Re: Jhana
Post by frank k » Thu May 07, 2020 4:18 am
And here's detailed research thoroughly refuting B. Sujato's erroneous translation and interpretation of vitakka and vicara.
http://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/v ... ndex.html
I'm very disappointed in you Ven. Dhammanando for answering his question in such a way without acknowledging the difference between a straight EBT interpretation and the commentarial one. One would assume you support B. Sujato's interpretation? If not, what is your position? I've publicly and via private message asked you number of times on this and you've not answered so far. How do you translate and interpret vitakka and vicara?
edit: I see this is 'general theravada' forum, and your answer is completely appropriate for that board, since orthodox Theravada would not find it controversial at all to assume Vism. explanation of vitakka and vicara is authoritative, even though it contradicts canonical Abhidhamma as well as EBT pali suttas. But in practice, we all know how vitakka, vicara, kaya are translated and interpreted has radical implications on how the 4 jhanas are understood and practiced. We have a responsibility to clarify the differences, especially for someone like you who is highly regarded and sought after for advice on Buddhist forums.
http://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/v ... ndex.html
I'm very disappointed in you Ven. Dhammanando for answering his question in such a way without acknowledging the difference between a straight EBT interpretation and the commentarial one. One would assume you support B. Sujato's interpretation? If not, what is your position? I've publicly and via private message asked you number of times on this and you've not answered so far. How do you translate and interpret vitakka and vicara?
edit: I see this is 'general theravada' forum, and your answer is completely appropriate for that board, since orthodox Theravada would not find it controversial at all to assume Vism. explanation of vitakka and vicara is authoritative, even though it contradicts canonical Abhidhamma as well as EBT pali suttas. But in practice, we all know how vitakka, vicara, kaya are translated and interpreted has radical implications on how the 4 jhanas are understood and practiced. We have a responsibility to clarify the differences, especially for someone like you who is highly regarded and sought after for advice on Buddhist forums.
Dhammanando wrote: ↑Mon May 04, 2020 10:57 pmzzzzzz wrote: ↑"Placing the mind" and "keeping it connected" are how Ven. Sujāto translates the jhāna factors of vitakka and vicāra. Here's a link to his blog where he explains the thinking behind his rendering of the first term:Mon May 04, 2020 9:34 pmWhat does "Placing the mind" mean here?
https://sujato.wordpress.com/2012/12/06 ... -in-jhana/
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org
STED definitions
STED definitionsVen. D's response: (still being cagey and not sharing his view on V&V)
e: Jhana
Post by frank k » Sat May 09, 2020 8:56 am
Dhammanando wrote: ↑Thank you Ven. D. I'm recovered and feeling well. Could you share your English translation of vitakka and vicara of the first jhana formula, and how you understand the meaning of it?Fri May 08, 2020 7:13 pmfrank k wrote: ↑My post had no aim but that of clarifying a translation over which zzzzzz was puzzled. In fulfilment of this aim no more words were needed than those which I wrote.Thu May 07, 2020 4:18 amI'm very disappointed in you Ven. Dhammanando for answering his question in such a way without acknowledging the difference between a straight EBT interpretation and the commentarial one.
I wish you the speediest of recoveries from your disappointment.
Re: Jhana
Unread post by Dhammanando » Mon May 11, 2020 8:03 pm
frank k wrote: ↑My preferred rendering would be "vitakka" and "vicāra".Sat May 09, 2020 8:56 amCould you share your English translation of vitakka and vicara of the first jhana formula,
That is, unless I'm talking to someone completely new to Buddhism I prefer to import technical terms rather than to translate them. This is the policy adopted by the Thai, Burmese and Sinhalese translators of the Tipiṭaka, and was also emulated by the Franco-Belgian scholars Poussin and Lamotte in their translations of Sanskrit Buddhist texts. Though I don't expect it to catch on in the anglophone world, I do think it's the best way to go about things.
frank k wrote: ↑I take the terms as they are defined in the Atthasālinī (Dhs-a. 114-115; The Expositor I. 151-3, link).Sat May 09, 2020 8:56 amand how you understand the meaning of it?
