Early Buddhist Meditation

by Keren Arbel

  While I think it is not possible to claim without any reservations that the whole Pāli Nikāyas proffer an entirely a consistent picture, I suggest that when one reads the early texts closely, one can observe an unanticipated overall consistency with regard to the role of the jhānas in the path to liberation.77 I am well aware of deconstructionists’ criticism that has been advocated by certain scholars of Buddhism regarding tensions, contradictions, editorial motivation and so forth which, according to their view, are reflected in the Pāli Nikāyas. This perspective is a plausible perspective; however, this is not the perspective adopted in this study. My aim – first and foremost as a research method – has been to find coherence and accord among the various elements, descriptions and prescriptions found in the Nikāyas. My research methodology set out to look for the wholeness and integrity of the four primary Nikāyas, to grasp interconnections, correspondences and resemblances among the various contemplative and meditative prescriptions and path-descriptions expounded in these texts. This was an intentional point of departure. The choice of this hermeneutic perspective is due to the apparent reality that, at times, deconstruction as a research method leaves us with nothing except from the deconstructing process itself. Many times I have found that discovering inconsistencies and conflicting views is more a matter of interpretation and hermeneutic orientation than the ‘truth’ of the matter. In this regard I believe Gombrich was perceptive when he wrote that ‘an obscurity or difficulty is not necessarily a discrepancy’.78 An examination of numerous and sometimes surprising occurrences of the four jhānas – and descriptions of what seem to portray the jhānas in a different formulation – aroused my inspiration and led me to propose a new theory regarding the phenomenology of the four jhānas according to the Nikāyas framework and mind-set.

  Having said that, I do not wish to claim that there are no passages in the Nikāyas that present somewhat a different picture, perhaps more in accordance with the traditional interpretation. Yet, I do wish to claim that there is ample evidence which suggests a different understanding of the phenomenology of the four jhānas and their role in the path of awakening. This book is based on these numerous references. Readers are left to decide for themselves whether this is indeed the case. I adhere to Jonathan Silk’s statement that ‘a theory is nothing more than a structure or construct within which to organize data.’79 I hope readers will find my theory of the jhānas to be a coherent construct of the Nikāyas’ data.

  It is my hope this study will offer readers, many of whom are well versed in these issues, a new and meaningful interpretation of the various path-factors and their relation to each other in the early Buddhist path to awakening. I also hope that this study will offer insights into issues that were obscure or problematic before, that it will produce a new appreciation for the role of the four jhānas in the path of liberation, and that it will rekindle an interest in these attainments as part of the practice of insight.

  An outline of the chapters

  Chapter 1 offers some historical discussions. It traces and examines the term jhāna/dhyāna in early non-Buddhist texts – texts that are the immediate historical and cultural context of the Pāli Nikāyas. It draws out several conclusions about the term jhāna/dhyāna in the early Upaniṣads and Jain texts and discusses the occurrences of the term jhāna in the Pāli Nikāyas in contexts of which non-Buddhist practices are described.

  Chapters 2 to 6 offer an in-depth analysis of the four jhānas and educe the philosophical implication that derives from this analysis. Each chapter presents a theory regarding the liberative value of a specific jhāna but also considers each of the jhānic states as part of a gradual and linked spiritual ascension, fruition and realization. These chapters demonstrate that the fourfold jhāna model designates a gradual spiritual ascent in which each step signifies a more clarified perception of experience.

  Chapter 2 offers an analysis of the first jhāna and opens with the question of whether entering into the first jhāna is brought about by the practice of one-pointed absorption. The chapter then offers an in-depth investigation of the nature of jhānic joy (pīti) and pleasure (sukha) and their liberative role. The chapter concludes with reflections on the nature of vitakka and vicāra in the first jhāna.

  Chapter 3 analyzes the second jhāna and demonstrates that by progressing from one jhāna to the next one further purifies the mind from what obstructs ‘clear seeing’ (vipassanā). This chapter explores in detail the notion of samādhi of the second jhāna and offers a new interpretation of this type of samādhi and the associated term ekodibhāvaṃ.

  For the purpose of calling attention to the noticeable parallelism between the fulfilment of the seven factors of awakening as ‘awakening factors’ (bojjhaṅgas) and the attainment of the jhānas, Chapter 4 takes a slight divergence. This chapter outlines the essential connection and interdependency between the arousal of the seven factors of awakening, as ‘awakening factors’, and the attainment of the first three jhānas. This is done by using a close textual analysis of what Rupert Gethin has entitled ‘the bojjhaṅga process formula’.

