Is Jhana a physical pleasure?

[Soren]

After reading the GWV's description of jhana I was for the most part convinced that it was the most accurate. However, there was one thing about jhana that seemed to be a contradiction in every description.

This confusion is over the issue of what type of pleasure jhana is supposed to be. There are different interpretations. The Visudhimagga interpretation says that it is a pleasure that completely transcends all of the five senses. Other interpretations, like this one say that jhana is completely a physical pleasure.

I really liked the idea that the meditation object is dropped upon the second jhana. The translation of "applied and sustained attention" made sense, and if jhana was a case concentration then in the standard description of jhana that Budda consistently gave he would have constantly mentioned it.

The interpretation garnered after reading the GWV description of jhana was that it was a physical pleasure - in much the same way that Leigh Brasington's was.

For example:
http://www.greatwesternvehicle.org/recognizingabsorption.htm
The first absorption (jhana) is characterized simply by the arising of a pleasurable sensation, which is bliss (piiti), as a consequence of a meditation technique

And also:

http://rightabsorption.wordpress.com/
Allow your awareness to acknowledge any pleasant sensation that may visit you. For most, these pleasant sensations are subtle and fleeting, as body discomfort and the racing contents of the mind tend to dominate the beginner’s efforts. This is okay — at some point, you will notice a pleasant sensation, and you’ll want to immediately shift your attention from the breath to this sensation.

The pleasant sensation will, once it’s drawn your awareness, begin to expand and deepen, often moving into different bodily places and/or levels of intensity. Allow this new object of meditation (“bliss and joy born of tranquility”) to guide you.
As the bliss and joy inevitably intensify, you will notice that your mind automatically begins to still.
If mind-activity reasserts itself, simply go back into the pleasant sensation(s), and notice that the mind regains its stillness that much quicker.



This contradiction also seemed to appear within the suttas themselves; because the (most detailed) description of the jhana reads:

"Furthermore, quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he enters and remains in the first first absorption (jhana): bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born from withdrawal, accompanied by applied and sustained attention (vitakka and vicára). He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born from withdrawal. Just as if a skilled bathman or bathman's apprentice would pour bath powder into a brass basin and knead it together, sprinkling it again and again with water, so that his ball of bath powder becomes saturated, moisture-laden, permeated within and without -- would nevertheless not drip; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born of withdrawal. There is nothing of his entire body that is not pervaded by bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born from withdrawal. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, and resolute, any memories and resolutions related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers and settles inwardly, grows unified and centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness of the body.

"And furthermore, with the stilling of applied and sustained attention (vitakka and vicára), he enters and remains in the second jhana, with bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born of tranquility, unification of awareness free from applied and sustained attention (vitakka and vicára) and with internal assurance. He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born of tranquility. Just like a lake with spring-water welling up from within, having no inflow from the east, west, north, or south (1), and with the skies supplying abundant showers time and again, so that the cool fount of water welling up from within the lake would permeate and pervade, suffuse and fill it with cool waters, there being no part of the lake not pervaded by the cool waters; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with the bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born of tranquility. There is nothing of his entire body not pervaded by bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born of tranquility. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, and resolute, any memories and resolutions related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers and settles inwardly, grows unified and centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness of the body.

"And furthermore, with the fading of joy (sukha), he remains in equanimity, mindful and alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure (piti). He enters and remains in the third jhana, of which the noble ones declare, 'Equanimous and mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the bliss (piti) divested of joy (sukha). Just as in a lotus pond, some of the lotuses, born and growing in the water, stay immersed in the water and flourish without standing up out of the water, so that they are permeated and pervaded, suffused and filled with cool water from their roots to their tips, and nothing of those lotuses would be not pervaded with cool water; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with the bliss (piti) divested of joy (sukha). There is nothing of his entire body not pervaded with bliss (piti) divested of joy (sukha). And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, and resolute, any memories and resolutions related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers and settles inwardly, grows unified and centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness of the body.

"And furthermore, with the abandoning of pleasure (sukha) and pain (dukkha)-- as with the earlier disappearance of elation and anxiety -- he enters and remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity and mindfulness, with neither pleasure (sukha) nor pain (dukkha). He sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. Just as if a man were sitting covered from head to foot with a white cloth so that there would be no part of his body to which the white cloth did not extend; even so, the monk sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. There is nothing of his entire body not pervaded by pure, bright awareness. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, and resolute, any memories and resolutions related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers and settles inwardly, grows unified and centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness on the body.


