Re: Vitakka & VicāraEdit
Post by frank k » Sat Oct 01, 2022 8:50 am
nirodha wrote:
MN125 is a sutta that is composed of various other sources (I've spent a month on that and the parallel 2 years ago, I would have to find my notes) and there are mistakes like there are in MN19. If I remember well it skips to second Jhana, while the agama parallel goes to first jhana. In MN19 and MA102 the thing is actually inverted with the agamas going directly to second jhana, so it seems like a mexican standoff (if there were no tons of other arguments that supports second jhana = end of discursive thought ofc).
frankk:
It's not a mexican standoff for many reasons.
First of all, there's MN 78, which shows that kusala sankappa doesn't cease until second jhāna, which means it is active in the first jhāna.
Second, both MN 125, and the agama parallel, both have two distinct stages of satipatthana. The first satipatthana is not jhana, the second satipatthana descirbed right after that IS first jhāna.
The Agama then shows an abbreviated all four jhana ellision.
But explicitly stating first jhana doesn't mean it can't be equivalent to that second satipatthana section.
However, explicitly omitting first jhana is explicitly and unequivocally equating it to that prior satipatthana clause.
Now even if you still have doubts, why the heck would there be a second satipatthana clause right after the first, if it wasn't going tell you something about first jhāna?
The other error you're making with this 'mexican standoff', is you should be judging the group of V&V related suttas from each school on their own.
That is, you look at MN 19, MN 20, MN 78, MN 125 as a group and see their coherence, and then look at the same group from the agama and evaluate their meaning as a group.
The key factor, is if you state first jhana, that doesn't make it "not satipatthana". But if you don't state first jhana, then it's explicilty saying the prior section IS talking about first jhāna.
So each school, though they choose a different sutta, in their group of vitakka themed suttas EXPLICITLY AND INTENTIONALLY omit first jhāna to make a point that either satipatthana or seven awakening factors described prior to second jhana is talking about first jhāna.
And the fact that 3rd and 4th jhana both explicilty contain sati and sampajano withn their formula,
makes it clear that satipatthana, right remembeirng, right effort, were active through all 4 jhanaas even though they're not explicitly stated in first two jhanas.
First of all, there's MN 78, which shows that kusala sankappa doesn't cease until second jhāna, which means it is active in the first jhāna.
Second, both MN 125, and the agama parallel, both have two distinct stages of satipatthana. The first satipatthana is not jhana, the second satipatthana descirbed right after that IS first jhāna.
The Agama then shows an abbreviated all four jhana ellision.
But explicitly stating first jhana doesn't mean it can't be equivalent to that second satipatthana section.
However, explicitly omitting first jhana is explicitly and unequivocally equating it to that prior satipatthana clause.
Now even if you still have doubts, why the heck would there be a second satipatthana clause right after the first, if it wasn't going tell you something about first jhāna?
The other error you're making with this 'mexican standoff', is you should be judging the group of V&V related suttas from each school on their own.
That is, you look at MN 19, MN 20, MN 78, MN 125 as a group and see their coherence, and then look at the same group from the agama and evaluate their meaning as a group.
The key factor, is if you state first jhana, that doesn't make it "not satipatthana". But if you don't state first jhana, then it's explicilty saying the prior section IS talking about first jhāna.
So each school, though they choose a different sutta, in their group of vitakka themed suttas EXPLICITLY AND INTENTIONALLY omit first jhāna to make a point that either satipatthana or seven awakening factors described prior to second jhana is talking about first jhāna.
And the fact that 3rd and 4th jhana both explicilty contain sati and sampajano withn their formula,
makes it clear that satipatthana, right remembeirng, right effort, were active through all 4 jhanaas even though they're not explicitly stated in first two jhanas.
Comments
Post a Comment