As you know, over the last 10 years (at least), I've been collecting evidence and doing a detailed pāli + english audits of how vitakka & vicāra works in first jhāna. Late Theravada has completely redefined important terms in jhāna and made their redefined 4 jhānas into a completely different samādhi system.
I am now in the process of going through my full report and summarizing everything into a concise Proof with hyperlinks to the detailed audits. At the conclusion of this exercise, you should be able to read a concise Proof with comprehensive survey of exactly how vitakka and vicāra works, inside and outside of first jhāna, and where and why the original meanings got corrupted.
It will take a week or two for me to do this, so I will update this article a few times.
2nd update on 2/14. It's at least 80% done. One more update in the near future
V&V💭 in 1st Jhāna🌘
1. Explicit continuity of kusala vitakka straight into 1st jhāna formula
Detailed audit of MN 19, 78, 125, highlighted pali + english
🔗
detailed audit
synopsis of section 1
What these selected suttas show, explicitly, is that the kusala vitakka that existed right before the moment of entry into first jhāna, is the same vitakka that continues into the standard first jhāna formula.
MN 125: No room for equivocation and prevarication here! By omitting first jhana formula completely, this sutta shows that the vitakka happening concurrently in
4sp🐘 right before second jhana, is exactly the vitakka of first jhana as well as the Dhamma that sati works with in
4sp🐘.
MN 78: reinforces the same idea as MN 125. By explicitly stating that akusala sankappa cease in first jhana, and that kusala sankappa do not cease until 2nd jhana, in effect is saying that kusala sankappa (equivalent to vitakka thoughts) is still active in first jhana.
MA 102: This is the agama parallel sutta to
MN 19, differs from the pali in that it omits first jhana like
MN 125 does, for extra emphasis that the vitakka immediately prior to first jhana is the same one that’s inside standard first jhana formula.
MN 19: With a clear understanding of the straightforward MN 125 and MN 78, now when you review MN 19 you can see that it doesn't matter if the standard first jhana formula is there or not (for this sutta MN 19). Because it already explicitly describes the type of V&V that operates in first jhana, in addition to the other things that must happen for the samadhi to be of first jhana quality. The key differentiator between the first jhana vitakka, and the vitakka at the beginning of the sutta where the kusala vitakka is not jhana, due to ‘excessive thinking’, is the presence of passadhi/pacification awakening factor. At the moment where passadhi is present, then so is sukha/pleasure, so is piti/rapture, meaning the vitakka is now attenuated, and no longer excessive or intense enough to block passadhi and first jhana from happening.
AN 8.30: eight thoughts of a great mean, those 8 thoughts are the same thoughts allowable in first jhana.
MN 117: the definition for samma sankappo includes vaci-sankhara, which is equivalent to vitakka-vicara, and so it includes the 3 right thoughts corresponding to 3 right resolves. Unlike the sutta references listed above this, MN 117 doesn’t include the explicit first jhana formula, but we mention this because the non-EBT reference below build on MN 117.
takko
| Speculative-thinking, |
vi-takko
| Directed-thinking, |
saṅkappo
| resolve, |
appanā
| fixing, |
By-appanā
| Firm-fixing, |
cetaso abhiniropanā
| mind being applied, |
Vacī-saṅ-khāro—
| Vocalization-co-activities |
from non EBT, also showing the same explicit continuity of vitakka into standard first jhana formula
KN Pe: Jhāna vitakka: Besides the explicit 3 types of kusala vitakka from the EBT, KN Pe gives a very rich and explicit description of the nuance and range of vitakka and vicara in first jhana.