So it is quite clear that jhana cannot be a pleasure that completely effaces the five physical senses because the descriptions given speak of the body, and even specifically speak of cultivating mindfulness towards the body.

The caveat, though, is that Buddha also said:

"I thought: Why am I afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensual pleasure and unwholesome states? 

and:

In one whose persistence is aroused, a pleasure (piiti) not-of-the-flesh (bliss) arises. When a pleasure not-of-the-flesh arises in one whose persistence is aroused, then pleasure (piiti) as a factor for awakening becomes aroused


So how can jhana be, "secluded from sensuality and a "pleasure not-of-the-flesh" yet also have the permeation of the body with bliss? The body is certainly a sense object that can be lusted for and pleasure in the body is often fleeting and temporary.

I began practicing my meditation by focusing on pleasant sensations  in the body (after reading the GWV) however it was not beneficial at all. It made me grasp at strange feelings that would make me lose my ability to concentrate during the day and make me feel disconnected from what was going on in an uncomfortable way (this wasn't the type of liberating detached-awareness that a Buddhist might look for, it was a feeling that everything lacked emotional "color" and I wasn't able to pay attention anyways).

I realize that this "lust" or "craving" for pleasant sensations was causing me suffering. Watching how craving can develop and mature and cause suffering offered me a great learning oppurtunity, but it still didn't answer my question. If jhana wasn't a physical pleasure, but the body was pervaded with bliss, then what was it?

I decided that during my meditation I would specifically try to cultivate mindfulness of the body but also avoid ANY type of craving within the body for pleasantness. What has been happening is an all around feeling of pleasantness that pervades the body - but it also doesn't feel like it is a part of the body.

My goal during meditation will now be to not crave anything. This coincides with the description for jhana, "Furthermore, quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he enters and remains in the first first absorption (jhana): bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born from withdrawal"

If I start to experience out of the ordinary pleasant sensations I will let my attention rest on them. But I will be keen to not crave any of these. This craving was causing me to try and "create" pleasure within my body, and it made me go into my meditation craving "bolts of ecstasy" within the body.

So I guess my question is; is this the correct way to do it? Can anybody explain this apparent contradiction?

[Jhanananda]

After reading the GWV's description of jhana I was for the most part convinced that it was the most accurate. However, there was one thing about jhana that seemed to be a contradiction in every description.

This confusion is over the issue of what type of pleasure jhana is supposed to be. There are different interpretations. The Visudhimagga interpretation says that it is a pleasure that completely transcends all of the five senses. Other interpretations, like this one say that jhana is completely a physical pleasure.

While I find little to agree with in the Visudhimagga, I do agree that the phenomena that is associated with deeper states of meditation (jhana) are nonetheless non-physical in nature, thus they "completely transcends all of the five senses." In fact from doing a close reading of the Visudhimagga, and understanding the background history of its writing, I am convinced that the Visudhimagga is nothing more than a classic example of appropriation, subversion, mystification and obfuscation.  Thus, any who who quotes from the Visudhimagga is someone who most probably has never had the experience of jhana.

Some years ago I sat an 11-day meditation retreat that was led by Leigh Brasington.  At that time I found nothing in his discussion of jhana to suggest that he has ever had the experience of jhana, so I have no interest in what he has to say on the subject.

I really liked the idea that the meditation object is dropped upon the second jhana. The translation of "applied and sustained attention" made sense, and if jhana was a case concentration then in the standard description of jhana that Budda consistently gave he would have constantly mentioned it.

The interpretation garnered after reading the GWV description of jhana was that it was a physical pleasure - in much the same way that Leigh Brasington's was.

For example:
http://www.greatwesternvehicle.org/recognizingabsorption.htm
The first absorption (jhana) is characterized simply by the arising of a pleasurable sensation, which is bliss (piiti), as a consequence of a meditation technique

And also:

http://rightabsorption.wordpress.com/
Allow your awareness to acknowledge any pleasant sensation that may visit you. For most, these pleasant sensations are subtle and fleeting, as body discomfort and the racing contents of the mind tend to dominate the beginner’s efforts. This is okay — at some point, you will notice a pleasant sensation, and you’ll want to immediately shift your attention from the breath to this sensation.

