Request: decent texts on jhanas and "jhanic" meditation

[WilliamW]

Background:

I am attempting to compile -- for my own benefit as well as that of anyone else who tends to worry about "doing it right" -- a collection of materials on jhana and "wet" meditation... but only texts that aren't misleading.

As I mentioned in my blog, and as others here have probably experienced as well, I read entire books on Buddhism and meditation before I even encountered the term "jhana". One of the first works I read that actually spoke of the fruits of meditation was Gunaratana's "The Jhanas in Theravada Buddhist Meditation" -- but, in the words of Jhananda, Gunaratana seems to be a "scholar-monk who has no real experience of jhana", so I'm hesitant to take too much advice from him.

Indeed, he appears to base his work on the Visuddhimagga, which is another prime example of why we must be careful in our selection of instructional material. Bhikkhu Sona, Jhananda, and Bhante Vimalaramsi are all on record as being very skeptical of this work, and yet generations of practitioners have based their efforts on it!

Skip Here If You're Impatient:

So I would like to ask the community: please link or reference any works on meditation and jhana that you believe are helpful and/or substantially accurate. The essays and sutta translations available on the main site are excellent, but there are other sources I wonder about. For example, the works of Ajahn Brahmavamso, Ajahn Chandako, or Bhikkhu Sujato; or the early commentaries Patisambhidamagga and Vimuttimagga .

Thank you in advance for any help. Additionally, personal accounts of practice are welcome -- there is no reason any member of this community should be inferior, in advice, to scholars who have never even attempted the practice!

[Frederick]

I look forward to this.

There were several great recommendations in the past. Jeffrey's translations are a nice starting point as well as _St. John of the Cross_ and _St. Theresa of Avila_.

For over 10 year, I have wanted to put together a book of passages that are most helpful to me. Of course, this changes a little, yearly.

Some of the books on jhana are probably not as helpful, such as the reviled Vissudhimagga, but these books, early on, did let me know that there was more to meditation. I know that they are misleading, but I didn't get far enough to be led too astray.

I should put together quotes from here that helped me though.

[WilliamW]

I feel the same way, re: the Visuddhimagga -- it seems that its details should not be relied on too closely, but the broad outline it provides seems solid enough and definitely helped point me in the right direction. "Jhanas are real, and here's how to meditate toward them" is nice to hear when you're surrounded by stuff like "meditation is just a way to calm down a little bit". (Short digression: as I think I wrote in my blog, a lot of people seem to focus on Buddhism as an ethical system or an "art of living", if you know what I mean by that. It is those things, but not only -- there's a difference between "relax every once in a while and don't be mean to people" and the Dharma, IMO.)


There are definitely a lot of texts that I think are promising or helpful, but I'd prefer to build up a core of resources that I (we) can feel "safe" in studying. For example, Bhante Vimalaramsi says, in an interview available on the GWV main site, that he doesn't think "one-pointed concentration" is the right way to go for jhanas; it will provide absorption but not jhana, if I understand his contention correctly. Instead of concentrating upon the breath, he suggests that one relax on the in-breath and relax on the out-breath, continually.

This seems dubious, to me, or at least confusing. Everything I've read has suggested that developing keen concentration is necessary (but maybe not sufficient, in and of itself) to absorption and jhana; this is a way to still and train the mind, if nothing else... right? However, Jhananda writes elsewhere that he broadly agrees with Bhante V, and Bhante V is at least talking about absorption and jhana, so I don't know what to think -- I feel certain that concentration is necessary at some point, but perhaps too some relaxation must take place...?

Just to get the ball rolling, I will post some links that I thought were interesting -- but I can't vouch for them too far. Some of their authors are on record as supporting notions contrary to the information available on GWV, which I trust implicitly; but these specific materials are, at least, not directly contradicting the information here, as far as I can see.

[WilliamW]

1

First, Thanissaro Bhikkhu. There is not too much on his ideas on the GWV main site, other than that there are surface indications he might lean a little more to the "dry" side. However, I have found the following texts interesting: here and here he deals with the combination of concentration and insight, and here he "troubleshoots" jhana practice a bit.