Canonical Abhidhamma book 1 and book 2 vitakka definition (same as in first jhana Vb 12)
“Accompanied by directed-thought, accompanied by evaluation” [means]:
| “Sa-vitakkaṃ sa-vicāran”ti |
There is directed-thought; there is evaluation.
| atthi vitakko, atthi vicāro. |
| |
Therein what is directed-thought?
| Tattha katamo vitakko? |
That which is speculative-thought, directed-thought,
| Yo takko vitakko |
resolve [a thought-formation or fashioning a thought],
| saṅkappo |
fixing, firm-fixing,
| appanā by-appanā |
application of the mind,
| cetaso abhiniropanā |
right-resolve.
| sammā-saṅkappo— |
This is called directed-thought.
| ayaṃ vuccati “vitakko”. |
| |
Therein what is evaluation?
| Tattha katamo vicāro? |
That which is searching, exploring,
| Yo cāro vi-cāro |
constant-examining, frequent wandering,
| anu-vicāro upa-vicāro |
(the) mind's constant-explorativeness,
| cittassa anu-sandhanatā |
{the mind's} constant-observation.
| an-upekkhanatā— |
This is called evaluation.
| ayaṃ vuccati “vicāro”. |
| |
Thus of this directed-thought and of this evaluation
| Iti iminā ca vitakkena iminā ca vicārena |
he is possessed, See section 357. furnished.
| upeto hoti … pe … samannāgato. |
Therefore this is called “accompanied by directed-thought, accompanied by evaluation”.
| Tena vuccati “savitakkaṃ savicāran”ti. |
Vimutti-magga (
Vimt.) first jhana builds on the canonical Abhidhamma definition, and also explicitly includes the 3 kusala vitakkas, and seems to include KN Pe material as well. From the many meditation subjects in Vimt., especially 31 body parts, you can see that like the
EBT, and unlike
Vism. Visuddhimagga, the vitakka of early Abhidhamma first jhana works the same as it does in EBT, with the difference that some types of kusala vitakka such as the 6 recollections of
AN 6.10 are considered too excessive and intense of thinking to be allowable in first jhana, and they created an ‘access samadhi’.
Note that access and fixed absorption in
Vism. and
Vimt. are quite different from each other, even though they’re both originally based on canoncial Abhidhamma. Vism. Is from a late period, where they made significant changes to Abhidhamma to advance their radical momentariness ideas, and redefine vitakka, vicāra, kāya, rūpa, into completely alien and incompatible meanings with EBT and even early Abhdihamma.
2. Hierarchy of vedana, sañña, Vitakka
hierarchy of perception, thinking, proliferation (in and outside of jhāna)
Synopsis of section 2.
MN 18,
MN 19,
MN 20 are 3 contiguous suttas with important things to say about first jhāna.
In
MN 18, we see the hierarchy from raw sensory data, all the way to proliferation of too much thinking (vitakka).
Cakkhu + rūpe + viññāṇaṃ → phasso → vedeti (vedanā) → sañjānāti → vitakketi → papañceti
eye + forms + consciousness → contact → feel → perceive → think → proliferate
AN 4.41 confirms the same order of hierarchy of vedeti (vedanā) → sañjānāti (sañña) → vitakketi, and clearly is in the
4j🌕 samādhi context.
MN 78 which states (by deduction) that skillful vitakka and sankappa are active and operational in first jhana, again confirms the hierarchy by saying thouse sankappa/vitakka depend on sañña/perceptions.
And where do these skillful resolves (sankappa) stem from? Where they stem from has been stated. You should say that they stem from perception. What perception? Perception takes many and diverse forms. Perceptions of renunciation, love, and kindness—skillful thoughts stem from this.
AN 9.41,
SN 40.1,
SN 40.2: By examining what the impurities that are happening in 2nd jhana, you can see they again follow the hierarchy, there is perception/sañña and attention (manasi karoti) bubbling underneath vitakka/thoughts as subverbal mental activity and supressed before they can become thoughts that would disqualify one from 2nd jhana, sending them back to first jhana.
AN 8.30: In this sutta, it's notable that these 8 thoughts, explicitly labeled as 'vitakka', are the same vitakka that transitions right into the sa-vitakka of first jhana. Especially notice the vitakka #8, which mentions papanca/proliferation of
MN 18, which would be an excessive type of thinking disqualifying one from first jhana. And it serves as an example of what type of attenuated vitakka that
MN 19,
MN 78,
MN 125 permit in first jhāna.
