman Claudiu Beoman:
Furthermore I find I can practice jhana in different ways.
I should point out here that jhana is not a practice, so as long as you consider it so, then you and I are not talking about the same thing.
Again, just a turn of phrase. Replace "practice jhana" with "meditate in a way that leads to the attainment of jhana." To re-phrase fully: "Furthermore, I find I can sit and meditate in different ways that lead to attaining jhana in differing levels of absorption."
Jhana is not "cognitive":Jhananda:
Beoman Claudiu Beoman:
I (and basically everyone else you have (x)ever(x) spoken with {here}) claim that's not the case. You claim that well, we therefore must not be doing jhana properly, since your way of doing jhana does lead to {liberation from anxiety, neuroses and addictions (dhukkha)}.
Correct, If you are doing something cognitive when you think you are experiencing jhana, then your jhana is not my jhana.
As I have sat in the way you have sat as described in your
practice regimen: "Allow yourself to become utterly and completely saturated in the jhana-nimitta", "Allow all absorptions to sweep you away as far as they will take you. Cling to nothing.", etc., I don't see how that is different from what you are doing. It is very pleasant. I can see how doing it 6 hours a day for years on end would reduce my neuroses. I don't see how it would eliminate them permanently - and you yourself say it doesn't, so I have no reason to think it would. Can you see why your way of life is not appealing to someone who wants to
permanently eliminate neuroses?
Jhananda:
I began reading the link and came upon these instructions:
Anapanasati Sutta:
"[1] Breathing in long, one discerns that one is breathing in long; or breathing out long, one discerns that one is breathing out long.
[2] Or breathing in short, one discerns that one is breathing in short; or breathing out short, one discerns that one is breathing out short.
[3] One trains oneself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body, and to breathe out sensitive to the entire body.
I immediately stopped reading there as I found these instructions to be too cognitive.
Okay, I am being facetious =). So please explain how those instructions are not cognitive, yet what I do is cognitive.
Jhananda:
Beoman Claudiu Beoman:
Even so, I don't think there is a fundamental difference between the two - you get to similar states of mind,
It is clear to me that we are not getting to the same states of mind. Because I would not use mind for jhanas 2-4, as mind is cognitive, and once the mind is still in the 2nd jhana, it is not present. I would use the term "states of consciousness."
Okay, let me re-phrase: "Even so, I don't think there is a fundamental difference between the two - you get to similar states,". I assure you I did not mean something "cognitive" when I said "states of mind." Also, please define what you mean by "cognitive", as before - what is not cognitive about the instructions I quoted but cognitive about what I do?
Comparison to OthersI want to point out that when critiquing your criticisms, I went solely by what I found in that link,
a critical analysis of jhana. You did not mention "luminous sphere model", "effacing the senses", "OOBE", or anything along those lines in that link, and that is the only one you provided - and specifically about those teachers. If you have more in-depth criticisms of those teachers then please post those links. I am only responding to the material you provided. So when you say:
Jhananda:
While that difference may seem slight to you, I would only point out that not recognizing the significant difference between our two models suggests you have not had any experience with jhana as I experience it.
You are not addressing anything I said as I did not even know that he had a luminous sphere model, since you didn't mention it in your article.
"it works for me, and not for them, so there is clearly a difference"Jhananda:
I have already pointed out that my method leads to liberation from anxiety, neuroses and addictions (dhukkha); whereas their method does not seem to. It would seem to be a significant difference, but then perhaps you do not care to be liberated from anxiety, neuroses and addictions (dhukkha).
Do you have any reason for that? Like a cause and effect reason, not "it's clear there is an important difference as there is the difference and they don't have my results." Sure, take that as a given. Take me through, step-by-step, exactly why the differences give you results but not them. If you are Enlightened you must know why you are Enlightened, more than "this seems to work." So far the only reason I can see is that you simply meditate more than them - and you said so yourself, if you don't get at least 3 hours or 3 sessions of meditation in, then it will not work. 3 hours a day, for the rest of your life, sounds like a lot of work if it doesn't even
permanently eliminate suffering.
Believe me, I care about being liberated from suffering. I care about others being liberated from suffering, as well. That's why I'm having this (very interesting!) exchange with you.
vipassana vs. shamathaJhananda:
Now, mainstream Theravadan Buddhism happens to believe that the Buddha taught two basic meditation techniques, one he called 'vipassana' and another one he called 'shamata' which is where jhana is supposed to be. The problem is, when we study the suttas critically we find there is no place in the suttas where this is expressed. Some people here think I am just splitting hairs.
I don't see why you mention this. Florian said he doesn't buy this, either, but this has nothing to do with what we've been talking about.
jhana junkieJhananda:
Now Tom thinks I am a "jhana junkie." Zen Buddhists tend to call me a "bliss bunny." However, the 8th fold of the Noble Eightfold Path is defined in the suttas by jhana (DN-22). So, we can conclude anyone who rejects jhana is not following the Noble Eightfold Path.
Just cause someone calls you a jhana junkie, does not mean they reject jhana. I personally know that Tom engages in jhana quite frequently (egads I've given you away, Tom!).
suffering only eliminated in 4th jhanaJhananda:
Now, recall that the Budha's thesis statement is the Four Noble Truths, and that is all about suffering (dhukkha) and how to overcome suffer (dhukkha). The only place in the suttas where we find someone free of suffering is when they arrive at the fourth jhana, through following the N8P, where adhukkha (freedom from suffering, or no-dhukkha) is part of what one attains in jhana.
If 4th jhana is the only place you overcome suffering, why does 1st-3rd jhana eliminate the first 5 fetters, which are also forms of suffering?
I believe this is just a mistranslation on your part, but i do not know pali so someone else will have to chime in.
8 stages of liberationJhananda:
I also say there are 8 stages of liberation (attha vimokkha-mukha) that are described in the suttas.
I'm afraid I really don't know what you mean, so please cite the sutta and/or describe the stages (or provide links doing so) and I'll reply further.
ConclusionI'm looking forward to your thoughts on my posts.