The pleasant sensation will, once it’s drawn your awareness, begin to expand and deepen, often moving into different bodily places and/or levels of intensity. Allow this new object of meditation (“bliss and joy born of tranquility”) to guide you.
As the bliss and joy inevitably intensify, you will notice that your mind automatically begins to still.
If mind-activity reasserts itself, simply go back into the pleasant sensation(s), and notice that the mind regains its stillness that much quicker.

This contradiction also seemed to appear within the suttas themselves; because the (most detailed) description of the jhana reads:

"Furthermore, quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he enters and remains in the first first absorption (jhana): bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born from withdrawal, accompanied by applied and sustained attention (vitakka and vicára). He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born from withdrawal. Just as if a skilled bathman or bathman's apprentice would pour bath powder into a brass basin and knead it together, sprinkling it again and again with water, so that his ball of bath powder becomes saturated, moisture-laden, permeated within and without -- would nevertheless not drip; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born of withdrawal. There is nothing of his entire body that is not pervaded by bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born from withdrawal. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, and resolute, any memories and resolutions related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers and settles inwardly, grows unified and centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness of the body.

"And furthermore, with the stilling of applied and sustained attention (vitakka and vicára), he enters and remains in the second jhana, with bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born of tranquility, unification of awareness free from applied and sustained attention (vitakka and vicára) and with internal assurance. He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born of tranquility. Just like a lake with spring-water welling up from within, having no inflow from the east, west, north, or south (1), and with the skies supplying abundant showers time and again, so that the cool fount of water welling up from within the lake would permeate and pervade, suffuse and fill it with cool waters, there being no part of the lake not pervaded by the cool waters; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with the bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born of tranquility. There is nothing of his entire body not pervaded by bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born of tranquility. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, and resolute, any memories and resolutions related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers and settles inwardly, grows unified and centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness of the body.

"And furthermore, with the fading of joy (sukha), he remains in equanimity, mindful and alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure (piti). He enters and remains in the third jhana, of which the noble ones declare, 'Equanimous and mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the bliss (piti) divested of joy (sukha). Just as in a lotus pond, some of the lotuses, born and growing in the water, stay immersed in the water and flourish without standing up out of the water, so that they are permeated and pervaded, suffused and filled with cool water from their roots to their tips, and nothing of those lotuses would be not pervaded with cool water; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with the bliss (piti) divested of joy (sukha). There is nothing of his entire body not pervaded with bliss (piti) divested of joy (sukha). And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, and resolute, any memories and resolutions related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers and settles inwardly, grows unified and centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness of the body.

"And furthermore, with the abandoning of pleasure (sukha) and pain (dukkha)-- as with the earlier disappearance of elation and anxiety -- he enters and remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity and mindfulness, with neither pleasure (sukha) nor pain (dukkha). He sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. Just as if a man were sitting covered from head to foot with a white cloth so that there would be no part of his body to which the white cloth did not extend; even so, the monk sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. There is nothing of his entire body not pervaded by pure, bright awareness. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, and resolute, any memories and resolutions related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers and settles inwardly, grows unified and centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness on the body.


So it is quite clear that jhana cannot be a pleasure that completely effaces the five physical senses because the descriptions given speak of the body, and even specifically speak of cultivating mindfulness towards the body.

Well, I can understand your confusion, because the charisms, or jhana-nimitta, which are phenomena that appear in the senses; however, those phenomena are purely non-physical.  For instance the charismatic sounds that many mystics have reported are clearly non-physical in nature, because they are made louder during meditation, but can even be heard in a noisy environment, so they cannot be the product of the organs of hearing.  It is also true for the other charismatic phenomena that appear in the other senses that they can be felt, or experienced even in an otherwise sensory "noisy" environment, although the charismatic phenomena can be more difficult to experience at first in a sensory "noisy" environment, so people who are interested in cultivating the charismatic phenomena tend to retreat to a sensory "silent" environment, such as the wilderness, caves, deprivation tanks, etc.

The caveat, though, is that Buddha also said:

"I thought: Why am I afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensual pleasure and unwholesome states? 

and:

In one whose persistence is aroused, a pleasure (piiti) not-of-the-flesh (bliss) arises. When a pleasure not-of-the-flesh arises in one whose persistence is aroused, then pleasure (piiti) as a factor for awakening becomes aroused

So how can jhana be, "secluded from sensuality and a "pleasure not-of-the-flesh" yet also have the permeation of the body with bliss? The body is certainly a sense object that can be lusted for and pleasure in the body is often fleeting and temporary.

