p.97
The Buddhist traditions assert that Gotama was
the first historical person in the world to become the Buddha, the Tathaagata. Non-buddhist traditions confirm this in an indirect way, for in
their literature none of the non-buddhist teachers was given the epithet of “Buddha.” Gotama became the
Buddha, for he realised the “bodhi,” the truly objective knowledge concerning the destruction of the
asravas or dukkha. In a wider sense the bodhi can be
interpreted as the objective knowledge of the Conditioned. The realisation of bodhi provided Gotama with the only valid
premise for really ascertaining the existence of the Nibbaana, the unconditioned reality. The existence of the Nibbaana was no longer a matter of faith with
him.
This achievement of Gotama revolutionised the spiritual world of the `Srama.nas. The pre-Buddhist `Srama.nas had not evinced any real interest for understanding the true nature of the Conditioned; they were all for attaining a mental state which offered the closest approximation to the calmness of the Unconditioned. Their spiritual endeavour was directed towards the suppression of mental agitations caused by unwholesome elements like greed, dukkha etc. but never towards the utter destruction of such evil elements.
The pre-Buddhists `Srama.nas mainly practised either of the following two systems of meditation: one was practised for attaining freedom from the influence of the feelings; the other aimed at the
p.98
cessation of perception and feeling through the gradual elimination of the perceptions of form, space etc. The first system was suitable for the realisation of bodhi, for it left the field of perception intact but showed the way to overcome the influence of the perceptibles; the other system was necessary for experiencing the Nibbaana-in-this-world for it gradually obliterates almost all the traces of the Conditioned.
Gotama was the first historical person who practised both the systems, improved upon them, combined them into one system and realised the ultimate spiritual goal. The present article attempts a detailed and critical account of the entire path Gotama traversed to become the Buddha, the Tathaagata.
Key words: 1. Four Jhaanas 2. Bodhi 3. Nibbaana-in-this-World
p.99
The available Buddhist traditions suggest that the `Saakya Gotama was the first historical person to become the Buddha, the Tathaagata. An account of the spiritual journey of Gotama would thus provide us with the description of the earliest path to the Tathaagatahood.
The entire spiritual path traversed by Gotama can be reconstructed in detail mainly from the following four pieces of traditions:
i) The account of the Parama-di.t.thadhamma-nibbaanavaadins in the Brahmajaala-sutta[1] of the Diigha Nikaaya which records the four jhaana formulas as known to the Nibbaanavaadins with some explanatory notes.
ii) The first part of the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta[2] which precedes the account of the four jhaanas followed by Gotama. This account enunciates the why and how of the `Srama.na meditation as developed by Gotama.
iii) A stock piece of narrative found in different Suttas[3] depicting the spiritual life of Gotama from the attainment of the first of the four jhaanas to the realisation of the third vijjaa, and the bodhi. This tradition also sheds light on the spiritual strivings of Gotama before the attainment of the first jhaana.
iv) The end part of the Ariyapriyeasanaa-sutta[4] that records the attainment of the Tathaagatahood by Gotama.
We may now briefly discuss the authenticity,
antiquity and the importance of these traditions as sources for the reconstruction of the
spiritual life of Gotama. On the basis of the
Brahmajaala-sutta we may conclude that the pre-Buddhist sect of the Nibbaanavaadins
p.100
was well known at the time of the Buddha. They appear to be the earliest of the pre-Buddhist sects to follow the system of the four jhaanas or states of meditation.[5] They had their own formulas of these jhaanas. In the absence of any tradition to the contrary we may hold that this sect was the originator of the system of the four jhaanas.
Why should this account of the Nibbaanavaadins be accepted as a source of materials relevant for the reconstruction of the spiritual life of Gotama? The unanimous testimony of the different Suttas suggest that Gotama while wayfaring towards the goal of nibbaana practised the system of four jhaanas created by the Nibbaanavaadins. This tradition can be accepted as authentic due to the following reasons:
i) The Suttas have preserved two versions of the system of the four jhaanas, one followed by the Nibbaanavaadins and the other by Gotama.[6] The Nibbaanavaadin version identifies each of these four jhaanas with the Nibbaana-in-this-world while the version followed by Gotama omits this identification. Otherwise the two versions are identical. The significance of the similarity between these two versions becomes clear when we pay attention to the structure of the jhaana formulas which can be conveniently divided into three parts. The Part 1 informs us about the abandoning of a mental element in consequence of which a particular jhaana is attained. The Part 2 provides us with some important details about the jhaana thus attained while the Part 3 identifies the jhaana with the Nibbaana-in-this-world. Thus it is obvious that an understanding of the Nibbaanavaadin tradition would go a long way in understanding the meditative
p.101
techniques practised by Gotama as well as the purpose for which Gotama was following this system of meditation.