  Having established in the previous chapter that the entrance into the third jhāna is brought about by developing the seven bojjhaṅgas, Chapter 5 offers further analysis of the nature of the third jhāna and its liberative significance. In this chapter I suggest that in the third jhāna a specialized form of awareness is beginning to be established: a mind which is not conditioned by habitual reaction-patterns of likes and dislikes, conscious or latent. I argue that the third jhāna signifies another step in the deconstruction of the fabricated sense of self.

  Chapter 6 concludes this section by offering a detailed examination of the fourth and final jhāna. Through an analysis of the formulaic description and passages that seem to refer to the fourth jhāna and its mental and physical factors, Chapter 6 argues that upekkhā in the fourth jhāna denotes a profoundly wise relation to experience, not tainted by any kind of wrong perception and mental reactivity rooted in craving (taṇhā). In this chapter I further show that sati is a multidimensional and versatile concept and that sati’s mode of function in a wholesome, non-discursive and non-reactive field of awareness, that is, the fourth-jhāna awareness, is different from its mode of function in an ordinary cognitive process. The chapter suggests that the fourth jhāna, although conditioned and impermanent (as all experiences and insights are), is nonetheless further ameliorating the connection between the conditioned and unconditioned by familiarizing the practitioner with an awakened awareness of reality.

  The next part of the book includes two chapters that consider the fourfold jhāna model in the context of the Nikāyas’ path to liberation. Having developed a theory regarding the nature of the four jhānas, Chapter 7 will offer further reflections on the interrelation between the attainment of the jhānas and the perfection of sīla (morality) and paññā (liberating wisdom). It suggests that the jhānas – particularly the fourth and final jhāna – exemplify in the Nikāyas’ theory of spiritual development the ideal mind. It expresses what I will call ‘wisdom-awareness’.

  Chapter 8 challenges some assumptions that are rooted in classical Buddhist phenomenology of meditation. It discusses two important questions: can we consider the arūpa samāpattis to be a type of jhāna, as the later Buddhist tradition has maintained, and can we find in the Pāli Nikāyas concrete references to the view that one can attain nibbāna without the attainment of the four jhānas?

  Notes

  1 SN V.308: Seyyathā’pi bhikkhave, gaṅgā nadī pācīnanintā pācīnapoṇā pācīnapabbhārā, evameva kho bhikkhave bhikkhu cattāro jhāne bhāvento cattāro jhāne bahulīkaronto nibbānaninno hoti nibbānapoṇo nibbānapabbhāro.

  2 See, for example, Rahula 1978, 68.

  3 I recognize that the term ‘Theravāda’ is problematic as Peter Skilling has shown (Peter Skilling 2009, 72). I use the term ‘Theravāda’, nonetheless, since it became a standard term for the form of Buddhism in Southeast Asia. I use it as re
ferring to the form of Buddhism which is based upon the fifth-century commentaries (Visuddhimagga and Āṭṭhakathā) and the later sub-commentaries (ṭīkā) and manuals. It is now also evident that before modern times no lay person would have called themselves a ‘Theravādin’. As pointed out by Juliane Schober and Steven Collins in a recent review article, ‘“Theravāda” is a term for a socio-religious tradition involving laity as well as monks, which is now known to be a modern, nineteenth century western invention. It has become widespread among Buddhists within Southeast Asia since a decision by the international World Fellowship of Buddhists in the early 1950s to use the term as an alternative to the pejorative “Hīnayāna” (“Lesser Vehicle”) and to the imprecise “Southern Buddhism”, which were at that time widely used’ (Schober and Collins 2012, 158).

