• You can 👂 hear sounds in the 4 jhānas.: Which samādhis are silent?
I did a comprehensive research on that article linked above, and AFAIK it contains every sutta and vinaya reference that sheds light on whether one can hear sounds in jhanas.
I also include Ven. Thanissaro's excellent essay on the topic within that article.
The conclusion of the study is that there is not a doubt in the EBT (early buddhist teachings), no ambiguity and absolutely unequivocal that one can hear sounds in the four jhanas.
[quote=robertk post_id=734736 time=1691233997 user_id=101]
Check the Abhidhamma pitaka: Katthavatthu
2023, aug. Robert forgetting we already had this discussion two years ago
[b]XV1118 Of Hearing in Jhana[/b]
The heretical sect, who believed that sound could be heard while in jhana were refuted.
You never got back to me on MN 125 Robert.
That is relevant here.
MN 125, by omitting the first jhāna, is essentially stating explicitly that the extra satipatthana stage they added in place where first jhāna would have been, IS first jhāna.
first jhāna is satipatthana with correct resolves/thoughts + passaddhi bojjhanga.
3rd and 4th jhāna contain satipatthana and pañña indriya embedded within their formulas (sati and sampajāno).
So if first jhāna is satipatthana, 3rd and 4th jhāna are also satipatthana, then by the sandwich theorem we know second jhana is also satipatthana.
(all 4 jhānas are satipatthana, but not all satipatthana qualify as 4 jhana).
If you can hear sounds in satipatthana, you can hear sounds in jhana.
DN 21 the Buddha explicitly hears a musician while he is in "jhāna".
Later on, loud noises from Sakka's carriage knock him out of "samādhi" (which we can deduce must be the 4 jhānas from earlier incident.
And at the end of the sutta, something like 84,000 devas become stream enterers WHILE HEARING THE BUDDHA give the DHamma talk.
Unless you think a samādhi lower than first jhāna is possible to attain stream entry, we can assume those 84000 devas were hearing, and thinking with vitakka and vicara while in first jhana.
There are many more suttas, but MN 125 and DN 21 are two of the more explicit in showing 5 senses must be active.
So how do you define heresy Robert?
I define it with respect to the EBT suttas.
So if the Buddha says in MN 125 and DN 21 you can hear sounds while in jhāna,
Vimuttimagga (which uses an earlier version of Abhidhamma than the one you follow) agrees with the Buddha, and states that sounds are thorns in jhana because you can hear and be annoyed by sounds,
And then a later Abhdhamma book you cite above contradicts Vimt. and the Buddha's suttas,
then that's my definition of heresy.
Besides, the Ab argument they use is flawed. They simply assert "you can't hear sounds in jhana" without ever proving how they arrived at that. That's the fallacy of circular reasoning. If they did try to cite something, it would obviously contradict MN 125 and DN 21.
Or you can do as Ajahn Brahm and his disciples do, start using pali sophistry, cherry picking, and redefining basic words in the dictionary to butcher the Buddha's Dhamma.
That's sophistry on top of heresy.