ii) All the Suttas dealing with the attainment of enlightenment by Gotama invariably states that Gotama practised the four jhaanas and realised bodhi after attaining the fourth jhaana.
iii) The early Buddhists surely knew that the Nibbaanavaadins were the originators of this system of meditation, and yet they did not hesitate to record that Gotama followed the same system.
iv) The Buddha often spoke of the four jhaanas to the monks and the lay disciples. His direct disciples are known to have practised this system of meditation.
v) The Buddha rejected the identification of the four jhaanas with the Nibbaana-in-this-world but accepted them as the means to the realisation of Nibbaana.[7]
vi) A study of the four jhaana formulas of the Nibbaanavaadins makes it clear that those Nibbaanavaadins who attained the fourth jhaana must have also rejected the identification of the first three jhaanas with the Nibbaana-in-this-world.[8] So it appears that Gotama accepted the first, second, and third jhaana formulas of the Nibbaanavaadins in toto. In case of the fourth jhaana formula he accepted everything except its identification with the Nibbaana.
The Brahmajaala-sutta informs us that the Nibbaanavaadins wanted to ascend from the mental state of a householder to the calmest mental state of the fourth jhaana. The meditative techniques involved in this process was to give up the gross (olaarika) i.e. agitative, mental elements one after another. But the method they
p.102
followed to be free from the agitative elements is not given here. This account also explains the meanings of such technical terms as kaama and akusala-dhamma used in the first jhaana formula.
The importance of the Nibbaanavaada tradition as a source for the reconstruction of the spiritual path followed by Gotama lies in the fact that Gotama not only followed their version of the first three jhaana formulas together with the explanatory notes in toto but also accepted the entire fourth jhaana formula except the identification of this mental state with Nibbaana.
The first part of the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta is an
autobiographical account in which the Buddha narrates to his disciples how he, as a
Bodhisatva, gained the knowledge of dhamma as dhamma. In this part of the Sutta he speaks of the spiritual practices he
followed in order to realise enlightenment.
This part of the Sutta which most probably constituted the original Dvedhaavitakka-sutta, confirms, supplements and elucidates the meditative techniques taught in the Brahmajaala-sutta, but never contradicts them. This account also mentions the important technique of being merely mindful of an object. This technique which is indispensable for gaining true knowledge of any object is not mentioned in the Brahmajaala-sutta account of the Nibbaanavaadins. This shows that the Nibbaanavaadins did not know of this technique, nor had they any idea of the objective knowledge. As Gotama could acquire the three vijjaas or bodhi, the objective knowledge, the tradition that Gotama practised the technique of mere mindfulness is surely authentic. This technique may be considered as Gotama’s main contribution to the `Srama.na meditative practices.
Informations on other meditative techniques employed by Gotama and given in the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta can also be regarded as reliable. The same techniques are also mentioned in the
p.103
account of the Brahmajaala-sutta whose antiquity and authenticity cannot be reasonably questioned.
The process of meditation recorded in the first part of the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta may be summarised as follows:
1) Gotama noticed that he had two types of thoughts (vitakka): unwholesome thoughts of kaama (desire), byaapaada (malevolence), and vihimsaa (violence), and wholesome thoughts of nekkhamma (skt. nai.skaamya / non-desire or renunciation), abyaapaada (benevolence) and avihimsaa (compassion).[9]
2) Gotama became conscious of each of these unwholesome thoughts separately whenever such a thought had arisen.
3) Gotama adversely criticised each of these thoughts separately and thus generated aversion for such thoughts.
4) Consequently the unwholesome thoughts did not arise anymore. The adverse criticism naturally came to an end.