  4 From Kornfield’s reviews of important contemporary Theravāda meditation teachers, it is evident that vipassanā meditation is central and salient while the jhānas are mostly absent from their teachings (Kornfield 1977, 288). The view that one can be liberated without the jhānas is also clear in Ledi Sayadaw’s teaching. In a book on Ledi, Erik Braun cited from Ledi’s Manual on Insight Meditation in which he stated that ‘those whose perfection of knowledge is ripened (pāramī ñāṇm̆ nu sū myā) need not cultivate concentration’ (Braun 2013, 138–9, 141). Buddhadāsa Bhikkhu has claimed that ‘it must not be forgotten that there exist another way of practice which leads to intuitive insight directly. This is the way of emancipation through Insight, which by-passes the Jhānas’ (Buddhadāsa and Thepwisutthimethi 1989, 319–20). Furthermore, Buddhadāsa also considered the possibility of ‘dry insight’ (the one who by-passes the jhānas) to be more universally applicable (Ibid., 61). In a book dedicated to explaining Pa-Auk Sayadaw’s teaching of the jhānas, the authors explains that one can attain awakening without the jhānas but the jhānas nonetheless were part of the Buddha’s own path (Houtman 1990, 181; Snyder and Rasmussen 2009, 32). For a discussion on the vipassanā - concentration dispute in Burma, see Houtman 1990, 185–9. According to Sarbacker in Tibetan Buddhism, for example, samatha is still regarded as an important part of the path, but vipasyanā is the key to liberation: ‘[T]hus it is said that they are complementary, but not equal in importance, with the process of liberation’ (Sarbacker 2005, 24).

  5 See, for example, La Vallée Poussin 1916, 163; Rahula 1978, 68; Katz 1982, 82; King 1992, viii; Crangle 1994, 272; Gunaratana 1999, 78; Solé-Leris 1999, 73.

  6 See Cousins 1974, 115–31; Griffiths 1981, 605–24; Cousins 1984, 56–68; King 1992; Solé-Leris 1999.

  7 Cousins 1974, 115.

  8 The kasiṇa is a meditation object that can come in four colours: blue/black, yellow, red and white and as light kasiṇa, water kasiṇa, earth kasiṇa, fire kasiṇa, air kasiṇa and limited space kasiṇa (Vism III.105). According to Buddhaghosa, all types of kasiṇa can be used for attaining the four jhānas. This is contrary to the four-element meditation that brings only access concentration (Vism III.106 and XI.44). At Vism XVIII.5 Buddhaghosa explains that the discernment of the four elements is the way to achieve ‘purification of view’ for ‘one whose vehicle is pure insight’. For a clear presentation of this practice by a contemporary Theravāda meditation teacher, see Pa-Auk Sayadaw 2003, 73–9.

  9 E.g., Vism III.106.

  10 See Cousins’s statement that ‘if jhāna practice is undertaken, it will be necessary to return therefrom in order to develop insight’ (Cousins 1974, 123). Note however, that there is a concept called vipassanā-jhānas in the modern Theravāda meditation tradition; a term seemed to be coined by Sayadaw U Pandita (U Pandita 1991, 180–1). Vipassanā-jhānas is a concept that describes the development of vipassanā in relation to the jhānas, as part of the model of the sixteen vipassanā-ñāṇas. The sixteen vipassanāñāṇas are a gradual model of insight that is outlined in the Visuddhimagga (for a detailed description see Mahāsi 2016, 303–466). The vipassanā-jhāna concept is committed to this insight model, although in this context, the various insights are not described in detail. The map of the sixteen ñāṇas is central to the Burmese meditation traditions (contrary to the Thai forest tradition), and hence, the vipassana-jhāna model is an endeavour to place the four jhānas into the elaborated model of the sixteen ñāṇas. Vipassana-jhāna is an interesting concept, but unfortunately, the material I could find on it is scarce and quite short (see U Pandita 1991, 195–205). It should be noted, however, that the sixteen ñāṇas cannot be found, as such, in the Nikāyas (the Rathavīnita Sutta is the basis for the seven purifications outlined in the Visuddhimagga). Thus, although my interpretation of the jhānas can be designated as vipassanā jhānas, it is different in the sense that it is not committed to the model of the sixteen ñāṇas and the seven purifications. The present study attempts to understand and interpret the four jhānas, as part of the practice of insight, from the perspective of the Nikāyas’ teachings alone.

  11 See, for example, Ajahn Dhammadaro’s statement about absorption concentration that ‘there is additionally a danger of this fixed concentration. Since it does not generate wisdom it can lead to clinging to bliss or even misuse of the powers of concentration, thereby actually increasing defilements’ (Kornfield 1977, 266). See also Ajahn Chah 2002, 149 and Buddhadāsa Bhikkhu’s statement that ‘a deeply concentrated mind [which clearly refers to the jhānas] is in no position to investigate anything. It cannot practice introspection at all; it is in a state of unawareness and is of no use for insight’ (Bucknell and Kang 1997, 107). He further emphasizes that ‘deep concentration is a major obstacle to insight practice’ (Bucknell and Kang 1997, 107; italics in the original).

