What these 3 suttas have in common, AN 9.36, MN 64, MN 111, is the very interesting feature of explicitly describing doing vipassana, while one is in the jhāna and the first 3 formless attainments. LBT (late buddhist text) apologists, as well as Sujato, Brahm, claim that the suttas describe a jhāna where one enters a disembodied, frozen state, where vipassana is impossible until one emerges from that 'jhāna'. Since Sujato translated all the suttas, let's take a look at what he translated, and how it supports his interpretation of 'jhāna'. AN 9.36: Jhānasutta—Bhikkhu Sujato (suttacentral.net) ‘The first absorption is a basis for ending the defilements.’ ‘Paṭhamampāhaṁ, bhikkhave, jhānaṁ nissāya āsavānaṁ khayaṁ vadāmī’ti, iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ. That’s what I said, but why did I say it? Kiñcetaṁ paṭicca vuttaṁ? Take a mendicant who, q uite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskill...
Hello Frank.
ReplyDeleteHow to reconciliate this sutta with SN 4.23?
"Now at that time Venerable Godhika was staying on the slopes of Isigili at the Black Rock. Then Venerable Godhika, meditating diligent, keen, and resolute, experienced temporary freedom of heart. But then he fell away from that temporary freedom of heart. For a second … third … fourth … fifth … sixth time Godhika experienced temporary freedom of heart. But for a sixth time he fell away from it. For a seventh time Godhika, meditating diligent, keen, and resolute, experienced temporary freedom of heart.
Then he thought, “I’ve fallen away from this temporary freedom of heart no less than six times. Why don’t I slit my wrists?”
The suicide in SN 22.87 for example, was due to the monk having debilitating pain in some kind of terminal health condition. In SN 4.23 The sutta doesn't explain in detail the reasons and motivation, so we can only guess. My guess is Godhika had a bad enough physical health condition (that would be the only reason for an arahant who can do ceto vimutti to not be able to do it) that perhaps there was also severe enough chronic pain to warrant suicide. That's just a guess. But even if there was no chronic pain, the point of that sutta is for an arahant it's blameless whether they choose to endure (khanti, khamo) the pain or not. So either way, not a contradiction with MN 125 and those related suttas on khanti.