AN 3.101 misc., Q&A

(5/1/2021 updated to correct an error, notes at bottom)

These were my previous notes on the sutta, where I had some uncertainty about where first and fourth jhana fell in the similes, since the sutta never explicitly uses the term 'jhana'. 

AN 3.101 Paṃsudhovaka: Dirt-washer purifying gold simile. 

misconduct in body, speech, & mind. = gross impurities, 

wrong intention/thoughts = moderate impurities, 

thoughts of family/caste = fine impurities, 

thoughts of Dhamma remain, in the grey zone between doorway of first jhana and just plain 4sp. 

With mind purified, the 6 abhiñña easy to get.

(agama parallel sutta may shed light on details of AN 3.101)

SA 1246, || to AN 3.101

After studying this carefully, I realize there's enough information there to deduce conclusively exactly which jhanas correspond to which stage of gold purification.

Here's the proof

• AN 3.101 Paṃsudhovaka
  • dirt-washer
    • (gold’s gross impurities)
    • (gold’s moderate impurities)
    • (gold’s fine impurities)
    • (gold dust)
    • (gold malleable, luminous, ready to be worked)
    • (monk’s gross impurities)
    • (monk’s moderate impurities)
    • (monk’s fine impurities) - in contrast to gold's fine impurities
    • (definitely first jhana with dhamma vitakka thoughts) - like pure gold dust free of impurities
    • (definitely purifed 4th jhana) - like luminous workable gold
    • (He can exercise any of the 6 abhiññā...)

First we will start with fourth jhana passage (not explicitly stated as 'jhana' or 'fourth jhana'), and why I know for sure it's imperturbable fourth jhana.

AN 3.101 passaage on what appears to be 4th jhana, not explicitly stated as such

Hoti so, bhikkhave, samayo yaṃ	But there comes a time when
taṃ cittaṃ ajjhattaṃ-yeva	his mind inwardly
San-tiṭṭhati san-nisīdati	grows-steady, settles-down,
ekodi hoti samādhiyati.	Unified & concentrated.
So hoti samādhi santo paṇīto	His *** concentration (is) peaceful & refined,
Paṭip-passaddhi-laddho ekodi-bhāv-ādhigato	has attained calm & unification,
na sa-saṅkhāra-niggayhavāritagato.	and is no longer kept in place by the fabrication of forceful restraint.
Yassa yassa ca abhiññā	“And then whichever of
sacchi-karaṇī-yassa dhammassa cittaṃ abhi-ninnāmeti	the higher knowledges he turns his mind to know & realize,
abhiññā sacchi-kiriyāya	he can witness them for himself
tatra tatreva sakkhibhabbataṃ pāpuṇāti sati satiāyatane.	whenever there is an opening.

Just a side note on the unusual term na sa-saṅkhāra-niggayhavāritagato, this term occurs rarely, and it seems to be something similar to an imperturbable version of fourth jhana crossed with animitta samadhi. This will be explored in another article another day.

The passage quoted above in isolation is somewhat ambiguous as to exactly which jhana it is. The 'ekodi' references suggest we're talking about at least second jhana, and suttas like MN 122 explicitly use ekodi as a verb, it means 'do the four jhanas'. 

So to deduce the answer, we have to fill in details from what we know about similar passages. What follows right after this passage, is the meditator doing the 6ab abhinna higher knowledges. 

Now whenever the suttas talk about a meditator with samadhi that can easily access and perform the 6ab higher knowledges, it's always a purified fourth jhana, or iddhi pada. For example, this passage for imperturbable 4th jhana occurs frequently in MN:

j4🌕 āneñja⚡ Imperturbabiilty is equivalent to 4ip 🌕⚡

(more than 21 suttas contain this STED)

STED malleable, wieldy, steady… imperturbability.

“so evaṃ samāhite citte	“When my undistractible-&-lucid mind
parisuddhe pariyodāte	(was thus) purified, bright,
an-aṅgaṇe vigat-ūpak-kilese	Un-blemished, rid-of-defilement,
Mudu-bhūte kammaniye	malleable, wieldy,
ṭhite āneñjap-patte	steady, {attained-to}-imperturbability,

Compare that STED standard definition of fourth jhana imperturbable that can easily do 6 higher knowledges, with AN 3.101's matching gold analogy, the purified, bright, workable gold:

(gold malleable, luminous, ready to be worked)

Hoti so, bhikkhave, samayo yaṃ suvaṇṇakāro vā suvaṇṇakārantevāsī vā taṃ jātarūpaṃ dhamati sandhamati niddhamati.	But there comes a time when the goldsmith or his apprentice has blown on the gold again & again until the dross is blown away.
Taṃ hoti jātarūpaṃ dhantaṃ sandhantaṃ niddhantaṃ niddhantakasāvaṃ,	The gold, having been blown on again & again to the point where the impurities are blown away,
mudu ca hoti kammaniyañca pabhassarañca,	is then refined, free from dross, pliant, malleable, & luminous.
na ca pabhaṅgu,	It is not brittle,
sammā upeti kammāya.	and is ready to be worked.
Yassā yassā ca pilandhanavikatiyā ākaṅkhati—yadi paṭṭikāya, yadi kuṇḍalāya, yadi gīveyyake, yadi suvaṇṇamālāya—tañcassa atthaṃ anubhoti.	Then whatever sort of ornament he has in mind—whether a belt, an earring, a necklace, or a gold chain—the gold would serve his purpose.