I would be interested in the GWV community's opinion on this. From my reading, I think it's... decent; thought-provoking, at least. He attains the "minimum standard" of not separating samatha and vipassana as separate practices. The main criticism I can see is that he seems to feel that thought or evaluation is present, to some extent, at all stages. From my understanding, directed thought and evaluation is only present in the first jhana. He does once say evluation disappears with the higher jhanas, but then seems to backtrack and say actually evaluation is present but more "refined". Hmm. That said, Thanissaro's idea about "investigating" the stage you are in to still the mind even further seems workable, although -- as mentioned above re: Bhante V -- one-pointed concentration is the most common prescription I see.

2

Here is an article on WildMind about jhana. At first glance, it seems good to me: the author believes jhana is essential, and goes directly to the Buddha's words to show this. Excellent practice. But he also writes about the difference between the jhanas and the "ayatanas", which he contrasts: the former is progressively more one-pointed and more still interior concentration, the latter progressively broader and more still awareness. (At least, that's my summary, which may not do the author full justice; see what you think.)

I don't believe Jhananda has written on the ayatanas as distinct from the jhanas, nor have I heard them mentioned elsewhere. However, the concept is interesting, and the author seems to have a decent backing for this concept from the suttas. Additional note: this author believes that jhanas five through eight are actually these ayatanas. I cannot remember whether I have read much about the GWV's view of these "arupa-jhanas" or "ayatanas" and whether they are distinct from the first four jhanas.

Also from WildMind is this list of factors conducive to jhana. I can't say much about it, other than that it seems right to me. Comments and criticisms very desired on this.

3

Next, there is Leigh Brasington. Mr. Brasington has written very much about the jhanas, which I am grateful for. I have not read all of it, so take my comments with a grain of salt. First, note that Jhananda has disagreed with the way Brasington has presented the jhanas in his retreats -- I don't know, and would be very interested in, Jhananda's opinion of the texts linked above (most especially this one, which is instructions for entering the first jhana).

That said, what I have read of Brasington's presentation broadly agrees with Jhananda's, apart from the issue of "access concentration". The main question I have is that regarding the switching of attention: Brasington believes you first develop one-pointed concentration, then switch attention to a pleasant sensation once it arises. Does this agree with GWV's experience? I believe Jhananda told me that concentration is maintained until the thought-stream of the mind is silenced, at which point we just attend/"just be" -- so maybe.

Here he explains various teachings related to the jhanas. Interestingly, he too notices a difference between the suttas and the Visuddhimagga -- and interestingly, from his own description of himself and his teacher, I don't really like his interpretation! That's a weird sensation, because I think his analysis here is pretty good, and from what I myself read of his methods, they aren't as "weak" as he claims they are! Hmm.

 Frankly, from what he says here, I instinctively lean toward what he calls "Visuddhimagga-style jhanas"... so I don't know what to think! I'm guessing this is because I want these states to be strong in order to feel like they're doing the things I read about them doing, and Brasington thinks "sutta-style jhanas" are weaker in concentration than "Visuddhimagga-style jhanas". Perhaps one of us is in error here.

4

Next, we have Ajahn Brahmavamso. I have not read all of this, again, so I can't say for certain how far we can trust this material. Jhananda writes that the work is quite good, on the whole, but that Brahmavamso relies too much upon the Visuddhimagga and -- like Brasington -- subscribes to the idea of "access concentration".  Preliminary scanning turns up some positive indications apart from that: in addition to Jhananda's qualified approval, I notice that Brahmavamso is refreshingly blunt about the necessity of jhana. "If it's not jhana, it's not Buddhist meditation!" -- whoa!

5

By a "Bhikkhu Sona", I quite like this text on anapanasati and nimitta. Sona believes that the Visuddhimagga, while useful, is in error in a few key ways -- and s/he makes a very good case for this.

Good practical instructions are provided, and this is largely based on early sources, so I'm a fan... with two reservations. One, the instructions basically end with "and now you'll start to feel the jhana factors" -- so I don't know if I'm supposed to continue with the last step provided, or what. Two, Sona appears to subscribe to "access concentration" as well. Hmm.

