vipassana can be done while in 4 jhānas
There's a common misunderstanding that vipassana is not possible while one is in the 4
Jhānas.
MN 111 AN 9.36 AN 8.63 SN 47.4 AN 4.41 are some suttas that are very clear that vipassana can be done concurrently while one is in the 4
Jhānas.
Another common misunderstanding is that there must be
verbal type of thinking in order to do vipassana, which would mean only first jhana can do vipassana.
From
MN 111 AN 9.36, we can see vipassana is still happening even without
V&V💭. How? We have to understand how the
EBT distinguishes between
verbal type of thinking in V&V, and the discerning (pajānati)
subverbal activity in second jhana and higher samadhi attainments.
The other thing to note, is that quoted text in sutta, such as MN 111 in the first 7 attainments:
| |
He discerned, | so evaṃ pajānāti — |
‘So this is how these dharma-[phenomena], | ‘evaṃ kirame dhammā |
not having been, come into play. | ahutvā sambhonti, |
Having been, they vanish.’ | hutvā paṭiventī’ti. |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
It does not mean one has to 'downshift' out of 3rd jhana for example and jump into first jhana and use
V&V💭 to 'think' that quoted text. Usually quoted text in pali suttas refers to
verbal type of thinking, but not in all cases.
Example 1: second through fourth jhana vipassana checking mind to see if one is in samadhi
Let's use a passage from another sutta illustrating a simpler example, such as discerning whether one's current mental state is in samadhi or not, or has anger, or not.
From
MN 10, citta anupassana, and also the
6ab ⚡☸ psychic power of mind reading, it's the same exact instructions:
| |
| |
with-aversion ** (in their) mind, 'with-aversion (in their) mind' (he) discerns. | sa-dosaṃ vā cittaṃ ‘sa-dosaṃ citta’nti pajānāti; |
without-aversion ** (in their) mind, 'without-aversion (in their) mind' (he) discerns. | vīta-dosaṃ vā cittaṃ ‘vīta-dosaṃ citta’nti pajānāti; |
...
| |
concentrated ** mind, 'concentrated mind' (he) discerns. | samāhitaṃ vā cittaṃ ‘samāhitaṃ citta’nti pajānāti; |
un-concentrated ** mind, 'un-concentrated mind' (he) discerns. | a-samāhitaṃ vā cittaṃ ‘a-samāhitaṃ citta’nti pajānāti; |
Quoted text doesn't require you have to mentally recite vitakka/thought of, "My mind is full of anger right now." You can directly and lucidly discern (pajānati, same as sapmajano in
S&S🐘💭) using
subverbal mental activity to know whether it's angry or not, whether it's in samadhi or not. How? Anger has many marks and perceptions that appear right after the initial volition of anger is activated. For example, there are tactile physical percerptions of feeling hot, burning, painful sensations, and for people with psychic powers, they can see a visual perception of different colors when people have different emotions such as lust they see a cloud of red, anger they see a cloud of black in the body. Those are all
subverbal perceptions that one can pay attention to (manasi karoti) and discern (pajanati) without need to mentally recite a thought/vitakka.
In contrast,
VRJ🐍 and
Jabrama🤡-jhana claim that it’s not even possible to have a verbal type of thought in jhana to ask, “is this first jhana samadhi?”, contradicting the EBT and the very explicit sutta passages in
MN 111 and
AN 9.36 showing explicitly one does do vipassana with vitakka in first jhana, and
subverbal perceptions beyond.
Example 2: Vipassana in four jhanas of seeing four noble truths
SN 56.1 and
SN 56.7 are both doing vipassana of seeing four noble truths, and this can be done while in the four jhanas. But there is one crucial difference.
SN 56.7 is using explicit vitakka, so is limited to first jhana or a samadhi less than first jhana.
| |
(4nt #1) ‘This is pain-&-suffering’ | ‘Idaṃ dukkhan’ti |
(you) should-think (that). | vitakkeyyātha, |
But SN 56.1, here again the quoted text doesn't require one have to use vitakka, it can be a
subverbal discering (pajanati) of perceptions and vedana/feelings.
| |
(4nt #1) ‘This is pain-&-suffering’ | ‘Idaṃ dukkhan’ti |
as-it-actually-has-become; (he) discerns (that). | yathā-bhūtaṃ pajānāti, |
| |
| |
Example 3: doing simple task such as walking without need for vitakka/thinking
For adult human bipeds who know how to walk,
when they want to walk they don’t need to have a verbal type of thought, “now I’m going to start walking.”
they just issue a volition (cetana) of “I want to walk”,
sati has a memory of how to physically do that activity of walking,
and then they just start walking.
All of this is done with
subverbal intention cetana, and a series of perceptions (sanna) and paying attention (manasi karoti), all subverbal operations.
From MN 19 :
ReplyDelete"And as I remained thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, thinking imbued with harmlessness arose in me. I discerned that 'Thinking imbued with harmlessness has arisen in me; and that leads neither to my own affliction, nor to the affliction of others, nor to the affliction of both. It fosters discernment, promotes lack of vexation, & leads to Unbinding. If I were to think & ponder in line with that even for a night... even for a day... even for a day & night, I do not envision any danger that would come from it, except that thinking & pondering a long time would tire the body. When the body is tired, the mind is disturbed; and a disturbed mind is far from concentration.' So I steadied my mind right within, settled, unified, & concentrated it. Why is that? So that my mind would not be disturbed.
"Just as in the last month of the hot season, when all the crops have been gathered into the village, a cowherd would look after his cows: While resting under the shade of a tree or out in the open, he simply keeps himself mindful of 'those cows.' In the same way, I simply kept myself mindful of 'those mental qualities.'
Very helpful (and very informative) post!
ReplyDelete"Usually quoted text in pali suttas refers to verbal type of thinking, but not in all cases."
This concurs not only with my own experiences, but also with suspicions I had when reading certain suttas--especially, the Buddha's prescription in AN 3.32; which I always interpreted as a sort of mantra which should fade into "sub-verbal" unintelligibility as one's concentration deepens. I never had the scriptural support, though, to give confidence to my theory. Until now. You are doing good work!