Conclusion:
The Buddha already has an established, consistent set of terms he uses to describe subverbal mental activity that precedes vitakka/thinking, and they follow that hierarchy from
MN 18. There is no need to overload vitakka to cover subverbal mental activity.
Detailed audit, highlighted pali + english
🔗
detailed audit
3. PreexistingTerms for Subverbal mental activity
no need to hijack ‘vitakka’ and overload it with subverbal meaning
As section 2 covered, sañña/perception and manasi karoti (attention) are the preferred terms used most frequently.
But there are a number of other terms used occasionally.
AN 3.60 sutta on mind reading. The contrast between part (2c) which directly ‘hears’ (sutva vitakka) thinking, and part (2d) where mind encompassing mind reads the subverbal ‘mano sankhara’.
(part 2c: ‘hearing’ vitakka thoughts)
but by hearing the sound of the directed thought & evaluation
| api ca kho vitakkayato vicārayato |
of a person thinking directed thoughts and evaluating, [saying,]
| Vitakka-vip-phāra-saddaṃ sutvā ādisati — |
(part 2d: ‘reading’ subverbal mano-sankhara before it becomes a vitakka thought)
| |
and encompassing the awareness [of the other] with his own awareness, he discerns,
| cetasā ceto paricca pajānāti — |
'Given the way the mental-fabrications of this venerable person are inclined,
| ‘yathā imassa bhoto mano-saṅkhārā paṇihitā |
the directed thoughts of his mind will immediately think about this.'
| imassa cittassa anantarā amuṃ nāma vitakkaṃ vitakkessatī’ti. |
| |
MN 20 5 methods of removing unwanted thoughts:
In method 4, to slow down vitakka (thoughts), one slows down the vitakka-sankhara
| |
(regarding) those thoughts,
| tesaṃ vitakkānaṃ |
Thought-formation-stilling (should be his) mind’s-activity
| Vitakka-saṅkhāra-saṇṭhānaṃ manasi-kātabbaṃ. |
| |
MN 117 samma sankappo definition includes terms used by late Abhidhamma to replace meaning of vitakka
| |
fixing,
| appanā |
Firm-fixing,
| By-appanā |
mind being applied,
| cetaso abhiniropanā |
Those are the terms late Abhidhamma uses to redefine vitakka, Appanā samādhi is “fixed penetration”, and the redefinition of vitakka as “initial application” is based on the ‘cetaso abhiniropana’.
conclusion of section 3
There are other terms as well, but these 3 terms, vitakka sankhara, mano sankhara, abhiniropana, are more than enough to show a prior precedent where the Buddha used terms to accurately denote subverbal mental activity, leaving no need to hijack ‘vitakka’ and give it additional subverbal range.
Hence, in the standard first jhana formula when it refers to vitakka, it’s referring to vitakka as ordinary thinking, the unspoken, unvocalized ‘mental talk’ that a meditator with psychic power can ‘hear’, or even ‘read’ the subverbal mental activity before it becomes a fully formed ‘thought’.
4. Oral tradition, vācā, vaci-sankhara, vitakka
Thousands of years before the Buddha showed up, there was already an established oral tradition way of learning and teaching the brahmins used, to memorize the vedas (sati), recite them orally (vāca, vocalized speech), and reflect on the meaning of those dhamma teachings with vitakka, vicāra, anupekkha (thinking, evaluation, reflection/observation).
These terms are intimately connected and in order for the oral tradition to work, they have to be used coherently and consistently.
If you try to plug in the Vism. Redefinition of vitakka of ‘initial application’ then it breaks the system.
Vitakka and vicara needs to be coherent, communicable speech, that gets recited into the form of vāca (vocalized speech).
When the Buddha came along and composed his Dhamma teachings, the sangha of disciples continued the oral tradition for 500 years, even though printing technology (carving rocks, inscribing leaves) was available. So vitakka and vicara has a very specific meaning, in order for this whole system of learning and transmitting teachings to work.