I believe Jhananda's main reason for rejecting the concept of access concentration is that it doesn't appear in the early suttas -- and that some have tried to claim it is sufficient for enlightenment by itself. Perhaps the concept is not a terrible one if it is not used as an excuse to stop striving for further jhanic development?

6 & Misc

Anyway, that essay relies, in some respects, on the two earlier commentaries I mentioned in my first post. The Patisambhidamagga is the one I am most interested in, as the earliest and -- according to "Bhikkhu Sona", and I believe him/her -- the clearest. If you search, you can find translations available, but I don't know which, if any, are of good quality.

The suttas themselves are, of course, excellent guides, and the only reason I have not commented upon Jhananda's translations of the "big four" is that I'm sure we're all familiar with them!

Bhante V, as mentioned above, gets a good word on the GWV main site and has some good stuff to say there, but -- also as mentioned above -- I cannot agree with his instructions. For example, here are more detailed instructions from him. There is no concentration, and there is an emphasis on observation. Will this change one's mental state? Perhaps; if Jhananda says this is the way to go, I will pay it more attention. But it seems to me that, as a few of the other links here state, one must develop a still and concentrated mind before "letting go" entirely, rather than attempting to let go from the beginning.

7 & Conclusion

Here is a nice little post, with a few pointers to some more. It's fairly slim on practical details, but the author seems to agree with GWV and has a linked series about how the jhanas were/are a bafflingly contentious issue for so long. Check this out, for example -- sounds like this guy is on board, and ought to come join us (if he hasn't already)!

Okay, that's it for now, I guess! I am in the middle of looking through the works of Sujato and Chandako, so I will comment on those when I get the chance. I am very interested in hearing what anyone else has to say -- on these two authors, or on anything else!

[Frederick]

I'm just going to offer my gratitude. I should read this over a few more times as well as going over the links. Thanks so much for posting.

[WilliamW]

I'm glad if you can take some benefit from this thread! Since I have already gathered together and commented upon a decent amount of sources, I will continue to add to the thread. I hope some others will have commentary or material to add, as well; a lot of things written here -- both in the links, and by myself as comments upon them -- could use a once-over by someone who has more experience in attaining the jhanas.


First, an obvious gap in the reading material recommended above is that of GWV's own texts. I was going to go through them and post a link to only that which I thought directly and immediately relevant... but even then it's too much! So a few highlights from a practical perspective: here Jhananda links information on the actual practice of meditation. Here are four useful suttas in Jhananda's "revised edition" translation, so to speak.

Note that the page on practices -- magga, the second link -- gathers together a few links to very important pages, and the only reason I don't highlight them below is to keep the number of links down. If information I thought was important was not linked on the magga page, I place it here: one, Jhananda answers some questions about his own practice and provides valuable information of practical significance in doing so; two and three, the experience of meditation to jhana; four and five, recognizing jhana and jhana-nimitta.

Finally, here is an earlier gap in my understanding, and the reply by Jhananda. It might be useful to someone else, since I think I tend to find and worry about any tiny area that's not completely spelled out!


Here and here are some texts by Ajahn Lee Dhammadaro, translated by Thanissaro. The latter doesn't appear to have a lot of clear instruction, but is more general commentary; the former has some fairly accurate-seeming and helpful information on attaining the jhanas, which I'm interested to compare to the experiences of anyone here. This fellow seems to think that concentration upon the breath is the key, but that you will become aware of the other factors and include them as you reach the jhanas.


I will either return and edit this page, or make a new post, when I finish going through the material from Chandako and Sujato; almost done.

Also: after some thought, I believe that Brahmavamso's work is -- of those in-depth guides linked in my large post, above -- possibly the best of the lot. That's not to say the others are not interesting or valuable; but they are either in a different category, like those from WildMind or Bhikkhu Sona, or contain some idea or assumption I don't agree with, like Bhante V's. I am withholding judgment on Dhammadaro's as of yet, but I like it.