I began practicing my meditation by focusing on pleasant sensations  in the body (after reading the GWV) however it was not beneficial at all. It made me grasp at strange feelings that would make me lose my ability to concentrate during the day and make me feel disconnected from what was going on in an uncomfortable way (this wasn't the type of liberating detached-awareness that a Buddhist might look for, it was a feeling that everything lacked emotional "color" and I wasn't able to pay attention anyways).

I realize that this "lust" or "craving" for pleasant sensations was causing me suffering. Watching how craving can develop and mature and cause suffering offered me a great learning oppurtunity, but it still didn't answer my question. If jhana wasn't a physical pleasure, but the body was pervaded with bliss, then what was it?

I decided that during my meditation I would specifically try to cultivate mindfulness of the body but also avoid ANY type of craving within the body for pleasantness. What has been happening is an all around feeling of pleasantness that pervades the body - but it also doesn't feel like it is a part of the body.

My goal during meditation will now be to not crave anything. This coincides with the description for jhana, "Furthermore, quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he enters and remains in the first first absorption (jhana): bliss (piti) and joy (sukha) born from withdrawal"

If I start to experience out of the ordinary pleasant sensations I will let my attention rest on them. But I will be keen to not crave any of these. This craving was causing me to try and "create" pleasure within my body, and it made me go into my meditation craving "bolts of ecstasy" within the body.

So I guess my question is; is this the correct way to do it? Can anybody explain this apparent contradiction?

Thank-you Soren, for posting your sincere inquiry to this forum.  Your question goes to the root of conflict that has persisted in Buddhism since Siddhartha Gautama preached in Magadha 26 centuries ago.  The point in Buddhism is, the 8th fold of the Noble Eightfold Path is defined in the suttas in terms of samadhi, and jhana.  Jhana and samadhi are defined there in ecstatic terms.  The experience of Jhana and samadhi is an ecstatic and blissful one, which means it is a pleasurable experience. 

However, the pleasures associated with Jhana and samadhi are pleasures that are not of a sensuous nature, which means, while they appear to come through the senses, they are not the product of sensory stimulation.  Why is that important?  Because, the pursuit of pleasures that are the product of sensory stimulation lead to addictive behavior, and thus suffering (dhukkha).  Whereas, those who saturate and suffuse themselves with the non-sensory pleasures of bliss, joy and ecstasy are freed from addictive behavior and suffering (dhukkha).

[Soren]

Some years ago I sat an 11-day meditation retreat that was led by Leigh Brasington.  At that time I found nothing in his discussion of jhana to suggest that he has ever had the experience of jhana, so I have no interest in what he has to say on the subject.

But certainly his interpretation here is the same as your own?:

You watch the breath until you arrive at access concentration, and then you let go of the breath and shift your attention to a pleasant sensation. There is not much point in watching the breath that has gotten extremely subtle or has disappeared completely. There’s nothing left to watch. Shift your attention to a pleasant sensation, preferably a pleasant physical sensation

Of course, you don't use the term access concentration but you say that you begin by concentrating on the breath. And you also say that once a pleasant sensation arises attention should be shifted to it.

Well, I can understand your confusion, because the charisms, or jhana-nimitta, which are phenomena that appear in the senses; however, those phenomena are purely non-physical.  For instance the charismatic sounds that many mystics have reported are clearly non-physical in nature, because they are made louder during meditation, but can even be heard in a noisy environment, so they cannot be the product of the organs of hearing.  It is also true for the other charismatic phenomena that appear in the other senses that they can be felt, or experienced even in an otherwise sensory "noisy" environment, although the charismatic phenomena can be more difficult to experience at first in a sensory "noisy" environment, so people who are interested in cultivating the charismatic phenomena tend to retreat to a sensory "silent" environment, such as the wilderness, caves, deprivation tanks, etc.

I understand what you are saying, but how do you know which pleasant sensations are "right" to concentrate on. There can be a mildly pleasant sensation that is due to the pressure of the floor and my sitting. This is born of sense contact though.

I've had a slight ringing in my ears for all of my life - but it has never been something that I've wanted to place attention on.

However, the pleasures associated with Jhana and samadhi are pleasures that are not of a sensuous nature, which means, while they appear to come through the senses, they are not the product of sensory stimulation.  Why is that important?  Because, the pursuit of pleasures that are the product of sensory stimulation lead to addictive behavior, and thus suffering (dhukkha).  Whereas, those who saturate and suffuse themselves with the non-sensory pleasures of bliss, joy and ecstasy are freed from addictive behavior and suffering (dhukkha).

