by Keren Arbel
Note that this is very different from the common perception that for entering the jhānas one has to focus the mind on a particular object (such as the kaṣinas).15 In SN V.198 the Buddha stated that it is not by focusing the mind or being absorbed into a meditation object that one attains the first jhāna; rather, it is by releasing and letting go of the foothold of unwholesome mind. This seems to be achieved by the cultivation of the seven factors of awakening to some extent16 and by the practice of morality, sense restraint and observation of phenomena, as prescribed in the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta, which allow one to ‘be endowed with’ noble mindfulness and full awareness.
Given the preceding, it is no surprise that the Buddha’s memory of the first jhāna, and the consequent re-entering into this state just before his awakening, enabled him to re-discover its power and significance in the spiritual path. While his asceticism and meditative practice up to that moment of remembrance did not take him ‘beyond [ordinary] human [condition] or granted him any distinction in insight and knowledge that fits the noble ones’, this attainment did. It allowed him to abandon exactly the thing that he was aiming for – the unwholesome states of mind.17
II Abandoning the nīvaraṇas
I have already pointed out that according to numerous suttas the first jhāna is attained when the mind is purified from the hindrances (nīvaraṇas). This is a prerequisite for entering the first jhāna. 18 These hindrances are specifically referred to in various suttas as the ‘five hindrances, imperfection of mind that weakens wisdom’.19 While Buddhaghosa considers the hindrances to be specifically obstructive to the jhānas, given that they do not allow the mind to concentrate on the meditation object,20 I would argue that the five nīvaraṇas are obstructive to seeing things as they are21 and for perfecting and consummating the seven factors of awakening. In other words, a mind that is not purified from these obstructions cannot see clearly; therefore, it does not have the ability to eradicate the āsavas for attaining complete liberation. SN V.92 clearly states this. It has the Buddha compare the purified mind to refined gold, while the five hindrances are likened to impurities that corrupt gold from being malleable, wieldy and radiant:
So too bhikkhus, there are there five corruptions of the mindcorrupted by which the mind is neither malleable nor wieldy nor radiant, but brittle and not rightly calmed for destruction of the āsavas. What five? Sense desire… ill will… sloth and torpor… restlessness and remorse… doubt are corruptions of the mind.22
The nīvaraṇas do not just obstruct strong concentration, they actually obstruct liberation. Although it is quite clear that liberation is possible only when the nīvaraṇas are absent, the actual way to purify the mind from these five corruptions is not explicated in detail in the Nikāyas. The Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta instructs the practitioner to observe not only whatever is present and absent at each moment but also the causes for the arising of the various phenomena (wholesome and unwholesome). We can say that the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta presents a theory of meditation in which ‘desire-less observation’ is the key (but not the only method the sutta presents) to weakening and eliminating the various unwholesome states. Yet, the Nikāyas also offer a more precise depiction of the mental process (and not a technique) by which the mind is actually purified from the hindrances (presumably by first recognizing them as prescribed in the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta).23 This depiction reveals the mechanism by which the five nīvaraṇas can be abandoned (and not only observed and weakened). It starts with the instruction of sitting down while establishing mindfulness in front of the meditator. This instruction of placing ‘mindfulness in front’ occurs both in the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta and in the Ānāpānasati Sutta (and in suttas that depicts the gradual path). I believe that this phrase alludes to the necessity of developing the four foundations of mindfulness as prescribed in the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta and the Ānāpānasati Sutta to some extent, and implies the preliminary development of the seven factors of awakening as a prerequisite for abandoning the nīvaraṇas. Hence, establishing mindfulness (sati), which is done by following the instructions of the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta (and alternatively the Ānāpānasati Sutta), enables the meditator to develop the seven factors of awakening to some degree. This can then be seen as the basis for abandoning the five hindrances.24 When mindfulness is established, the Buddha explains that:
Abandoning covetousness for the world, he abides with a mind free from covetousness. [Thus] he causes the mind to become pure from covetousness.