If anyone is interested (and probably even if not) I'll try to make this more than a "links post" by summarizing the material -- and attempting to synthesize the best of it into an "ecstatic Buddhist consensus" on meditation, absorption, and the jhanas.

[Jhanananda]

It is good to see some in depth investigation and discussion into jhana here on this forum. 

Thanks to a generous supporter of the GWV I have received a refurbished replacement for my last dead computer.  Thankfully it is much better than the old one, and will aide in video editing.  However, I do not at this time have a case to put my old SATA drive into, so that my new computer will have access to the data.  So, for now I will have to be brief.

My health has also improved considerably since 2014, so I believe that soon I will be able to be more of a part6iciapnt here, and get back to publishing videos on my research.

Just a few notes to WilliamW on this thread:

1) It is the opinion here that the suttas are the primary source in Buddhist dialog; otherwise we use the writing of genuine mystics such as: Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, Rumi, Kabir, Patanjali and of course Siddhartha Gautama.

2) Thus, whenever there is confusion for one, then one should first turn to the writing of the above mystics first for clarification.

3) The term 'concentration' has been most miss-used within a Buddhist context.  In most cases it is a translation for 'jhana' and 'samadhi' which I completely reject.

4) Thus, Bhante V uses the terms 'concentration' and 'absorption' so inaccurately that it is difficult for me to find much agreement with Bhante V.

5) WilliamW had some trouble determining if a person was a he or a she.  Just keep in mind that 'Bhikkhu' means monk;' 'Bhikkhuni' means 'nun.'

I will comment further on this excellent thread when I can spend a few hours upon it.

[WilliamW]

Thank you for the reply, Jhanananda. I'm glad things are going well for you lately!

1) It is the opinion here that the suttas are the primary source in Buddhist dialog; otherwise we use the writing of genuine mystics such as: Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, Rumi, Kabir, Patanjali and of course Siddhartha Gautama.

2) Thus, whenever there is confusion for one, then one should first turn to the writing of the above mystics first for clarification.

I agree with this approach.

 However, it seems to me that in most -- if not all -- of these historical cases, the texts can be unclear or sparse in detail. The Buddha's suttas, and maybe Patanjali's yoga sutras, are probably the most detailed and practical of all the mystical accounts still exant -- but they still offer a fairly barebones account of the practices, in some respects. There is a ton of detail there, but then you have something like, e.g., the Anapanasati sutta; we get: "One trains oneself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body..." and an entire list of "sensitive to" conditions...

...but this leaves a lot of questions unanswered! As I asked in my first thread here, are these instructions supposed to be concurrent or sequential? Or: what exactly is "sensitive to"? -- it could be anything from concentration to noting to simple awareness. Or: is this supposed to be a conscious goal, or is it describing a result that arises?

We can make good guesses at a lot of these. By the use of the words "trains oneself", for example, we can probably answer the last question above; and the term "sensitive to", while encompassing some very fine gradations of meaning, can only really mean some sort of awareness -- so we won't go too astray if interpreting this for ourselves. (And, of course, you answered the concurrent vs. sequential practice in my previous thread. That's why I appreciate this place!)

So I also believe that the suttas and sutras should be the first stop, and the last word if there is a question that they bear upon directly. But, because there can be misunderstandings from even the clearest instructions, I believe it helps to read commentaries (historical or modern) -- particularly ones that go into more detail, since a step-by-step instruction is harder to misinterpret than a quick summary.

(Another example: Patanjali writes, about advanced dhyana: "When only the essence of that object, place, or point shines forth in the mind, as if devoid even of its own form, that state of deep absorption is called deep concentration or samadhi." There are a lot of ways to understand this, I think, so it helps to know what other meditators have found. It's not surprising that "advanced" states are hard to describe, though -- I believe a lot of mysticism entails experiential truth that cannot be strictly relayed through words.)

3) The term 'concentration' has been most miss-used within a Buddhist context.  In most cases it is a translation for 'jhana' and 'samadhi' which I completely reject.

4) Thus, Bhante V uses the terms 'concentration' and 'absorption' so inaccurately that it is difficult for me to find much agreement with Bhante V.

