Skip to main content

Billionaire playboy tires of his harem and goes into seclusion: Or, Why it's better to translate first jhāna's kāmehi as 'sensuality'

example to show problem with kāmehi as "sensual pleasures" in first jhāna:

Billionaire playboy Tony Stark got tired of his harem of beautiful girl friends and hedonic lifestyle indulging in the 5 cords of sensual pleasure, so he went into the forest for seclusion from those sensual pleasures to meditate.
6 months later he emerged from his secluded forest meditation retreat, and lust and desire returned in full force.

And that's why I follow Thanissaro translation of kāmā as "sensuality", AN 6.63, KN Pe and Ab Vb first jhāna gloss.
It's more accurate and prevents that kind of misinterpretation of temporary disenchantment from lust and passion for sensual pleasures.  

First jhāna marks not just a meditative skill accomplishment, but a deeper understanding of suffering and its cause, and a tangible impact eroding the power of craving, lust, desire.

In mangling 'kāmehi' in the sutta formula for first jhāna, Ajahn Brahm and Vism.'s redefinition of "jhāna" as a disembodied frozen stupor,  removes the critically important link to the second noble truth, the first jhāna's important role in reducing the cause of suffering.  

 



“Vivicceva kāmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehī”ti tattha katame kāmā? Chando kāmo, rāgo kāmo, chandarāgo kāmo, saṅkappo kāmo, rāgo kāmo, saṅkapparāgo kāmo— ime vuccanti “kāmā”.
“Aloof from sense pleasures, aloof from unskilful dhammas” means: Therein what are sense pleasures? Wish is sense pleasure, lust is sense pleasure, lustful wish is sense pleasure, thought is sense pleasure, lust is sense pleasure, lustful thought is sense pleasure. These are called sense pleasures.

It was always clear to me, even just relying on Bodhi's English sutta translations,  without even considering the grammar, whether kāma was singular or plural, just looking at what happens before every first jhāna occurrence in the suttas, it's always linked to samma sankappo (nekkhamma as the opposite of kāma), and the 5 kāmaguna.

So in my mind, whether the more common translation of "sensual pleasures" or Thanissaro's "sensuality" was used, my mind already establishes the correct meaning, as Ab Vb and AN6.63 gloss more accurately, linking it to second noble truth and preventing this kind of wrong interpretation in the billionaire example above that can happen if you go with "sensual pleasures."


Comments

Post a Comment

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
Post a Comment
Read more

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
Post a Comment
Read more

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
Post a Comment
Read more