This makes sense, but it isn't specific enough for me.

When is a pleasurable sensation pleasant enough to shift away the attention from the breath?

If I experience a pleasurable sensation on my skin because of the light pressure from my clothes then this is born of sense contact from an external object. But is the pleasant feeling of the heartbeat born of sense contact?

Why is it that I feel pleasant sensations during meditation but it doesn't bring any emotional joy or even bliss (which should be in the first jhana)?

If there are a lot of people who practice anapassati  then why aren't they also experiencing jhana? Is it because they are ignoring the charisms? If that is the case then a specific list of all the charisms should be given so they aren't ignored.

[Jhanananda]

But certainly his (Brasington's) interpretation here is the same as your own?:

You watch the breath until you arrive at access concentration, and then you let go of the breath and shift your attention to a pleasant sensation. There is not much point in watching the breath that has gotten extremely subtle or has disappeared completely. There’s nothing left to watch. Shift your attention to a pleasant sensation, preferably a pleasant physical sensation

Of course, you don't use the term access concentration but you say that you begin by concentrating on the breath. And you also say that once a pleasant sensation arises attention should be shifted to it.

Good point, except that Brasington does not know about the charisms, and you are confusing charisms with pleasant physical sensation, which they are not.  The whole point of the Buddha's insistence upon getting away from sensory pleasure was to find the pleasure that is not the product of sensory stimulation, which is the charisms.  He called these charisms 'jhana-nimitta.'

I understand what you are saying, but how do you know which pleasant sensations are "right" to concentrate on. There can be a mildly pleasant sensation that is due to the pressure of the floor and my sitting. This is born of sense contact though. I've had a slight ringing in my ears for all of my life - but it has never been something that I've wanted to place attention on.

A lot of people confuse tinnitus with charismatic hearing.  Tinnitus is caused by physical damage to the organs of hearing, and does not get louder when one meditates; whereas, charismatic hearing comes from leading a rigorous, self-aware contemplative life, and gets louder when one meditates.  It also goes through a series of frequency changes as one progresses spiritually; whereas, tinnitus does not change regardless of how much or how well one meditates.

However, the pleasures associated with Jhana and samadhi are pleasures that are not of a sensuous nature, which means, while they appear to come through the senses, they are not the product of sensory stimulation.  Why is that important?  Because, the pursuit of pleasures that are the product of sensory stimulation lead to addictive behavior, and thus suffering (dhukkha).  Whereas, those who saturate and suffuse themselves with the non-sensory pleasures of bliss, joy and ecstasy are freed from addictive behavior and suffering (dhukkha).

This makes sense, but it isn't specific enough for me.

When is a pleasurable sensation pleasant enough to shift away the attention from the breath?

If I experience a pleasurable sensation on my skin because of the light pressure from my clothes then this is born of sense contact from an external object. But is the pleasant feeling of the heartbeat born of sense contact?

Why is it that I feel pleasant sensations during meditation but it doesn't bring any emotional joy or even bliss (which should be in the first jhana)?

Trying to understand the charisms without experiencing them is futile.  I propose that you just occupy yourself with 1) finding the regular practice of meditation sufficiently compelling that you will do it for one-hour sits at least twice a day for the rest of your life. 2) Focus on the stilling of the mind. 

After you have mastered stilling your mind, then you might find charisms arising, then you will understand what the mystics, like Siddhartha Gautama, and myself were speaking about.

If there are a lot of people who practice anapassati  then why aren't they also experiencing jhana? Is it because they are ignoring the charisms? If that is the case then a specific list of all the charisms should be given so they aren't ignored.

This is a good question.  Considering that my work has been mostly ignored, and I have been marginalized by the Buddhist and contemplative communities, then we will have to consider that most of the people who practice meditation must get absolutely nothing out of it.

Now, why do most people get nothing out of their meditation practice?  Most probably, because when people meditate they just space out, or play endless mind-games, or just think.  None of which will lead to anything but boredom, so they generally do not meditate every day, or for more than a few minutes.

[Soren]

Good point, except that Brasington does not know about the charisms, and you are confusing charisms with pleasant physical sensation, which they are not.  The whole point of the Buddha's insistence upon getting away from sensory pleasure was to find the pleasure that is not the product of sensory stimulation, which is the charisms.  He called these charisms 'jhana-nimitta.'