  12 PED: 286.

  13 Robert Gimello has stated that the jhānas have a powerful delusive potential. However, this notion is not found in the Nikāyas. Gimello 1978, 193.

  14 E.g., SN V.308.

  15 Griffiths 1981, 618.

  16 See Bronkhorst 1993, 108. This issue will be addressed in detail in the next section.

  17 SA II.127: paññāvimuttā kho mayaṃ, āvusoti āvuso, mayaṃ nijjhānakā sukkhavipassakā paññāmetteneva vimuttāti dasseti.

  18 One possible answer to that dilemma is to say that in the process of trying to calm and still the mind, a meditator can have various insights, such as about anicca anttā and dukkha. Furthermore, on emerging the a jhānas, or close to it, one is also very sensitive to small changes, and subtle dukkha, However, these insights can be said to be a byproduct, as one does not direct the mind to this type of investigation. Mahāsi Sayadaw, for example, stated that the breath can be used for both tranquillity (i.e., the jhānas) and for insight. However, ‘the only difference is that observation of the conceptual form of the breath produces tranquillity, while attention to its touch and movement produces insight’ (Mahāsi Sayadaw 2016, 130). Hence, when a meditator’s aim is to achieve one-pointed concentration on a chosen object, whether insights regarding the nature of experience will register or be transformative, really depends on the practitioner intention and inclination of mind. It is quite possible that if the intention is to attain one-pointed concentration, and if there is no interest in other aspects of the nature of the mind and the body, a meditator can just not ‘see’ these insights in a meaningful way.

  19 Rahula 1978, 68.

  20 Griffiths 1983, 57.

  21 Griffiths 1981, 615.

  22 Ronkin 2005, 6.

  23 I suggest a thought experiment at this point. Imagine knowing only the descriptions of the four jhānas in the Nikāyas: would you perceive the four jhānas as absorptions in a particular object of meditation, just from reading their description in the Nikāyas, without knowing the Theravāda prescription? Would you think that they are a separate meditation technique, diametrically opposed to the practice of observing experience (the practice of satipaṭṭhāna)? And lastly, would you think that the Nikāyas express the view that they are an optional element in the path?

  24 See, for example, Norman, who has stated that
some Pāli text can be dated with great probability to pre-Aśoka time, while the rest can be dated from his time (Norman 1993, 111). This hypothesis is strengthened by the fact that canonical Pāli texts (not commentarial or post-canonical texts) do not mention or refer to Aśoka. This suggests that the Pāli canonical texts predate Aśoka. Alexander Wynne has pointed out that it seems probable that the Pāli Canon being was closed to materials from other sects at an early date. He states that ‘whereas some of the other sects periodically shared literature and changed their canonical material in the sectarian period, the Theravādins of Sri Lanka did not – they confined the received material to non-canonical books’. He suggests that ‘the Pāli canon was relatively closed after its reduction at an early date’ and can even be ‘pushed back’ depending upon ‘the date when the Pāli texts reached Sri Lanka, i.e. the date at which the sectarian period begun’ (Wynne 2003, 8, 11). He further suggests that the Pāli texts arrived in Sri Lanka in the middle of the third century BC, and states that ‘much of what is found in the Suttapiṭaka is earlier than 250 B.C., perhaps even more than 100 years older than this’ (Ibid., 22). Venerable Sujato also maintains that since Sinhalese is a completely different language than Pāli, ‘it is inconceivable that the Sinhalese would have deliberately composed a canon in a foreign language, so they must have brought their scriptures from the mainland, where they were already relatively fixed in a canonical language. The persistence of the scriptures in a non-native tongue is further evidence of an early date for the Pali canon’ (Sujato, ‘A Higher Criticism of Archaeology’). See also Bond, who points out that the internal evidence of the Pāli canon suggests it did not evolve in Sri Lanka, since it also contains no references to people or events in Sri Lanka, something that we would expect if it had evolved there. He further asserts that ‘the indications are that the Pāli Canon was complete or largely complete when it reached Śri Lanka from India’ (Bond 1980, 54).