5) Gotama also paid attention to each of the wholesome thoughts whenever it arose and cultivated it by continuously appreciating it.
6) Gotama stopped the continuous appreciation of each of the wholesome thoughts as it made him tired and impaired his concentration. This also shows that further cultivation of wholesome thoughts was no longer necessary.
7) It is to be noted that Gotama did not take any step against the spontaneous arising of the wholesome thoughts. The Baahitika-sutta (M II, p.116) states that the Tathaagata has abandoned all unwholesome states and possesses wholesome states. This explains why Gotama later as the Buddha would preach the dhamma out of compassion for others. No pleading by any god to do so was necessary
8) Next Gotama became mindful of dhamma as dhamma. He did
p.104
not pay attention to the goodness of the dhamma. Such mindfulness leads to bodhi and nibbaana as it has been stated in the Satipa.t.thaana-sutta.[10]
The third source deals with the attainment of
the four jhaanas and the three vijjaas by Gotama. We
have already discussed why the tradition about the attainment of the jhaanas and the
vijjaas should be regarded as authentic. This
conclusion is strengthened when we consider that the mental state which Gotama attained in
the Buddhist fourth jhaana is indispensable for realising bodhi or any other objective
knowledge.[11]
The importance of this tradition lies in the fact that it gives a connected account of gradually ascending spiritual states culminating in the realisation of bodhi. This appears to be the earliest attempt to present a continuous account of the spiritual life of Gotama beginning with an indirect reference to his renunciation of the household life and ending with the attainment of enlightenment. This account depicts in bare outline only the spiritual achievements of Gotama bereft of all supernatural and other embellishments that burden later accounts. There is no mention of the legend of the four sightings of an old man, a dead man etc., or of the legend of Ka.n.thaka, or that of Maara attacking Gotama. It is even more remarkable that neither the term bodhi occurs in this tradition nor has the attainment of enlightenment been brought into association with any tree that came to be known as the Bodhi tree or a river or a full-moon night.
The Ariyapariyesanaa-sutta tells us about the
last part of the
p.105
spiritual journey of Gotama. Gotama practised different Aaruupya-samaapattis under different teachers, and gradually attained the neva-sa~n~naa-naasa~n~naayatana (the sphere of neither-perception-nor-not-perception). Gotama went beyond this state and realised the sa~n~naa-vedayita-nirodha, i.e the nibbaana-in-this-world. He became the Tathaagata. This account is realistic and free from all legendary elements. The authenticity of this account is beyond any reasonable doubt.
The name of the other suttas which have helped us to elucidate and supplement the informations given in the above mentioned sources will be mentioned in course of our discussion.
The main aim of the Nibbaanavaadins as well as
of Gotama the Bodhisatva was to experience Nibbaana-in-this-world. The meaning of Nibbaana as understood in the pre-Buddhist age has
not been expressly stated in the account of the Nibbaanavada as given in the
Brahmajaala-sutta. An analysis of this account will,
however, show that Nibbaana in this world stood for the experience of utter mental
calmness.[12] Negatively speaking Nibbaana would, therefore, signify freedom all
agitative mental elements. Which are called gross
(olaarika). All spiritual activities undertaken by
Gotama were attuned to this goal. It is necessary to
constantly bear this fact in mind in order to reconstruct and comprehend the entire
spiritual path traversed by Gotama.
p.106
It is certain that Gotama did not practise the four jhaanas immediately after becoming a `Srama.na. The first jhaana formula followed by Gotama tells us about his initial spiritual practices. This formula starts with the phrase ‘kaamehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi vivicca’ (having separated from kaama and unwholesome mental states). It goes on to state that Gotama attained the first jhaana. So the jhaana formula shows that Gotama first had to get separated (vivicca) from kaama and akusaladhamma in order to attain the first jhaana. But this formula does not explicitly state what is exactly meant by kaama and akusaladhamma, nor does it explain how Gotama got separated from kaama and akusaladhamma.
We can throw some light on these problems with the help of the other two sources mentioned above, viz. i) the Brahmajaala-sutta account of the Nibbaanavaadins that describes the mental state of a person before the attainment of the first jhaana; ii) the first part of the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta which precedes the recording of the first jhaana formula.
