Skip to main content

A new translation of SN 38.16, and first jhāna is a lot easier than you think

 

(translation style SP-FLUENT by frankk‍)

16. Du-k-kara-pañhā-sutta
16. A Question About What’s Hard to Do
“Kiṃ nu kho, āvuso sāriputta, imasmiṃ dhamma-vinaye duk-karan”ti?
“friend Sāriputta, in this Dharma and training, what is hard to do?”
“Pabbajjā kho, āvuso, imasmiṃ dhamma-vinaye duk-karā”ti.
“[deciding to become a monk and] Going forth , friend, is hard to do in this Dharma and training.”
“Pabbajitena panāvuso, kiṃ duk-karan”ti?
“But what’s hard to do for someone who has gone forth?”
“Pabbajitena kho, āvuso, abhi-rati duk-karā”ti.
“When you’ve gone forth it’s hard to be satisfied [with the lifestyle of a monk].”
“Abhi-ratena panāvuso, kiṃ duk-karan”ti?
“But what’s hard to do for someone who is satisfied [with the lifestyle of a monk]?”
“Abhi-ratena kho, āvuso, dhamm-ānu-dhammap-paṭipatti duk-karā”ti.
“When you’re satisfied, it’s hard to practice The Dharma in line with The Dharma [at a high skill level, doing the fourth frame of satipaṭṭhāna, Dhamma-anu-passana, with fourth jhāna level of quality].”
“Kīvaciraṃ panāvuso, dhamm-ānu-dhammap-paṭipanno bhikkhu arahaṃ assā”ti?
“But if a monk practices in line with The Dharma [at a high skill level], will it take them long to become a perfected one, [an Arahant]?”
“Na-ciraṃ, āvuso”ti.
“Not long, friend.”

(commentary by frankk)

SN 38.16 and SN 39.16 are the same, just a different wanderer asking the same question. When the suttas are redundant like this, it’s making a point that many different wanderers tend to ask the same question, so it’s not an outlier, not a special case, not unusual, i.e. we shouldn’t make an erroneous assumption that some unique suttas are a special case for a special situation, rather than a general teaching addressed to a general audience.

* note that according to Vism., their redefined ‘jhāna’ VRJ👻🥶, is so difficult to do that only 1 in a million monks can achieve on average. If that were the case, you would certainly expect that to make an appearance in this sutta.

* being satisfied [with the lifestyle of a monk renouncing all worldly pleasures], is the primary driver for first jhāna, deriving pleasure from skillful wholesome pleasures based on renunciation, rather than worldly pleasures that are addictive and unsustainable. Like many other suttas, this suggest that the Buddha expected happy monks would easily develop some level of proficiency with at least first jhāna. So the difficulty with first jhāna is in being content with simplicity and an ethical lifestyle, rather than requiring a superhuman level of samatha that LBT redefines as ‘jhāna’.

* cross referencing with MN 64, we know it’s impossible to attain arahantship or non-return without at least first jhāna. We know the Buddha expected even novice monks to attain at least mediocre first jhāna. Those who are satisfied with the holy life can easily do the mental part of first jhāna, those who don’t would disrobe.

* As for stream entry and once-returner, the difficulty of that would seem to sandwiched somewhere between what this sutta says for going forth, and arahantship.

* So putting together these bits, we can deduce practicing in line with Dharma implies doing it at fourth jhāna quality level in the context of this sutta.

* the contrast between being satisfied with living the holy life, and the difficulty of practicing Dharma in line with the Dharma, is likely referring to the fact that the Buddha, expected on average monks to have some proficiency in the first three jhānas (pleasant abiding in all 4 postures, partial jhāna), and that one could be complacent in that happiness and not assiduously (a-p-pamāda 🐘🐾‍) strive for arahantship with 4sp🐘 done at fourth Jhāna level of quality. That kind of complacency is explained by Mahā Kaccana as being stuck internally [in jhāna], and in SN 55, the Buddha says he did not want to teach about stream entry because he was concerned with his disciples being negligent (pamāda) rather than assiduously (a-p-pamāda 🐘🐾‍) striving for arahantship.

SN 38.16 FLIPT style of translation for pāḷi learners

“Kiṃ nu kho, āvuso sāriputta,
"What ** indeed, friend sāriputta,
imasmiṃ dhamma-vinaye duk-karan”ti?
(in) this dhamma-(and)-discipline (is) difficult-(to)-do?"
“Pabbajjā kho, āvuso,
"[Leaving the home life and] taking-ordination indeed, friend,
imasmiṃ dhamma-vinaye duk-karā”ti.
(in) this dhamma-(and)-discipline (is) difficult-(to)-do.
“Pabbajitena pan-āvuso,
“(for) one-ordained ***-,friend,
kiṃ duk-karan”ti?
what (is) difficult-(to) do?”
“Pabbajitena kho, āvuso,
“(for) one-ordained ***, friend,
Abhi-rati duk-karā”ti.
Abundant-delight [in that lifestyle] (is) difficult-(to)-do.”
“Abhi-ratena pan-āvuso,
“(for) one-abundantly-delighted ***-,friend,
kiṃ duk-karan”ti?
what (is) difficult-(to) do?”
“Abhi-ratena kho, āvuso,
“(for) one-abundantly-delighted ***-,friend,
Dhammā-nu-dhammap-paṭi-patti duk-karā”ti.
{practice in accordance with}-dhamma (is) difficult-(to) do
“Kīva-ciraṃ pan-āvuso,
“how-long, ***-friend,
Dhammā-nu-dhammap-paṭi-panno
(in) {practicing in accordance with}-dhamma,
bhikkhu arahaṃ assā”ti?
(that a) monk {attains} arahantship?”
“Na-ciraṃ, āvuso”ti.
“Not-long, friend.”


Related

links to many suttas here -> (j1🌘 easy) first jhāna is easier than you think



“accharā-saṅghāt-amattampi ce, bhikkhave,
"{Monks}, (if), for the amount of time it takes to snap-the-fingers,
bhikkhu mettā-cittaṃ āsevati;
a-monk {does} Friendly-kindness-(with the)-mind
ayaṃ vuccati, bhikkhave —
this is-called, ********* -
‘bhikkhu arittaj-jhāno viharati
'a-monk not-devoid-(of)-jhāna (he) abides (in).
satthu-sāsana-karo
{he carries out} the-teachers-dispensation-****,
ovāda-pati-karo,
{he carries out} the-advice,
a-moghaṃ raṭṭha-piṇḍaṃ bhuñjati’.
not-(in)-futility (is the) country's-almsfood (that he) eats.'
ko pana vādo ye naṃ bahulī-karontī”ti!
how much-more I-say (of) he *** (that) abundantly-practices (it)!"

“accharā-saṅghāt-amattampi ce, bhikkhave,
"{Monks}, (if), for the amount of time it takes to snap-the-fingers,
bhikkhu mettā-cittaṃ bhāveti;
a-monk {develops} Friendly-kindness-(with the)-mind;
ayaṃ vuccati, bhikkhave —
this is-called, ********* -
‘bhikkhu arittaj-jhāno viharati
'a-monk not-devoid-(of)-jhāna (he) abides (in).
satthu-sāsana-karo
{he carries out} the-teachers-dispensation-****,
ovāda-pati-karo,
{he carries out} the-advice,
a-moghaṃ raṭṭha-piṇḍaṃ bhuñjati’.
not-(in)-futility (is the) country's-almsfood (that he) eats.'
ko pana vādo ye naṃ bahulī-karontī”ti!
how much-more I-say (of) he *** (that) abundantly-practices (it)!"


Comments

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

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

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