It's good to hear this, because Bhante V's ideas are -- so far -- the least appealing to me. Of course, "unappealing" doesn't necessarily mean "inaccurate", but one reason I feel this way is that I don't think they are accurate (i.e., don't correspond to the suttas).

5) WilliamW had some trouble determining if a person was a he or a she.  Just keep in mind that 'Bhikkhu' means monk;' 'Bhikkhuni' means 'nun.'

Thank you. I thought "Sona" was a sort of ambiguous name.

[WilliamW]

I had a few more thoughts and links to share.

Brasington's Paradox

One, it's weird to me that Leigh Brasington teaches such "weak" jhanas. As Jhananda mentions elsewhere, he (Brasington) seems to believe one can almost instantly pop into and out of all of the jhanas at will, and does not believe they are very deep states of absorption (e.g., do not efface the senses at all, at least until the fourth jhana). I say it's weird because when he recounts his own experiences, they remind me of what Jhananda writes! In fact, in a lecture he even mentions kriyas and swaying, and something very similar to Jhananda's description of kundalini rising.

His description here seems to be of very strong states indeed. They appear to be something I would certainly want to explore -- where do they lead? What is the effect of such wholesome piti and sukha, and what is left after they fade? But -- perhaps because his teacher appeared somewhat anti-ecstasy -- it seems Mr. Brasington went down a different path. Still, his writings on the subject are knowledgeable and possibly helpful.

One of his ideas, which I've heard repeated elsewhere, is that concentration is a separate "ability" from the jhanas. As I mention at the end of the post, some people think that absorption will increase itself, increase wholesome factors, and lead one through the jhanas itself. But others, like Mr. Brasington, think that the jhanas have to do with what one contemplates -- that first one chooses some object with which to get in the initial jhana(s), and then from there it's all about being absorbed in the factors that have arisen -- and that the power of concentration that one has (also developed, in parallel but perhaps more slowly, through similar meditation) enables one to stay in them longer and deeper, but is not necessary.

Yoga Sutras

Here is a very good translation and explication of Patanjali's sutras. I'm very interested in Hindu/tantric/yogic ideas on meditation and samadhi; there is a huge variety of claims and teachings here, and there is a hundred lifetimes' worth of experimentation contained within them. Ultimately, I believe the Buddha dispensed with a lot of the "noise" and isolated the "signal" in the data, and so that's the best place to look -- but don't forget that it is out of these traditions and this culture that he developed his own path.

(I say "experimentation", because that's how I think of much of what mystics and contemplatives do -- it's about ways to understand reality, experience, consciousness, the self, etc. on a very deep level. If nothing else, it is examining the mind and different ways to use it. Like some people learn how to discern and use muscles others can't normally access -- for example, raising a single eyebrow -- I believe the contemplative is able to access and analyze parts of the mind and conscious experience that many never apprehend at all.

One example that occurred to me is the difference between "awareness" and "noting"; listening to a Tina Rasmussen and Stephen Snyder talk (linked below), I noticed that being aware of a breath is different from noting a breath ("I am breathing"). I think that, for most people, these are conceptualized as the same: putting a word to it is being aware of it. And this is a fairly trivial example; I'm sure that others here have more insightful ones.)

Yoga Sutras 2: Hinduism and non-dualism + arupa-jhanas and ayatanas

In particular, the advaita (non-dualist) writings have always interested me. One finds a lot of "just world" fallacy in them, I think; it's hard for me to reconcile some of the things I have seen with the idea that "all is Shiva, all is perfect"; but, that said, the writing is fascinating. It's so counter-intuitive, much of the time -- such as the idea that through the fetters one can obtain liberation, possibly influencing the common Vajrayana idea that all we see is both maya and nirvana -- but oddly compelling, for me.

