emptyuniverse

Endnotes:


(1) The path as presented in the Nikayas is functional and not fundamentalist. It is universal, ecumenical, and nonsectarian. One undertakes as much or as little path as is necessary for the abandoning of ignorance and craving. This threefold classification of discernment, ethical conduct, and meditation, constitutes the essential aspects of the path, and includes the noble eightfold path as follows:

Discernment: right view, right intention

Ethical conduct: right speech, right action, right livelihood

Meditation: right effort, right mindfulness, right samadhi

And if this isn't enough one can expand it to include the 37 Wings to Awakening. But in the end this is all a purely functional framework. These teachings are a raft to enable one to cross the turbulent waters of cyclic existence (samsara). Once one has crossed beyond to the farther shore of liberation, one puts the raft down, and according to ones initial aspiration and capabilities, then works for the liberation of all sentient beings. (back)

(2) Conditioned phenomena also includes all states of the desire realm (hell, animal, hungry ghost, human, and various gods); all states of the pure form realms and the formless realms. They are all considered impermanent samsaric states. (back)

(3) The Buddha's other two schematic models — that of the five aggregates (khandas) and the twelve sensory spheres (ayatanas) are:

form:

visible form, sound, odor, flavor, tactile sensation

eye, ear, nose, tongue, body

solid form (earth), liquid form (water), gaseous form (air/wind), temperature (fire)

feeling:

feeling produced from eye-contact, feeling produced from ear-contact, feeling produced from nose-contact, feeling produced from tongue-contact, feeling produced from body-contact, feeling produced from mind-contact

for each of the six senses feeling can be either pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral

perception:

perception of visible form, perception of sound, perception of smell, perception of taste, perception of tactile sensation, perception of mental objects (i.e. feeling, prior perception, and fabrications)

fabrications:

volitional intention pertaining to visible form, volitional intention pertaining to sounds, volitional intention pertaining to odors, volitional intention pertaining to flavors, volitional intention pertaining to tactile sensations, volitional intention pertaining to mental objects (i.e. feeling, perception, and prior fabrications)

craving (and aversion) for visible form, craving (and aversion) for sound, craving (and aversion) for odor, craving (and aversion) for flavor, craving (and aversion) for tactile sensation, craving (and aversion) for mental objects (i.e. feeling, perception, and prior fabrications)

directed thought pertaining to visible form, directed thought pertaining to sound, directed thought pertaining to odor, directed thought pertaining to flavor, directed thought pertaining to tactile sensation, directed thought pertaining to mental objects (i.e. feeling, perception, and prior fabrications)

discursive thinking pertaining to visible form, discursive thinking pertaining to sound, discursive thinking pertaining to odor, discursive thinking pertaining to flavor, discursive thinking pertaining to tactile sensation, discursive thinking pertaining to mental objects (i.e. feeling, perception, and prior fabrications)

consciousness:

visual consciousness, auditory consciousness, olfactory consciousness, gustatory consciousness, tactile consciousness, mental consciousness

How the aggregates are dependently originated:

From the origination of nutriment comes the origination of form. From the cessation of nutriment comes the cessation of form... From the origination of contact comes the origination of feeling. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling... From the origination of contact comes the origination of perception. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of perception... From the origination of contact comes the origination of fabrications. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of fabrications... From the origination of name and form comes the origination of consciousness. From the cessation of name and form comes the cessation of consciousness.

The five aggregates can be superimposed on the eighteen elements as follows:

the eighteen elements:

visible forms eye visual consciousness
sounds ear auditory consciousness
odors nose olfactory consciousness
flavors tongue gustatory consciousness
tactile sensations body tactile consciousness
mental objects mind mental consciousness


the five aggregates:

form form consciousness
form form consciousness
form form consciousness
form form consciousness
form form consciousness
feeling/perception/fabrications consciousness consciousness


the twelve sensory spheres are the sense objects and sense organs of the eighteen elements. (back to discernment page)    (back to clear seeing page)

(4) Understanding these eighteen elements also allows us to understand that no phenomenon can have any ultimate self-nature (sabhava) or other-nature (para-bhava). This understanding regarding the emptiness of conditioned phenomena shouldn't be construed as being a criticism of the Pali Sutta Pitaka (although it's obviously critical of the theory of self-nature that crept into the post canonical commentarial literature), nor a 'Mahayana' interpretation of the Pali Suttas. Even the early commentarial Sunnata Katha of the Patisambhidamagga (from the Khuddaka Nikaya), specifically states that the five aggregates are empty of self-nature (sabhavena-sunnat):

[Because it is] produced, form is empty of self-nature; ceased, form is changed and [therefore] empty. Produced, feelings ... perceptions ... fabrications ... consciousness ... are empty of self-nature; ceased, [they are] changed and empty.