They even share many of the same adjectives: Luminous, purified, malleable, workable.

They use slightly different words for luminous - pabhassara in one, and pariyodate in the other, but when you compare with other passages talking about the same visual luminosity that appears in meditation, such as the famous fourth jhana simile in AN 5.28, we know these synonyms are talking about the same thing

Reiterate conclusion on why we know for sure this is fourth jhana:

1. It's always an imperturbable version of fourth jhana, iddhipada, when the 6 higher knowledges are easily accessible. 

2. the gold simile matches up with the standard STED definition of the frequent stock passage on imperturbable fourth jhana that appears in more than 20 suttas. 

3. you never find a sutta where someone is in 1st or 2nd jhana for example and can easily perform the 6 higher knowledges. 

Now we've eliminated that ambiguity, we can prove why the other ambiguous passage is first jhana, and not second or third

• AN 3.101 Paṃsudhovaka
  • dirt-washer
    • (gold’s gross impurities)
    • (gold’s moderate impurities)
    • (gold’s fine impurities)
    • (gold dust)
    • (gold malleable, luminous, ready to be worked)
    • (monk’s gross impurities)
    • (monk’s moderate impurities)
    • (monk’s fine impurities) - in contrast to gold's fine impurities
    • (definitely first jhana with dhamma vitakka thoughts) - like pure gold dust free of impurities
    • (definitely purifed 4th jhana) - like luminous workable gold
    • (He can exercise any of the 6 abhiññā...)

(monk’s fine impurities)

Tasmiṃ pahīne tasmiṃ byantīkate santi adhicittamanuyuttassa bhikkhuno sukhumasahagatā upakkilesā	When he is rid of them there remain in him the fine impurities:
ñātivitakko janapadavitakko anavaññattipaṭisaṃyutto vitakko,	thoughts of his caste, thoughts of his home district, thoughts related to not wanting to be despised.
tamenaṃ sacetaso bhikkhu dabbajātiko pajahati vinodeti byantīkaroti anabhāvaṃ gameti.	These he abandons, destroys, dispels, wipes out of existence.

(first jhana, not explicitly labeled as such)

Tasmiṃ pahīne tasmiṃ byantīkate athāparaṃ dhamma-vitakkā-vasissanti.	“When he is rid of them, there remain only thoughts of the Dhamma.
So hoti samādhi na ceva santo na ca paṇīto nappaṭippassaddhaladdho na ekodibhāvādhigato sasaṅkhāraniggayhavāritagato.	His concentration is neither peaceful nor refined, has not yet attained calm or unification, and is kept in place by the fabrication of forceful restraint.

The samadhi that is  'not ekodi' (singular focus),  not 'completely pacified', 'with forceful restraint', is referring to the coded fourth jhana we determined in the previous section. 

Now because it says 'not ekodi' and 'not yet fully pacified (pati-passadhi)', you'd think "ok, so it can't be first jhana, since first jhana is supposed to be ekaggata (synonym for ekodi) and pacified (otherwise piti sukha wouldn't arise)". 

But the passage preceding first jhana here is talking about vitakka thoughts related to the home life, and the passage preceding that talks about having already gotten rid of the 3 wrong resolves/sankappa (equivalent to having abandoned 5 hindrances already).

So at first, this passage seems like an ambiguous mess where we can not say for sure what's going on, we can't determine if this really is first jhana, or a samadhi close to first jhana but short of it.

But studying the standard first jhana and second jhana formula provides the answer.

(STED 1st Jhāna)

🚫💑 vivicc’eva kāmehi	🚫💑 Quite-withdrawn (from) sensuality,
🚫😠 vivicca a-kusalehi dhammehi	🚫😠 withdrawn (from) un-skillful Dhamma [teachings & qualities],
(V&V💭) sa-vitakkaṃ sa-vicāraṃ	(V&V💭) With-directed-thought, with-evaluation,
😁🙂 viveka-jaṃ pīti-sukhaṃ	😁🙂 withdrawal-born rapture-&-pleasure,
🌘 paṭhamaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati.	🌘 first Jhāna (he) enters, dwells.

