Skip to main content

'subverbal' = mental co-activities (citta Saṅ-khārā) that underlie thoughts you think before you say them out loud

Even though 'subverbal' is not in the English dictionary, it is a concept used in the EBT regularly. Since late Theravada and corrupt monks try to justify their redefinition of jhana and vitakka by claiming the Buddha did not have existing pali terms to describe subverbal activity, and had to 'borrow' vitakka and redefine it into a subverbal meaning for first jhana, this short article will expose their fraudulent claim with incontrovertible evidence showing otherwise. 

subverbal: (not in Eng. dictionary)

EBT compliant definition of 'subverbal': mental co-activities (citta Saṅ-khārā) that underlie thoughts you think V&V💭 before you say them out loud (vāca). The most frequent subverbal activity terms used by the Buddha, is perceptions (sañña) and attention (manasi karoti) to perceptions.
✅samādhi nimittas, Dhamma, sati and Dhamma-vicaya span the whole range from verbal to vitakka and subverbal activity. Example: After V&V💭 ceases in first jhana, S&S🐘💭 continues as subverbal mental processing from 2nd jhana on up. Even in Abhidhamma, 31asb🧟‍ and Vimt. use verbal recitation of body parts as the entry into that meditation, and mental recitation V&V💭 continues into first jhana, then becomes S&S🐘💭 in 2nd jhana on up.
AN 9.41: See the perceptions and attention that underly vitakka (thinking) referenced in 2nd and first jhana.
MN 18AN 4.41: hierarchy of vinnana, vedana, sanna, vitakka.
MN 20 this is a 2nd and first jhana context - vitakka Saṅ-khārā underly and precede vitakka (directed thoughts)
AN 3.60 meditator with mind reading superpower can "hear" mental talk V&V💭 of first jhana meditators, and can directly perceive the mind of the subverbal mano-saṅkhārā of meditators in 2nd jhana and above.

⛔ vitakka in first jhana does not mean subverbal, as late Abhidhamma redefines it. It always means directed thoughts. Vism. apologists and corrupt monks who try to redefine jhana and vitakka claim that vitakka is subverbal, because the Buddha did not have existing words to describe subverbal activity. As you can see from above, there's already a rich selection of existing terms to describe subverbal activity, being used in jhana and samadhi context.

subverbal



☸ Lucid 24.org 🐘🐾‍


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Advice to younger meditators on jhāna, sex, porn, masturbation

Someone asked: Is porn considered harmful sexual.activity? I don't have a sex life because I don't have a partner and I don't wish to engage in casual sex so I use porn to quench the biological urge to orgasm. I can't see that's it's harmful because nobody is being forced into it. The actors are all paid well and claim to enjoy it etc. The only harm I can see is that it's so accessible these days on smart devices and so children may access it but I believe that this is the parents responsibility to not allow unsupervised use of devices etc. Views? Frankk response: In another thread, you asked about pleasant sensations and jhāna.  I'm guessing you're young, so here's some important advice you won't get from suttas   if you're serious about jhāna.  (since monastics are already celibate by rule)   If you want to attain stable and higher jhānas,   celibacy and noble silence to the best of your ability are the feedstock and prerequiste to tha

SN 48.40 Ven. Thanissaro comments on Ven. Sunyo's analysis

This was Ven. Sunyo's analysis of SN 48.40: https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2024/05/exciting-news-honest-ebt-scholars-like.html And here is Ven. Thanissaro's response to that analysis: I think there’s a better way to tackle the issue of SN 48:40 than by appealing to the oldest layers of commentarial literature. That way is to point out that SN 48:40, as we have it, doesn’t pass the test in DN 16 for determining what’s genuine Dhamma and what’s not. There the standard is, not the authority of the person who’s claiming to report the Buddha’s teachings, but whether the teachings he’s reporting are actually in accordance with the principles of the Dhamma that you know. So the simple fact that those who have passed the Buddha’s teachings down to us say that a particular passage is what the Buddha actually taught is not sufficient grounds for accepting it. In the case of the jhānas—the point at issue here— we have to take as our guide the standard formula for the jhānas, a

1min. video: Dalai Lama kissing boy and asking him to suck his tongue

To give more context, this is a public event,  * everyone knows cameras are rolling  *  it's a room full of children * the boy's mom is standing off camera a few feet away watching all of this * the boy initiated contact, he had already had a hug with Dalai Lama earlier and then asked Dalai Lama for another hug which triggered this segment  17 min. video showing what happened before that 1 min. clip and after, with some explanation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT0qey5Ts78 16min talk from Ajahn Acalo with his thoughts on Dalai Lama kissing boy, relevance to Bhikkhu monastic code, sexual predators in religion in general, and how celibate monastics deal with sexual energy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK2m0TcUib0 The child's comments about the incident in a filmed interview later https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/world-news/2023/04/18/643eba5d46163ffc078b457c.html The child: It's a great experience It was amazing to meet His Holiness and I think it's a great ex