I believe a lot of these Shaivite/Kaula/Aghori mystics have certainly experienced some sort of transcendent state that changed their lives forever, and I want to know more about it. I found a possible clue in one of the above articles:

In the WildMind link above, the author distinguishes the arupa-jhanas from the jhanas, calling the former "ayatanas". He suggests that these are more directly obtained by what we might call "mindfulness meditation" -- that is, the sort that takes as its "object" (if you can call it that) the present moment -- than by the succession of jhanas, which take as their object something amenable to one-pointedness. The former broadens awareness, whereas the latter narrows it (at first). The former involves a sense of unification with the cosmos -- very advaita, very Shaivite -- and the latter involves an examination of the self. The article contends that it is possible to go on to the ayatana states from the jhanas, as the "traditional" progression states, but that it is not the only way.

So the author goes on to argue that in the suttas, or at least the early ones, the "arupa-jhanas" are never referred to as such, but as "ayatanas"; this is why (he says) the Buddha did not obtain enlightenment when he was taught the ayatanas by the ascetics, but only when he entered the first four jhanas. This makes a lot of sense to me, though I'm not learned enough in the suttas to tell if the terminological argument is as firm as it seems.

Relevant Dharma Talks

Here is a list of talks about jhana. I recommend Tina Rasmussen, Stephen Snyder, Shaila Catherine, and Pa Auk Sayadaw. Of course, I don't fully agree with Leigh Brasington, but his stuff is very detailed and worthwhile as well. Also of course, I have not listened to them all, so "buyer beware"... (I intend to transcribe a lot of them... although I've got way too many projects going, so please excuse my slowness on all of them!)

Conclusion?

It seems to me that almost all of these texts have certain ideas in common. I want to wait until I finish all of my reading to really try to summarize and consolidate, but it looks like the general pattern is: take an object (e.g., the breath), maintain awareness on it until the jhana factors arise, and then either switch attention to those factors, or continue concentration with an awareness of them. Opinions seem to differ on the last step, there -- see what I have written above about Brasington's ideas.

The purpose of the jhanas is subject to a little more disagreement. Some think that they provide a calm and steady mind for later or concurrent use in insight; others think they are the insight, providing it experientially, through the practice itself. I'm less concerned about this than I am about getting there, but I lean toward the latter interpretation. I believe it is supported by the suttas.

[Jhanananda]

However, it seems to me that in most -- if not all -- of these historical cases, the texts can be unclear or sparse in detail. The Buddha's suttas, and maybe Patanjali's yoga sutras, are probably the most detailed and practical of all the mystical accounts still exant -- but they still offer a fairly barebones account of the practices, in some respects. There is a ton of detail there, but then you have something like, e.g., the Anapanasati sutta; we get: "One trains oneself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body..." and an entire list of "sensitive to" conditions...

I agree; however, one always needs secondary sources, and what I see grossly inadequate in the suttas is a profound lack 0of detailed description of the jhana-nimitta, which we call charisms.  Here we find ample sources for detailed descriptions in the mystics listed above.

...but this leaves a lot of questions unanswered! As I asked in my first thread here, are these instructions supposed to be concurrent or sequential? Or: what exactly is "sensitive to"? -- it could be anything from concentration to noting to simple awareness. Or: is this supposed to be a conscious goal, or is it describing a result that arises?

We can make good guesses at a lot of these. By the use of the words "trains oneself", for example, we can probably answer the last question above; and the term "sensitive to", while encompassing some very fine gradations of meaning, can only really mean some sort of awareness -- so we won't go too astray if interpreting this for ourselves. (And, of course, you answered the concurrent vs. sequential practice in my previous thread. That's why I appreciate this place!

Yes, this too is sparsely defined in the suttas.  It has been my experience that "bare attention" to the sensory domain, while relaxing deeply, and leaning toward a still mind leads directly to the superior fruit of attainment (maha-phala).  However, one must also practice "sensitive" to the arising of the jhana-mimitta (charisms), be able to recognize their value, and attend to them as they arise as the new meditation object.

So I also believe that the suttas and sutras should be the first stop, and the last word if there is a question that they bear upon directly. But, because there can be misunderstandings from even the clearest instructions, I believe it helps to read commentaries (historical or modern) -- particularly ones that go into more detail, since a step-by-step instruction is harder to misinterpret than a quick summary.