The passage then goes on to list 194 other conditioned phenomena (comprising the five aggregates, twelve sensory spheres, and eighteen elements) which is an exhaustive list of all possible conditioned phenomena including kama-dhatu, rupa-dhatu, and arupa-dhatu phenomena, stating that all these phenomena are empty of self-nature.

Therefore, even the early commentarial view regarding self-nature is that phenomena don't have any ultimate self-nature, period. Of the 200 times the term sabhava occurs in the Sutta Pitaka (that I'm aware of) 199 of those occurrences are in the above mentioned passage from the Patisambhidamagga. The only other canonical mention of sabhava (that I'm aware of) is in the Buddhavamsa, where it states "Of him comprehending these phenomena having their own natures, tastes, and characteristics." This text is considered a very late addition to the canon, and as such may have been influenced by the commentarial introduction of the term. Nevertheless, in light of the Patisambhidamagga, I would suggest that this Buddhavamsa statement be interpreted as referring to the comprehending of phenomena and thereby discerning that phenomena are ultimately empty of self-nature.

But one might ask: "So what's the harm in ascribing self-nature to paramattha dhammas anyway, since visual consciousness has the nature of 'knowing' and visible form doesn't?" Yes, this is a valid temporal discernment of what differentiates mind (nama) form (rupa), but as such it is still based on the temporal (sankhata) understanding of temporal conditioned phenomena (sankhata dhamma), and therefore only represents 'mere' phenomena according to 'mere' conventional designations. Ascribing self-nature to these conditioned temporal phenomena gives rise to exactly the wrong approach regarding how discernment relates to such conditioned phenomena. This wrong turn suggests that conditioned paramattha dhammas are 'ultimate realities.' This represents a gross misunderstanding of the distinction between conventional/relative/temporal truth (samuti-sacca; vohara-desana: 'relative/conventional teaching') and ultimate truth (paramattha-sacca; paramattha-desana: ultimate teaching).

Conditioned phenomena are 'merely' ultimately irreducible empirical phenomena, and as such have no inherent self-nature because they are dependently arisen. Furthermore, the analysis of all conditioned phenomena is entirely based on temporal linear discernment employing temporal linear causal relationships and conventional mental labels. Therefore this mode of knowledge which results in 'knowledge of the regularity of phenomena' (dhamma-thiti-nana), as valid as it is from the temporal linear perspective, still only represents relative truth. For the discernment of ultimate truth one needs to transcend the temporal mode of analysis altogether by direct valid cognition of nontemporal emptiness, which is the deathless element (amata dhatu), and which eventually results in direct realization of Nibbana (Nibbana-nana). Therefore, the nontemporal discernment of the deathless element (which is the full realization of the emptiness of self) and the resultant fruition of Nibbana is the only Ultimate Truth (Paramattha-sacca).

Also, concerning how the theory of self-nature represents a wrong turn by way of the methodology of clear seeing (vipassana) resulting in discernment (panna), what this notion of self-nature does is set up a substantialistic philosophy concerned with the never-ending analysis of conditioned phenomena. This approach effectively blocks the arising of the necessary attitude of nonfashioning (atammayata) required to surrender linear discernment altogether and remain with the nonlinear discernment of deathlessness which is the pathway to the fruition of what we call Dhamma. The self-nature approach, I believe, represents not only and illogical philosophy (i.e. the theory of self-nature is refuted by valid logical inference) rooted in non-Buddhist essentialism, it also represents an extremely unskillful (akusala) methodology concerning the functional efficacy of conditioned linear discernment which mistakenly views the fruition of the path (i.e. the unconditioned, Nibbana) in rigidly dualistic and nihilistic terms.