According to the Nibbaanavada tradition as recorded in the Brahmajaala-sutta, kaama means five types of desirable sensual objects to which one gets attached, and akusaladhammas indicate the unwholesome mental elements of grief, lamentation, pain, melancholy and despair (soka-parideva-dukkha-domanassa-upaayaasaa) which arise due to loss of kaama.[13] But interpreted in the light of the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta kaama should mean desire and akusaladhammas should stand for the thoughts of desire (kaama-vitakka), malevolence (byaapaada-vitakka) and violence (vihimsaa-vitakka). Which of these two traditions is applicable to the first jhaana formula?
The phrase ‘having separated from kaama and having separated from akusaladhammas’ shows that kaama and akusaladhammas belong to two different categories. In the Brahmajaala-sutta account
p.107
also kaama and akusaladhammas belong to different categories. But in the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta kaama means desire, and kaama together with byaapaada and vihimsaa belong to one category. Moreover it will be shown later that the term kaama in the first jhaana formula as well as in the Brahmajaala-sutta account of the Nibbaanavaadins has been used in a restrictive sense. The Dvedhaavitakka-sutta, on the other hand, appears to have used the term kaama in a general sense; at least it does not explicitly impose any limitation on it. So the terms kaama and akusaladhamma as used in the first jhaana formula should be interpreted according to the Brahmajaala-sutta tradition.
We can, therefore, conclude that Gotama also accepted the original meanings of these terms namely, kaama means five types of desirable objects and akusaladhammas indicate unwholesome mental elements like soka, parideva etc. which belong to the category of dukkha. This conclusion also supports the idea that Gotama accepted the earlier tradition that the loss of kaama is the cause of the unwholesome mental elements of grief, pain etc. This shows that the terms like kaama, dukkha etc. have been used in the formula in a relative, restrictive sense, and not in a general sense.
He had to give up kaama in order to be free from the feeling of dukkha. The fact that Gotama felt pain at the loss of kaama (desirable object) shows that he was attached to kaama.[14] So the giving up of kaama indicates both physical separation and mental detachment from it. With the freedom from the attachment to kaama one also becomes free from the akusaladhammas.
It should be noted that Gotama could not act directly against the arising of the feeling of dukkha. Dukkha is caused by attachment to kaama. He had first to give up the attachment to kaama in order to be free from the feeling of dukkha. It is only in a state of jhaana that one can act directly against an agitative mental element.
p.108
But how could Gotama give up kaama? The Brahmajaala-sutta only states that the unwholesome mental elements arise due to the loss of kaama, but is silent about criticising kaama on this account. The Dvedhaavitakka-sutta, on the other hand, suggests that Gotama must have exercised some such criticism of kaama in order to get rid of it. In this sutta the Buddha tells that he, as a bodhisatva, stopped the arising of the thoughts of desire for any object by adversely criticising such a thought everytime it arose in mind. Next he cultivated the opposite thought of desirelessness (nekkhamma-vitakka) for such objects by repeatedly thinking of the advantages of being without such desires. This he did to ensure that he always remains free from such desires, and reacts to the desirable objects with thoughts of desirelessness. Gotama must have resorted to such a method to get rid of kaama before attaining the first jhaana. One may object to this opinion by pointing out that kaama in the first jhaana formula means desirable objects and not desire. So the method taught in this Sutta should not be applied to the first jhaana. But this objection is not tenable, for we have seen, the painful reactions to the loss of desirable objects implies the presence of desire for such objects. The fact is that even after the physical separation from desirable objects desire for such objects may still linger in mind. Real separation from an object, as we have already pointed out, means both physical separation and mental detachment.
We may be, therefore, justified in surmising that Gotama first adversely criticised the possession of and attachment to the five types of desirable objects on the ground that they invariably lead to pain and suffering. Later when the thoughts of desire ceased to arise in mind, he practised appreciative deliberations regarding the advantages of having no desire for such objects. We will see later that this interpretation will help us to understand the presence of vitakka and vicaara in the first jhaana formula.