And from your earlier post...
frank k wrote: ↑Not having read any books by the Sujāto-Brahmavaṃso-Brahmali trio, I don't know to precisely what extent our understandings of jhāna coincide. But on the two points where you and the trio are in dispute (i.e., on whether in the first jhāna there can be (1) five-sense-door experience and (2) thinking about a plurality of ārammaṇas), I find their reading of the suttas to be more compelling.Thu May 07, 2020 4:18 amOne would assume you support B. Sujato's interpretation?
frank k wrote: ↑Sorry, but I seldom reply to private messages unless they're concerned with moderatorial matters. As for public threads about jhāna (especially debates on what counts as "true jhāna"), I almost never post to them unless it's merely to offer some minor note of clarification that won't get me embroiled in a never-ending debate.Thu May 07, 2020 4:18 amIf not, what is your position? I've publicly and via private message asked you number of times on this and you've not answered so far.
Doodoot reiterating wrong views for the umpteenth time:
"In MN 19, the Buddha said his mind was silent before 1st jhana."
Re: Jhana
Post by frank k » Sun May 10, 2020 6:47 am
On MN 19: you need to stop stubbornly clinging to your wrong views and face reality. MN 19 does NOT say vitakka and vicara cease prior to first jhana. What it says is that EXCESSIVE vitakka and vicara tires the body and prevents first jhana. But the fact that the words vitakka and vicara are in the first jhana means there's an attenuated non excessive V&V in there.
The agama parallel to MN 19 makes this point even more extreme by removing the first jhana formula altogether (to emphasize the point that the state of samadhi described prior to the first jhana formula was the same activity taking place).
MN 125 also makes that same point by removing the first jhana formula.
MN 78 corroborates the point by saying that kusala sankappa (vitakka equivalent in this context) does not cease until SECOND jhana (not first).
AN 8.30 also explicitly uses vitakka in a vaci-sankhara (thoughts you think before you speak them out loud) immediately before first jhana.
Again and again you avoid the mountain of evidence, and keep infecting Dhamma forums with your wrong views on vitakka and vicara of jhana. People with correct understanding of vitakka and vicara and jhana get sick of correcting your wrong views all the time, picking up after you like dog walkers with their plastic doggy poop bags. I'm done with that. Other forum members, it's up to you to exercise civic responsibility and prevent viral wrong views from spreading.
The agama parallel to MN 19 makes this point even more extreme by removing the first jhana formula altogether (to emphasize the point that the state of samadhi described prior to the first jhana formula was the same activity taking place).
MN 125 also makes that same point by removing the first jhana formula.
MN 78 corroborates the point by saying that kusala sankappa (vitakka equivalent in this context) does not cease until SECOND jhana (not first).
AN 8.30 also explicitly uses vitakka in a vaci-sankhara (thoughts you think before you speak them out loud) immediately before first jhana.
Again and again you avoid the mountain of evidence, and keep infecting Dhamma forums with your wrong views on vitakka and vicara of jhana. People with correct understanding of vitakka and vicara and jhana get sick of correcting your wrong views all the time, picking up after you like dog walkers with their plastic doggy poop bags. I'm done with that. Other forum members, it's up to you to exercise civic responsibility and prevent viral wrong views from spreading.
DooDoot wrote: ↑"In MN 19, the Buddha said his mind was silent before 1st jhana."Sun May 10, 2020 1:20 amMN 19 wrote:... [ordinary verbal] thinking & pondering a long time would tire the body. When the body is tired, the mind is disturbed; and a disturbed mind is far from concentration.' So I steadied my mind right within, settled, unified & concentrated it. Why is that? So that my mind would not be disturbed.
Unflagging persistence was aroused in me and unmuddled mindfulness established. My body was calm & unaroused, my mind concentrated & single. Quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
No comments:
Post a Comment