MN 44 defines vaci-sankhara as vitakka and vicara.
| |
pubbe kho, āvuso visākha,
| prior to [vocalizing speech], friend Visakha, |
vitakketvā vicāretvā
| (one) directs-thoughts (and) evaluates [those very thoughts], |
pacchā vācaṃ bhindati,
| afterwards, vocal-speech breaks-out, |
tasmā vitakka-vicārā vacī-saṅkhāro.
| Therefore directed-thought-&-evaluation are vocal-speech-fabrications. |
| |
MN 44 also defines 3 types of sankhara which gradually cease through the 9 samadhi attainments.
SN 36.11 gives further detail on the relationship between vaca, vaci sankhara and vitakka as they fade out gradually in the 9 samadhi attainments.
| |
1. paṭhamaṃ jhānaṃ samāpannassa
| 1. (with) first jhāna attained, |
🚫🗣️💬 vācā niruddhā hoti.
| 🚫🗣️💬 vocalization-of-speech has ceased. |
2. dutiyaṃ jhānaṃ samāpannassa
| 2. (with) second jhāna attained, |
🚫(V&V💭) vitakka-vicārā niruddhā honti.
| 🚫(V&V💭) directed-thought-&-evaluation has ceased. |
What this means, is vocalizing speech from first jhana would require an energy dispersion that would inhibit passaddhi, piti, sukha, or decrease it enough to not qualify for first jhana.
In second jhana, if one were to exercise the thinking of vitakka and vicara, that energy dispersion would knock one out of the ekodi and samadhi of 2nd jhana, and revert to a lower first jhana.
There’s a common misunderstanding of that passage where people believe it means it’s impossible to speak in first jhana, and impossible to think in 2nd jhana. That’s wrong. Personal experience with meditation will clear things up, and also suttas such as:
AN 9.41 which uses descriptive terminology of the impurities bubbling underneath each of the 9 samadhi attainments. Cetana, sankhara, will, choice, intention, are not shut off in the first 7 meditative attainments (
MN 111). You can notice the perceptions/sañña bubbling underneath, but you don’t have to ACT on those impulses.
Many other passages in the suttas show how vitakka in first jhana is intimately connected with the oral tradition functions of memorizing, reciting, hearing, thinking and reflecting, and the Buddha must be using vitakka to mean kusala Dharma vitakka (skill thought relevant to dharma) .
These selected suttas here are especially relevant because they show the explicit continuity between first jhana vitakka and the vitakka right outside of first jhana.
AN 5.26: involves hearing sound of dhamma talk, v&v, reciting dhamma,
7sb☀️ and
4j🌕. It's also located in a contiguous cluster of suttas that address deep jhāna samādhi, such as
AN 5.28 which contains the 4 famous similes.
AN 5.73 V&V, upekkha, recitation, samatha, jhāna
AN 6.56 Phagguna attained arahantship with hearing, V&V. Jhāna not explicitly stated here, but if it's not first jhana using vitakka, then you have the uncomfortable problem of explaining why even bother defining 4 jhanas when you can just use ordinary thinking to attain arahantship.
AN 7.61 Maha Moggallana uses V&V and reciting dhamma to stop drowsiness in samādhi. Do you seriously believe he's ever not in
4j🌕 or
4ip 🌕⚡ or
j4🌕 āneñja⚡ quality of mind?
SN 46.3: This sutta is listed because it’s the prototypical and most complete
7sb☀️ sutta showing all 7 steps clearly in an oral tradition context. But in the suttas, it appears in truncated or slightly varied forms well over a 100 times.
Why do you think noble silence is 2nd jhāna, and not first?
SN 21.1: defines noble silence,
👑😶, as 2nd jhana, not first. If vitakka were the Vism. Redefined variety of ‘initial application’, then first jhana would be noble silence. What kind of mental talking could there be if one’s mind is glued to visual nimitta or kasina? See the full article on noble silence (
👑😶) for all the places it’s referenced so you can see the context.
Therefore, first jhana is just vocal silence,
SN 36.11, refraining from vocalizing mental speech of vitakka.
2nd jhana is noble silence, because a mind reader wouldn’t ‘hear’ mental talk of vitakka of a 2nd jhana meditator. IN contrast, the mind reader could read the mind of a first jhana mediator and ‘hear’ vitakka thoughts related to Dhamma, such as, “may he be happy”, “head hair, body hair”, etc.