We have already noted that being separated from kaama, dukkha
p.109
etc. Gotama attained the first jhaana. We have to understand that the formula does not make any categorical statement. We know that dukkha which is due to the loss of kaama, is present in the first jhaana.[15] This shows that the meditator is still attached to kaama to some extent, though the attachment cannot be as intense as in the pre-jhanic mind. Moreover the worldly mind that feels pain changes considerably after the attainment of the first jhaana which is beyond the worldly mind and is called adhicitta (higher mind).[16] So the phrase “kaamehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi vivicca” does not mean that Gotama has got absolutely separated from kaama etc.; it means that he separated himself from kaama etc.only to the extent they are related to the worldly mind. We will see later that the Vatthupama-sutta refers to such limitations by using the term “yatodhi” (to that extent).[17]
The pre-jhanic mental state is fraught with pain while the first jhaana is characterised by piiti (joy) and sukha (happiness). But it would be wrong to assume that Gotama gave up the painful, worldly mental state for the sake of the delightful first jhaana. Gotama’s immediate aim was only to be free from the intense mental agitation caused by dukkha etc. Moreover we will show later that Gotama did not intentionally develop piiti and sukha. On the basis of the Brahmajaala-sutta we can hold that Gotama did not directly try for the removal of dukkha. The unwholesome mental elements of dukkha etc. are caused by the attachment to kaama. So Gotama actually exerted himself to be separated from kaama both physically and mentally. As Gotama was successful in separating himself from kaama, the akusaladhammas like dukkha etc. naturally ceased to some extent to arise in mind. This freedom from kaama, dukkha
p.110
etc. started a mental process that gradually led to the arising of different mental elements the collective and conventional name for which was the first jhaana.
On the basis of what has been discussed above we
can hold that Gotama got relatively separated from kaama and akusaladhammas, and
consequently attained the first jhaana. This jhaana
is accompanied by vitakka and vicaara (initial and developed appreciative deliberations
regarding desirelessness with reference to kaama),[18] born of separation (vivekajam) and
characterised by piiti and sukha. Gotama abided in
this jhaana.
Gotama adversely criticised kaama and akusaladhammas in order to give them up. The contents of the adverse criticism surely dealt with the grossness and impermanency of kaama. This criticism falls within the mental range of an ordinary person, and it comes to an end when one gets separated from kaama. But the mental state of first jhaana which is called adhicitta (higher mind) comes into existence only after relative separation from kaama etc. has taken place; it, therefore, cannot be the mental state of an ordinary person. The vitakka and vicaara cannot be the same as the adverse criticism made by an ordinary person against kaama. What then could be the contents of vitakka and vicaara in the first jhaana?
We know from the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta that when the thoughts of desire (kaamavitakka) ceased to arise, Gotama cultivated the opposite thoughts of desirelessness (nekkhammavitakka) regarding the desirable objects by deliberating upon its advantages. The vitakka and vicaara should refer to such appreciative deliberations concerning desirelessness.
p.111
The contents of vitakka and vicaara can also be surmised. Gotama like the `Srama.nas of his time, was trying to realise the nibbaana-in-this-world, as it has been stated in the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta. So his deliberations should also have been connected with nibbaana. But unlike the tradition preserved in this Sutta, his deliberations were most probably not connected with pa~n~naa, for in those days the `Srama.nas were not interested in pa~n~naa (wisdom) and Gotama had not yet realised the importance of bodhi for the realisation of nibbaana. The tradition preserved in the Dvedhaa-vitakka-sutta is an amalgamation of two different traditions──that of Gotama’s experience as a bodhisatva and that of the Buddha’s teachings to his disciples.
Vasubandhu[19] pointed out that vitakka and vicaara cannot occur simultaneously, but must occur successively. One may surmise that the first jhaana formula originally had either vitakka and vicaara. But the Nikaayas always record this formula including both vitakka and vicaara. There is no reason to doubt the authenticity of this tradition. This helps us to understand the concept of jhaana in that early period. The mental elements constituting a jhaana occur in a sequence. Thus the jhaana formula is not a description of a mental state at a given moment, or in concentration on a given object; it is a record of a series of reactions that takes place whenever a mental state that is free from kaama and akusaladhammas comes into contact with a desirable object.