The self-nature theory spins an ever increasing web of relative diversity and complexity, which is simply more complication, becoming, and stress, which is in no way liberational because it keeps one trapped in the linear, temporal causal mode of naming and thereby grasping onto the nimittas of phenomena which completely blocks transcendent intuition (i.e. nontemporal gnosis) from emerging/being realized. Awareness which only identifies linear temporal dichotomizing consciousness (vinnana) without realizing nonlinear-nontemporal-nonlocalized-transcendent gnosis (nana) is nihilistic in that it posits the complete cessation of awareness as the goal of practice.

Moreover, this view is not only nihilistic, it is at the same time substantialistic in that is ignorantly reifies duration and location which is rooted in the deep seated infatuation (raga) with memory recognition (sanna) and discursive fabrication (vitakka-sankhara). For all the lip service proponents of the own-nature theory give to distinguishing 'concept' from 'reality,' they forever remain stuck within the conceptual reification of time and space, which is the root cause of the origin of the self-view from which they are attempting to free themselves. By not transcending the conditioned aggregates of perception (sanna) and fabrication (sankhara) they remain within the very conditioned phenomena that the Buddha, in the Phena Sutta, calls "an idiot's babbling."

So based on the above quotation from the Sunnata Katha, what follows is a valid interpretation of the suttas, especially what the Phena Sutta says regarding the aggregates as being 'empty, void, without substance.' This is a pretty straightforward message. (back)

(5) There are differing interpretations of this third step of the first tetrad of the Ānāpānasati Sutta regarding 'experiencing the whole body' (sabbakāya-paṭisaṃvedī). Ven. Bodhi's footnote to this step is relevant here. From The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha, 2001 ed.:

MA [Majjhima Nikāya Aṭṭhakathā] explains 'experiencing the whole body' (sabbakāya-paṭisaṃvedī) as signifying that the meditator becomes aware of each in-breath and out-breath through its three phases of beginning, middle, and end. In the first edition I followed this explanation and added in brackets 'of breath' after 'the whole body.' In retrospect, however, this interpretation seems forced, and I now prefer to take the phrase quite literally. It is also difficult to see how paṭisaṃvedī could mean 'is aware of,' as it is based on a verb meaning 'to experience.'

Ven. Bodhi expands on this point in his Majjhima Nikāya Lectures: A Systematic Study of the Majjhima Nikāya 'Exploring the Word of the Buddha,' Lecture On MN 118: Ānāpānasati Sutta (2005.04.05):

I used to think that the commentary was completely correct on this, but then it struck me to just focus on the Pāli words sabbakāya, which simply means "whole body," and also the word that comes after that, paṭisaṃvedī. Now the word paṭisaṃvedī has the sense of "experiencing" rather than the sense of awareness or knowing. It's more akin to what you might call the feeling aspect of experience than to the knowing aspect of experience. In fact, the root of this word is related to the word vedanā which means feeling. And so what seems to me to be taking place here is that while breathing in and breathing out one's awareness (or range of experience) is now expanding to the point that it can encompass the whole body and take in the whole body while one's attention is still fixed at this particular point at the nostrils where one feels the breath most distinctly coming in and going out.

And I think this can be related to one's experience in the jhanas in that it might be suggesting a stage in the development of mindfulness of breathing either approaching close to the jhāna or within the jhāna itself. I find some support for this if one takes a look at the Mahā-Assapura Sutta, which gives a standard way of explaining the four jhanas. The text describes a monk who has abandoned the five hindrances and who "enters upon and abides in the first jhāna, which is accompanied by applied and sustained thought, with rapture and pleasure born of seclusion. He makes the rapture and pleasure born of seclusion drench, steep, fill, and pervade this body, so that there is no part of his whole body..." (it uses the expression sabbakāya), "... unpervaded by the rapture and pleasure born of seclusion." And then the text goes on to use the simile of the barber or barber's apprentice who prepares a ball of bathing powder or shaving powder in a metal basin, sprinkles it with water, and then mixes it so that the water entirely pervades the soap powder inside and out. We get a similar simile in each of the next three paragraphs. Each paragraph includes the expression of the "whole body" being completely pervaded by the qualities within each particular jhanic attainment.

Coming back to the Ānāpānasati Sutta, I don't think this sentence necessarily indicates that the meditator has already reached the jhāna, but it seems to indicate what I would call a widening or expanding of the range of experience so that as the pīti and sukha — the rapture and happiness, the joy and happiness — are building up along with the development of concentration, they're now experienced as pervading the whole body. And so with attention still focused at the nostrils, or around the nostrils, he's experiencing that joy and happiness extending through the whole body. [Slightly edited for textual clarity.]