Jain founder doesn’t believe 2nd jhana is possible
SN 41.8 Jain founder doesn’t believe 2nd jhana, samadhi that is without vitakka and vicara, is possible.
Now he’s not a Buddhist, so he’s using vitakka and vicara in the way the rest of the world understands it, as ‘thinking and evaluation.’ Otherwise you would need Buddhagosa, Ajahn Brahm, and B. Sujato to go back in a 🔗
vitakka time machine and explain to him that vitakka means “initial application”, not “thinking”.
5. There is no vitakka controversy
There is just crime and lack of punishment (as of this writing).
In 1969, U Thittila translated into English, vitakka & vicara everywhere in the canonical Abhidhamma as 'intial application & sustained application.' This is completely wrong. It's not just wrong, it's criminal. It's a type of false equivalence fallacy. 'Initial application' is a subset of vitakka (thinking), according to MN 117 and the canonical Abhidhamma definition of vitakka. But you can not translate vitakka as 'intial application'. A subset ('initial application') is not equivalent to the set ('vitakka' = thinking).
proof: U Titthila wrongly translates and interprets vitakka as 'initial application'
The only place 'vitakka' ever means 'initial application' is in Vism., and only in the section where it redefines jhāna, vitakka, under earth kasina. In doing this, they depart from canonical Abhidhamma.
But even in Vism. kasina meditations, vitakka still means 'thinking', and mental recitation!
Especially if you examine this Abhidhamma commentary passage,
proof: early Abhidhamma 31 body parts vitakka is mental recitation,
compare to kayagata 31 body parts in
Vimt. vs.
Vism., you can see that in the early Abhidhamma you could simultaneously do 4 brahmaviharas, 31 body parts, with first jhana using mental recitation of thinking of key words.
And even in the very spot where Vism. redefines jhana vitakka
🔗
under earth kasina, 'vitakka' still means 'thinking!'
Illegitimate Legitimacy
Why would U Thittila commit this crime? Because it's a hard sell, convincing the Buddhist world to accept the new redefined meaning of vitakka, as understood in Vism.'s redefinition of jhāna. So he translated vitakka everywhere into 'initial application' to groom everyone into gradually accepting this wrong definition. Due to survivorship bias (winners write the history books), with late Theravada promulgating their redefined Abhidhamma and redefined jhana, their wrong views on jhana are commonly accepted as truth.
Just as science advances when great scientists of our generation stand on the shoulders of giants, criminals gleefully stand on the shoulders of giant criminals to continue the crime (see: B. Sujato's 'placing the mind', and B. Analayo's EBMS riddled with fallacies). The only way to stop this is to educate people on the correct translation and understanding of 'vitakka.' It has to be a grass roots effort, and individuals have to collectively petition and apply pressure on popular teachers to relabel their erroneous interpretation of jhana and vitakka so that they don't contradict
EBT. For example, Ajahn Brahm's samādhi system I've relabeled as
Jhabrama Jhana is not Jhāna
conclusion of this section:
vitakka in first jhana is of 3 types: renunciation, good will, non harm. Even in canonical Abhidhamma!
🔗
Proof: Do I have to spell it out?
Vitakka can not be translated or understood as 'initial application' (U Thittila) or 'placing the mind' (B. Sujato) for these reasons proven with detailed audits above (in linked articles).
1. By equivalence fallacy: 'initial application' is a subset of 'thinking' (vitakka) and 'mental recitation' (vaci sankhara).
2. 'initial application' is an anachronism. Vism. came 1000 years after the Buddha, you can't substitute a redefintion back into the original teachings which predates it by 1000 years. 🔗
Uness you use the vitakka time machine
3. Even in Abhidhamma Vism., vitakka as vaci-sankhara (mental recitation, unverbalized thoughts) is used in kasina meditation!
4. Even if you were to attempt to wrongly translate 'vitakka', at minimum it would need to be 'intitial application on a kusala vitakka that is nekkhamma, abyapada, avihimsa'.
No comments:
Post a Comment