I agree here as well; however, the Abidhamma, Vissudhimagga, and Miuti-magga, are clearly classic examples of appropriation, subversion and obfuscation by a corrupt priesthood. So, one should make the secondary source the writing of other genuine mystics; as well as learning to read critically, and check the translations for common bias, and mis-translation.

(Another example: Patanjali writes, about advanced dhyana: "When only the essence of that object, place, or point shines forth in the mind, as if devoid even of its own form, that state of deep absorption is called deep concentration or samadhi." There are a lot of ways to understand this, I think, so it helps to know what other meditators have found. It's not surprising that "advanced" states are hard to describe, though -- I believe a lot of mysticism entails experiential truth that cannot be strictly relayed through words.)

Yes, I agree, this is why I depended heavily upon the writing of other mystics, and a daily meditation practice that leaned toward depth.

It's good to hear this, because Bhante V's ideas are -- so far -- the least appealing to me. Of course, "unappealing" doesn't necessarily mean "inaccurate", but one reason I feel this way is that I don't think they are accurate (i.e., don't correspond to the suttas).

Yes, when I met Bhante V I tried to have a discussion with him about being clear with his language.  At that time he was not willing to consider that I deserved a peer-level discussion, which keeps me at a distance from him to the present.

Thank you. I thought "Sona" was a sort of ambiguous name.

It could be intentionally so.

[Jhanananda]

I had a few more thoughts and links to share.

Brasington's Paradox

One, it's weird to me that Leigh Brasington teaches such "weak" jhanas. As Jhananda mentions elsewhere, he (Brasington) seems to believe one can almost instantly pop into and out of all of the jhanas at will, and does not believe they are very deep states of absorption (e.g., do not efface the senses at all, at least until the fourth jhana). I say it's weird because when he recounts his own experiences, they remind me of what Jhananda writes! In fact, in a lecture he even mentions kriyas and swaying, and something very similar to Jhananda's description of kundalini rising.

His description here seems to be of very strong states indeed. They appear to be something I would certainly want to explore -- where do they lead? What is the effect of such wholesome piti and sukha, and what is left after they fade? But -- perhaps because his teacher appeared somewhat anti-ecstasy -- it seems Mr. Brasington went down a different path. Still, his writings on the subject are knowledgeable and possibly helpful.

One of his ideas, which I've heard repeated elsewhere, is that concentration is a separate "ability" from the jhanas. As I mention at the end of the post, some people think that absorption will increase itself, increase wholesome factors, and lead one through the jhanas itself. But others, like Mr. Brasington, think that the jhanas have to do with what one contemplates -- that first one chooses some object with which to get in the initial jhana(s), and then from there it's all about being absorbed in the factors that have arisen -- and that the power of concentration that one has (also developed, in parallel but perhaps more slowly, through similar meditation) enables one to stay in them longer and deeper, but is not necessary...

While keeping in mind the wise, "we know a tree by its fruit," then considering that one who otherwise does not seem to understand the superior fruit, but has a personal record otherwise; then ask yourself, "Is this an example of plagerism?"  Did he just copy my record, or that of another mystic?

[bodhimind]

I agree; however, one always needs secondary sources, and what I see grossly inadequate in the suttas is a profound lack 0of detailed description of the jhana-nimitta, which we call charisms.  Here we find ample sources for detailed descriptions in the mystics listed above.

I always wondered about this... Why is it written in the Vissuddhimaga and not in the Earlier Buddhist Texts? Might there be a reason why the EBTs do not contain many references to charisms, if they were that important?

[Jhanananda]

I always wondered about this... Why is it written in the Vissuddhimaga and not in the Earlier Buddhist Texts? Might there be a reason why the EBTs do not contain many references to charisms, if they were that important?

I would say the Pali Canon has the best historic record of the description of the 8 ecstatic altered states of consciousness, which are associated with the deep meditation experience.  It also describes the OOBE better than most.  It just has little on all of the other strange sensory phenomena, and the Vissuddhimagga has nothing, but nonsense to offer the contemplative, who has arrived at deep meditation.