Abandoning ill will and hatred, he abides with a mind free from ill will, compassionate for the welfare of all living beings. [Thus] he causes the mind to become pure from ill will and hatred.
Abandoning sloth and torpor, he abides free from sloth and torpor. Thus, he has clear perception; he is mindful and fully aware. [Thus] he causes the mind to become pure from sloth and torpor.
Abandoning restlessness and remorse, he abides un-agitated with a mind inwardly peaceful. [Thus] he causes the mind to become pure from restlessness and remorse.
Abandoning doubt, he abides having gone beyond doubt, un-perplexed about wholesome states. [Thus] he causes the mind to become pure from doubt.25
From this account it is quite clear that a mind in which these obstructions are not present is a mind where wholesome qualities are present, such as compassion, clear perception, mindfulness, full awareness, peacefulness and confidence regarding what is wholesome (i.e., discernment of what wholesome and unwholesome). What is more interesting in these accounts is the repeated description that one dwells (viharati) with a mind free from the five hindrances (presumably when one enters the first jhāna and during the attainments of the other three jhānas); by this ‘dwelling’ (viharati) the practitioner ‘causes the mind to become pure’ (cittaṃ parisodheti).26
From the way the clauses are constructed in Pāli, it seems that the actual abiding (viharati) when the mind is free from the various hindrances is the mechanism by which the mind actually becomes purified. This, I would suggest, is reflected by the last sentence of each clause, since it uses the verb parisudh in the causative form (parisodheti). Here we find the notion that what causes the mind to become purified from the hindrances is the actual abiding – for a period of time – in a state of mind that is free from these hindrances.
SN V.95 also points out that ‘when the five n īvaraṇas are not present in the mind, on that occasion, the seven factors of awakening progress to fulfilment by development’.27 In other words, one can start to develop the seven factors of awakening while the mind is not purified from the hindrances. Yet, until the five nīvaraṇas are not completely absent from the mind, these wholesome factors cannot be perfected and matured.28 As we will see in Chapter 4, the entrance into the first jhāna opens the way to the complete perfection of the seven factors of awakening by way of jhāna. And only when the seven factors of awakening are fully developed and matured can one realize the fruit of true knowledge and liberation.29
Interestingly, SN V.97 states that ‘these five hindrances are causing blindness, causing lack of vision, causing lack of knowledge, impeding wisdom, tending to vexation, leading away from nibbāna’.30 MN I.276 further states that when these hindrances are abandoned, the practitioners sees (samanupassti) that there is a situation akin to ‘freedom from debt (ānaṇyaṃ), healthiness (ārogyaṃ), release from prison (bandhanāmokkhaṃ), freedom from slavery (bhujissaṃ) and a land of safety (khemantabhūmiṃ)’.31 In other words, only when the five hindrances are absent, presumably when one is dwelling in the jhānas, the final stages of liberation can occur by perfecting and fulfilling the seven factors and by eradicating the āsavas. 32 Note that although the nīvaraṇas impede wisdom (paññā), there is nowhere an explanation of what kind of ‘wisdom’ (paññā) they impede. A possible understanding is that when the mind is free from the various obstructions (nīvaraṇas) and unwholesome states (akusala dhammas), and contains only wholesome factors, experience is perceived without any distorted perception and mental
impediments.33 In other words, when the mind is wholesome and pure, it is a 'state of wisdom’ – a state in which no akusala dhammas exist. What I am trying to suggest is that the absence of one thing (i.e., nīvaraṇas) does not necessarily point to the presence of something else (i.e., some conceptual wisdom or specific cognitive content). Thus, it is quite justified to suggest that the jhānas are states where wisdom is strong since the mind is not hindered by mental obstructions and experience can be seen more clearly that is, it is less fabricated by unwholesome states and conceptual overlays.