If these pleasures manifest in the senses how does it coincide with the philosophy of not being attached to sensual pleasure (regardless of how it is born)?

A lot of people confuse tinnitus with charismatic hearing.  Tinnitus is caused by physical damage to the organs of hearing, and does not get louder when one meditates; whereas, charismatic hearing comes from leading a rigorous, self-aware contemplative life, and gets louder when one meditates.  It also goes through a series of frequency changes as one progresses spiritually; whereas, tinnitus does not change regardless of how much or how well one meditates.

Over the past few days my third eye has been tingling almost continuously. I feel relatively "safe" in attaching to this pleasure. But I also experience kinesthetic sensations (both during meditation and outside of it) and I am not sure if these constitute a charism.

Trying to understand the charisms without experiencing them is futile.  I propose that you just occupy yourself with 1) finding the regular practice of meditation sufficiently compelling that you will do it for one-hour sits at least twice a day for the rest of your life. 2) Focus on the stilling of the mind. 

I think that I am experiencing some charisms (mostly kinesthetic) but I am never sure whether or not it actually is one, and thus whether or not to attach to it. For example, after eating sugar there is a slight energetic feeling in the body. I shouldn't confuse this for Kundalini, but how do I tell the difference?

The stilling of the mind: Should I let my attention freely wonder between the charisms or focus it on one and thus 'keep it still.'

[Jhanananda]

If these pleasures manifest in the senses how does it coincide with the philosophy of not being attached to sensual pleasure (regardless of how it is born)?...

Over the past few days my third eye has been tingling almost continuously. I feel relatively "safe" in attaching to this pleasure. But I also experience kinesthetic sensations (both during meditation and outside of it) and I am not sure if these constitute a charism...

I think that I am experiencing some charisms (mostly kinesthetic) but I am never sure whether or not it actually is one, and thus whether or not to attach to it. For example, after eating sugar there is a slight energetic feeling in the body. I shouldn't confuse this for Kundalini, but how do I tell the difference?...

The stilling of the mind: Should I let my attention freely wonder between the charisms or focus it on one and thus 'keep it still...'

It appears that you are having trouble with a few concepts: self-awareness verses attachment, verses thinking; the stilling of the mind; and the charisms.

Let us for now ignore the charisms and focus upon more foundational concepts to get, such as: self-awareness, verses thinking, verses attachment; and what is stilling of the mind?

Self-awareness is being aware of the five aggregates, which are: the body, the senses, mental structure and the cognitive processes.  I will add in here one can also be aware of the charisms, or jhana-nimitta, and not be attached to them.  In fact the charisms typically arise when the mind is still, so by definition, one cannot be attached to them; however, one can be aware of them.

Attachment is obsessing over something, which is not the same thing as being self-aware.  In self-awareness we are not obsessing over the self, we are just aware of self.

If the mind is engaged upon something then we are obsessing over it.  Whereas, if the mind is still, then we can still be aware of something, without the mind engaging with it.  Bare attention, is one of the ideas behind mindful self-awareness, were we are aware of one or more of the aggregates, but we are not obsessing over it, or thinking about it.

When the mind is still, then we are not thinking; however, we might be aware of something without the mind engaging with it.

I propose that you spend some time reflecting upon these concepts: self-awareness, verses thinking, verses attachment; and what is the stilling of the mind.  And, I propose that you do not spend much time trying to figure out what the charisms are for now; and instead just attend to the stilling of your mind.

[Soren]

I propose that you spend some time reflecting upon these concepts: self-awareness, verses thinking, verses attachment; and what is the stilling of the mind.  And, I propose that you do not spend much time trying to figure out what the charisms are for now; and instead just attend to the stilling of your mind.

Agreed. No matter how logically I understand it it will never be enough.

[Jhanananda]

While I value critical thinking, and recognize that it is essential for becoming enlightened; nonetheless one cannot think it through.  One has to just spend a lot of time meditating, and observing, being self-aware, and following one's intuition as well. 

Then, after many hours, possibly years, of daily meditation practice, we find something arising that is out of the ordinary, then we go looking for someone who knows what it is, and how to respond to it.  We often go from teacher to teacher for decades.  Maybe after a few decades we realize that wacky old guy we met along the way actually knew what was going on; while all of those famous, well-published gurus, who had thousands bowing at their feet, turned out to be clueless.

So, strive on, Jhanananda