And Ven. Thanissaro's footnote on the same line from the Ānāpānasati Sutta:

The commentaries insist that 'body' here means the breath, but this is unlikely in this context, for the next step — without further explanation — refers to the breath as 'bodily fabrication.' If the Buddha were using two different terms to refer to the breath in such close proximity, he would have been careful to signal that he was redefining his terms (as he does below, when explaining that the first four steps in breath meditation correspond to the practice of focusing on the body in and of itself as a frame of reference). The step of breathing in and out sensitive to the entire body relates to the many similes in the suttas depicting jhāna as a state of whole-body awareness (see MN 119).

(back)

(6) On this point Ven. Thanissaro states in Wings to Awakening: An Anthology from the Pali Canon, Part III E. Right Concentration:

[F]orm jhana is a state of mental absorption in the form of one's own physical body, as sensed from within. Jhana focused on this type of form comes in four levels, identical with the four levels mentioned in the definition of the faculty of concentration (SN 48.10) and of right concentration under the noble eightfold path (SN 45.8).

(back)

(7) I'm not a lone voice in the wilderness regarding the sutta definition of jhana being much different from the commentarial definition of jhana. On this subject, Ven. Thanissaro states:

The role of jhana as a condition for transcendent discernment is one of the most controversial issues in the Theravada tradition. Three basic positions have been advanced in modern writings. One, following the commentarial tradition, asserts that jhana is not necessary for any of the four levels of Awakening and that there is a class of individuals -- called 'dry insight' meditators -- who are 'released through discernment' based on a level of concentration lower than that of jhana. A second position, citing a passage in the Canon (AN III.88) stating that concentration is mastered only on the level of nonreturning, holds that jhana is necessary for the attainment of nonreturning and arahantship, but not for the lower levels of Awakening. The third position states that the attainment of at least the first level of jhana is essential for all four levels of Awakening.

Evidence from the Canon supports the third position, but not the other two [....] Part of the controversy over this question may be explained by the fact that the commentarial literature defines jhana in terms that bear little resemblance to the canonical description. The Path of Purification -- the cornerstone of the commentarial system -- takes as its paradigm for meditation practice a method called kasina, in which one stares at an external object until the image of the object is imprinted in one's mind. The image then gives rise to a countersign that is said to indicate the attainment of threshold concentration, a necessary prelude to jhana. The text then tries to fit all other meditation methods into the mold of kasina practice, so that they too give rise to countersigns, but even by its own admission, breath meditation does not fit well into the mold: with other methods, the stronger one's focus, the more vivid the object and the closer it is to producing a sign and countersign; but with the breath, the stronger one's focus, the harder the object is to detect. As a result, the text states that only Buddhas and Buddhas' sons find the breath a congenial focal point for attaining jhana.

None of these assertions have any support in the Canon. Although a practice called kasina is mentioned tangentially in some of the discourses, the only point where it is described in any detail (MN 121) makes no mention of staring at an object or gaining a countersign. If breath meditation were congenial only to Buddhas and their sons, there seems little reason for the Buddha to have taught it so frequently and to such a wide variety of people. If the arising of a countersign were essential to the attainment of jhana, one would expect it to be included in the steps of breath meditation and in the graphic analogies used to describe jhana, but it isn't. Some Theravadins insist that questioning the commentaries is a sign of disrespect for the tradition, but it seems to be a sign of greater disrespect for the Buddha -- or the compilers of the Canon -- to assume that he or they would have left out something absolutely essential to the practice.

All of these points seem to indicate that what jhana means in the commentaries is something quite different from what it means in the Canon. Because of this difference we can say that the commentaries are right in viewing their type of jhana as unnecessary for Awakening, but Awakening cannot occur without the attainment of jhana in the canonical sense.

(back)

(8) For a more detailed examination of how the Visuddhimagga arrived at its notions concerning the sign of jhana when practicing breath meditation, see The Mystery of the Breath Nimitta by Ajahn Sona, Abbot of Birken Forest Monastery. (back)

(9) The stages of insight-gnosis presented here is inspired by the teachings of Ajahn Buddhadasa and Ajahn Amaro. Ajahn Buddhadasa proposed a ninefold progression of insight gnosis as follows:


Ajahn Amaro simplified the essentials of the above to six:


(back)