III Viveka
The Pāli English Dictionary, and consequently most translators, translates viveka as ‘detachment’, ‘separation’ and ‘seclusion’.34 Buddhaghosa explains that viveka means either the disappearance of the hindrances, or that the jhāna factors are secluded from the hindrances.35 However, according to the Sanskrit dictionary, the first meaning of viveka is ‘discrimination’.36 The Sanskrit dictionary further describes viveka as ‘(1) true knowledge, (2) discretion, (3) right judgement, and (4) the faculty of distinguishing and classifying things according to their real properties’. These meanings of the term viveka seem to assist in interpreting this term in the Buddhist context as well, since viveka has no clear definition in the Nikāyas and it seems to be used in different ways. I suggest that the use of vivicca and viveka, in the description of the first jhāna (both from the verb vi + vic), plays with both meanings of the verb; namely, its meaning as discernment and the consequent ‘seclusion’ and letting go. Although there are times that the Buddha changes the meaning of a Sanskrit term completely, sometimes he does not; for example, he retains the meanings of terms such as dukkha, sukha and so on. I believe that the term viveka retained in the Nikāyas also its Sanskrit meaning as ‘discernment’.
This interpretation is supported by a description from SN V 301. In this sutta, the quality of viveka is developed by the practice of the four satipaṭṭhānas. Anuruddha declares that
[i]ndeed friends, when that bhikkhu is developing and cultivating the four establishings of mindfulness, it is impossible that he will give up the training and return to the lower life. For what reason? Because for a long time his mind has slanted, sloped, and inclined towards viveka. 37
Here Anuruddha clearly states that by seeing clearly (anupassati) body, feeling, mind and dhammas (the four focuses of mindfulness) the practitioner develops the quality of viveka. In this context, it seems that viveka is a quality connected to clear seeing, to discernment of the nature of experience.38 We also see here that the jhānas follow the development of the four satipaṭṭhānas and not some practice of onepointed concentration.39 The preceding also indicates that the development of the four satipaṭṭhānas inclines the mind towards discerning the true nature of phenomena; discernment that allows the mind to see the disadvantage of sense pleasures and, hence, let go of the desire for them and other unwholesome states (such as clinging and aversion, for example).That is, the cultivation of the four satipaṭṭhānas develops the ability to recognize and discern the mechanism of mind and body for seeing clearly into the nature of the various physical and mental phenomena. I would suggest that this discernment of phenomena (dhammas), and the consequent detachment (vivicca) is indicated by the term viveka, the same viveka from which pīti and sukha of the first jhāna are born.40 Discerning the nature of phenomena enables the mind to change its inclinations; that is, it allows us to let go of our basic unwholesome tendencies and desires, which are based on a mistaken perception of reality. This letting go (vossagga) is the proximate cause for entering the first jhāna.
IV Detachment from sensual pleasures (kāma)
One common understanding of the nature of the jhāna attainments is that these states are trance-like experiences in which one is completely cut off from sense experience.41 According to the Kathāvatthu, for example, the five senses and related classes of consciousness (eye-consciousness etc.) do not operate in the jhānas.42 However, the description of the first jhāna implies something quite different and it seems that the Kathāvatthu and subsequent commentators missed the point. What the description of the first jhāna indicates is that one is separated from two things upon entering the first jhāna: k āma and unwholesome states (akusalehi dhammehi). For our present enquiry, kāma is the pivotal term.
If the first jhāna is a state in which the practitioner is cut off from objects of the five senses, it would be reasonable to expect a clear statement in the text that the meditator is cut off from either the five faculties (indriya), which refer to the five sense organs,43 or those of the twelve āyatanas, which designate the senses and their corresponding objects (i.e., the fields of perception). Further, a statement that one is cut off from ‘the five strings of sensual desires’ (pañca-kāma-guṇā) – namely, forms, sounds, odours, flavours and tangibles – would clearly point to the cutting off of sensory experience while in the jhānas. 44 In other words, while the term pañcakāma-guṇā describes sense experience (excluding the sixth sense, mano-viññāṇa), the term kāma refers quite straightforwardly to the attachment and clinging to the five guṇas together with attachment to the various mental objects (mano-viññāṇa).
