I think it would be a good exercise to compare the teachings on meditation instruction based on Vinaya mūḷa and Suttanta mūḷa only versus Classical Theravāda Teachings (Vinaya, Sutta, Abhidhamma, plus commentaries).
We should ask our lovely nonCT friends what they can come up with (obviously in other groups and not here) and then copy what was found here… Then compare with what CT has to say (although this could get very extensive on our side). However, I’ve sort lost interest on the other groups. So if you are one who dances with danger on the other side, perhaps you can ask them where the information is.
For instance. Where is the information on light or Earth Kasiṇa. Attainment of the arūpa jhānas? How to attain jhāna and what that really means and how that is compared to momentarily being happy and having 5 factors (which could be any type of happy mental state).
This would by far be the best challenge for the nonCT, since the important thing about Buddhism is Practice. I think both sides agree with this, yet I’m sure they think we don’t practice.
A post was merged into an existing topic: Sense objects during Jhana?
It would be good if there was a summary rather than endless cross links. If you can please try to show what is said, and then also compare with the classical Theravāda explanation.
It is for sure to see that classical theravāda will have a definitive and detailed explanation.
For instance… is there any explanation of jhāna in sutta only besides the 4 jhāna stock phrase which has a small simile for each and a list of the jhāna factors? These items could be stretched into many different interpretations. As one friend joked to me… “I have jhāna factors… vitakka vicāra pīti sukha ekagatta …” these can happen in any wholesome or even unwholesome happy mind, but obviously the monk who was joking did not have jhāna nor was he making any claims.
Nice post by Ven. Dhammanando!
I moved it to a topic that is about the (wrong) idea that sense objects could be experienced during jhana.
Thanks @RobertK. Bhante @bksubhuti, I’m sorry that I can’t give a detailed essay on this subject - that’s way beyond my pay grade.
What I personally think is useful about those discussions of the nature of jhāna is that they provide a detailed discussion of what the suttas say about the matter. As Ven Dhammanando says, the Theravada position on the matter was argued at the Third Council pre Visuddhimagga. I do understand that this Forum takes the Commentaries, Visuddhimagga, etc as authoritative, but this material may be helpful in arguing against the idea that the Theravada view on depth of absorption in jhāna contradicts the suttas.