(STED 2nd Jhāna)

Vitakka-vicārānaṃ vūpasamā	(with) directed-thoughts-(and)-evaluation subsiding,
ajjhattaṃ sampasādanaṃ	internal assurance,
🌄 cetaso ekodi-bhāvaṃ	🌄 mind transcended-into-singularity,
🚫(V&V💭) a-vitakkaṃ a-vicāraṃ	🚫(V&V💭) No-directed-Thought, no-evaluation,
🌄😁🙂 samādhi-jaṃ pīti-sukhaṃ	🌄😁🙂 undistractable-lucidity—born rapture-&-pleasure,
🌗 dutiyaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati.	🌗 second Jhāna (he) enters, dwells.

The specialized terms 'ekodi' and 'samadhi' don't appear until the second jhana. Second jhana's bliss is based on samadhi and ekodi.

Whereas first jhana's bliss is based on seclusion from sensuality and the 5 hindrances, and contains [Dhamma] thoughts and evaluation (of those same Dhamma thoughts). 

So this resolves the seeming contradiction with AN 3.101's coded description of first jhana that is a samadhi 'without ekodi singularity (synonym of ekaggata)'.  Note that ekaggata is only said to be in first jhana in a couple of passages in the suttas, both stated by Sariputta, and probably inserted by revisionists to support an Abhidhamma, whereas ekodi and samadhi are specifically not listed in standard first jhana and don't appear until second jhana. The standard jhana formula appears over a 100 times, compared to the 2 ekaggata passages. 

So it should be clear what the Buddha is saying, he means exactly what he says in the terse jhana formula. First jhana is a samadhi, but somewhat weak. The bliss from jhana can't even be said to be based on samadhi and ekodi until the second jhana. 

And what does AN 3.101 ambiguous first jhana passage say? It's a samadhi with Dhamma vitakka, but it's not ekodi. And that Dhamma vitakka has already been purified of 5 hindrances two stages ago (moderate impurities were 5 hindrances, fine impurites were thoughts of household life). Perfect match, therefore this is definitely first jhana samadhi.

Reiterating conclusion on why we know for sure this is first jhana

1. The corresponding gold simile is 'pure gold dust free of impurities', free of the gold impurities (5 hindrances and 3 wrong resolves/thoughts). 

2. Dhamma vitakka of this passage is the same vitakka and vicara that appears in standard first jhana formula. Other suttas, such as AN 8.30, MN 125, MN 78  unequivocally make the same case by giving similar examples of vaci-sankhara (thoughts you think before you say them out loud) and the explicit examples of what kinds of Dhamma vitakka one can think while in first jhana.

3. We know it's not second or 3rd jhana because of the 'not ekodi and samadhi', and we're squeezed on the other end where we know the next part has to be an imperturbable fourth jhana.

One other unusual feature about this sutta AN 3.101

Normally, whenever suttas use similes, it will follow a pattern:

1. It will describe the monks doing something

2. It will then give a simile saying, "it's like this...."

3. It will then repeat (1) again, describing the monks doing something

I can't even think of an example off hand where a sutta doesn't explain similes following that pattern, like this sutta where it describes the gold stages, then the monk action stages, without interleaving them and explicitly tying each monk action to the simile and then repeating the monk action so it's completely unambiguous which action is tied to which simile (so you wouldn't accidentally tie the simile to an adjacent action). 

What's the implication? It almost seems like there were Theravadins deliberately trying to make the sutta ambiguous and hard to interpret whether that first jhana section could be an access concentration, or something short of first jhana. De-coupling it from the simile makes it harder to establish definite correspondence with first jhana.

And that's exactly why B. Sujato cherry picks this sutta to try to 'prove' his theory on why the vitakka of first jhana can't mean ordinary discursive thinking. 

Conclusion

Although the sutta never explicitly uses the word 'jhana', 'first jhana', 'fourth jhana', comparison with similar suttas in the 6 higher knowledge and jhana context, and matching up the gold similes individually with each monk action establishes :

1.  we are definitely talking about first jhana with vitakka  vaci sankhara (thoughts you think before you vocalize them out loud), 

2. and the other coded samadhi sequence is an  imperturbable version of fourth jhana, which is equivalent to iddhi-pada.

• AN 3.101 Paṃsudhovaka
  • dirt-washer
    • (gold’s gross impurities)
    • (gold’s moderate impurities)
    • (gold’s fine impurities)
    • (gold dust)
    • (gold malleable, luminous, ready to be worked)
    • (monk’s gross impurities)
    • (monk’s moderate impurities)
    • (monk’s fine impurities) - in contrast to gold's fine impurities
    • (definitely first jhana with dhamma vitakka thoughts) - like pure gold dust free of impurities
    • (definitely purifed 4th jhana) - like luminous workable gold
    • (He can exercise any of the 6 abhiññā...)

Misc.

5/1/2021 corrected a mistake - the ambiguous first jhana section does say it's a samadhi (but a samadhi that is not ekodi, a synonym of ekaggata that some passages do say is part of first jhana).

AN 3.101 misc., Q&A