AN III.411 explicitly clarifies the difference between the ‘five strings of sensual desire; (pañca-kāma-guṇā) and kāma’. In this sutta, the Buddha unequivocally states that pañca-kāma-guṇā are desirable objects of the five sense objects. He further states that the ‘five stings of sensual desire’ that are ‘agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing’45 are not kāma in the Buddha’s teaching.46 Kāma, on the contrary, is the ‘thought of desire’ (saṅkapparāga). The Buddha explains this point in a beautiful verse
The thought of desire in a person is kāma,
not the wonderful sense pleasures [found] in the world.
The thought of desire in a person is kāma.
The wonderful [things] remain as they are in the world,
while the wise men remove the impulse [for them].47
It is safe to say that since the description of the first jhāna does not mention that one is separated from the indriyas, the five sense-related āyatanas or the kāmaguṇas, the assumption that one is cut off from sense experience while in the jhānas is a misunderstanding.48 In light of this, I would suggest that what is not present in the experience of the jhānas is the movement of desire – the internal movement in which sense objects capture and captivate the mind. Furthermore, according to the description of the first jhāna, one is not separated from all mental phenomena, that is, from all objects of the sixth sense (mano-viññāṇa), but only from akusala dhammas – those mental factors that are not conducive to liberation.
In summary, this discussion shows that when the practitioner enters and abides in the first jhāna, he or she is in fact separated from the attachment and desire for sensual pleasures – the basic tendency of an ordinary cognition49 – and not from sense experience.50 This conclusion corresponds with the earlier interpretation of viveka. Being separated from desire and attachment to sensual pleasures (and other unwholesome states of mind) must originate from insight into the nature of the world of the senses. Desire for sense pleasures is a basic tendency of an un-liberated mind that considers sense pleasure as gratifying and worth seeking. Being separated from this basic tendency, and from other unwholesome states, is quite an advanced realization. It points to the strong insight into the impermanence of the various objects of cognition and to the understanding of the futility in holding on to them. Thus, the jhānas are an experience quite different from ordinary experience but at the same time, not separated from it. They are psychosomatic states in which one has a different experience of being an embodied being in the midst of experience. I will return to this point later on.
V Seeking pain for attaining pleasure
While trying to understand the significance of the first jhāna to the Buddhist path, I have come to think that jhānic pīti (mental joy and ease) and sukha (bodily pleasure
)51 are the key elements for deciphering this state. In the following investigation, we will see that these two factors (nīrāmisa pīti and nīrāmisa sukha), which characterize the first and second jhānas (sukha is also one of the factors of the third jhāna), are pleasure and joy that do not involve desire and attachment. On the contrary, they can only arise when one encounters the world of phenomena without clinging. When one discerns (viveka) the true nature of phenomena, that is, the unreliability, impermanence and lack of substantiality of all phenomena, jhānic pīti and sukha are born.52 Furthermore, it is the very attainment of jhānic pīti and sukha which allows the mind to abandon completely the desire for sense pleasures (kāma) and the latent tendency (anusaya) to seek this type of pleasure.
Let us backtrack for a moment and go into a deeper investigation of the term kāma, which is pivotal for understanding the liberative value of the first jhāna. In Buddhist thought, kāma – the desire for sense pleasures – is a fundamental impediment to liberation. This is clearly stated by the Buddha in MN II.261–2:
Bhikkhus, [the objects of] sensual pleasures are impermanent, hollow, false, deceptive; they are illusory, the prattle of fools. The desire for sensual pleasure here and now and the desire for sensual pleasures in lives to come, sensual perceptions here and now and sensual perceptions in lives to come – both alike are Māra’s realm, Māra’s domain, Māra’s bait, Māra’s hunting ground. On account of them, these evil unwholesome mental states such as covetousness, ill will, and presumption arise. And they constitute and obstruction to a noble disciple in training here.53
