Skip to main content

Ajahn Brahmali interpretation of disembodied jhāna: Bald faced lie, willful ignorance due to confirmation bias, or gross incompetence?

 

Brahmali's comments in bold underlined

https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/if-jhana-is-total-absorption-without-physical-sensation-why-is-pain-only-abandoned-in-the-fourth-jhana/29410/134

...

>>Apart from those in the Aj Brahm school of thought and those who go by the Visuddhimagga’s idea of jhana, I don’t know of anyone who accepts that plural definition kama in Margaret Cone’s dictionary.

What about the entire Pali commentarial tradition?


>>It’s freedom from sensual pleasures, not the 5 senses.

The five senses are interesting only in so far as they provide pleasure. 

Freedom from sensual pleasure means freedom from the five senses. 

These things are given up together.



Frankk comments


A bald-faced lie is one that is obvious, unambiguous, and readily apparent—like the visage of a person unobscured by facial hair.

How Vism. glosses kāmehi in first jhāna here

https://lucid24.org/sted/ebt/not/vism/single/index.html#4.8.11

Kāmadhātusamatikkamanato hi kāmarāgapaṭipakkhato ca idaṃ jhānaṃ kāmānameva nissaraṇaṃ.
for this jhāna is the escape from sense desires since it surmounts the sense-desire element and since it is incompatible with greed for sense desires,
Yathāha, "kāmānametaṃ nissaraṇaṃ yadidaṃ nekkhamma"nti (dī. ni. 3.353).
according as it is said: “The escape from sense desires is this, that is to say, renunciation” (D III 275).

Vism. goes on to elaborate on other additonal aspects of kāma, but they never contradict the quote above which agrees with EBT sutta that kāma is referring to greed for sensual desires. 







Does Brahmali care to explain how you can experience sukha (pleasure) with skin, flesh blood from a physical body when supposedly "seclusion from kāma" means your mind has already been divorced from the body?


Abhidhamma gloss of first jhāna says

4👑☸ → Tv Ab Vb → 12 Jhāna-vibhaṅga
“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.




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