We have to note that the vitakka and vicaara started in the pre-jhanic worldly mind and continued in the first jhaana. Of these two the vitakka, the initial deliberations, precedes the vicaara, the developed deliberations. Of all the mental elements constituting the first jhaana the vitakka would be, therefore, first perceived. Accordingly in the jhaana formula the vitakka heads the list of the characteristics of the first jhaana.
p.112
We have seen that the vitakka and vicaara were connected with the process of separation from kaama. As the appreciative deliberations regarding the merits of desirelessness (i.e. vitakka and vicaara) continues in the first jhaana, the thoughts of adverse criticism of the desire for kaama continues to be absent from the mind. The absence of adverse criticism indicates the absence of the desire for kaama and the akusala-dhammas. We may hold that this separation from dicer etc. has been termed “viveka” in the first jhaana formula. This conclusion is supported by the Vatthupama-sutta quoted later. (S.P.18)
The vitakka and vicaara, on the other hand, refers only to the appreciative deliberations regarding the merits of being without any desire for kaama.
The term that we have in the formula is “vivekajam” instead of viveka. Which mental element is born of viveka that is referred to here? In the formula the compound “piitisukham” comes immediately after “vivekajam.” Some scholars thought that “vivekajam” qualifies “piitisukham” and therefore translated the phrase as “piiti and sukha born of separation.” Next they took the entire phrase as characterising the first jhaana. But this translation to be correct there should have been a single compound made of “vivekaja” or “viveka” and “piitisukha.” (cf. the compound “pavivekapiti” in the Pa~ncattaya-sutta).[20] Even a cursory glance at the formula shows that like “savitakkam” and “savicaaram” each of the terms “vivekajam” and “piitisukham” also should separately characterise the “pa.thamajhaanam” (first state of meditation). Again if we following other scholars translate the second jhaana formula in the same way, we find that piiti and sukha are born of concentration (samaadhi). But this is not possible. The same type of piiti and sukha cannot be born of two different causes. This shows that
p.113
neither viveka nor samadhi can be the cause of “piiti” and “sukha”. Moreover no single factor (either viveka or samadhi) can cause both piiti and sukha.
We have also to remember that “vivekajam” cannot really characterise pa.thamajhaanam. It is only grammatically that “pa.thamajhaanam” appears to be characterised by the term “vivekajam.” This point has been further discussed later.
As “viveka” cannot be the cause of “piitisukha” or “pa.thamajhaanam,” we have to admit that the mental element born of viveka has not been mentioned in the first jhaana formula.
The Buddha surely knew that there is no pa.thamajhaanam to be born of viveka. And yet he did not change the first jhaana formula. How can we account for this fact? Of all the mental elements which were given the name of pa.thamajhaana those of vitakka and vicaara came into existence in the pre-jhanic state, and continued in the first jhaana. Vitakka and vicaara in themselves were unable to start the process that led to the development of the other elements constituting the pa.thamajhaana. He later became sure that he had really become separated from the adverse criticism of kaama and hence from the desire for kaama etc. which would not arise anymore. This awareness of separation is the element of viveka. This started the chain reaction that came to a natural end with the arising of samadhi,[21] and included the other elements necessary for the constitution of the pa.thamajhaana. Therefore the first jhaana is called vivekajam or born of viveka.
We find that the formula taken literally appears to be highly confusing and inaccurate. From our discussion on the term vivekajam we know that there is a gap in the formula. Moreover the formula appears to give two different causes for the arising of the first jhaana: one, the act of separation from kaama (desirable object) etc. and the other, the awareness of the separation (viveka)
p.114
from kaama (desire) and akusaladharmmas. Secondly there is no pa.thamajhaana in reality. The term pa.thamajhaana is merely a conventional name given to the mental elements enumerated in the formula. If we ignore the imaginary term pa.thamajhaana, how are we going to explain the rise of piiti and sukha, or the relationship existing between them. Or what happens due to the separation from kaama as there is no pa.thamajhaana? A tradition preserved in the Vatthupama-sutta can help us to find a way out of all these riddles. The relevant passage of the Sutta runs as follows:
When he has given up . . . the imperfections of the mind (upakilesa) in part (yatodhi) he considers thus: “I am possessed of initial confidence (aveccapasaada) in the Buddha . . . gains gladness (paamojja) connected with the dhamma.” When he is glad, rapture (piiti) is born in him; in one who is rapturous, the body becomes tranquil; one whose body is tranquil (passaddhi), feels pleasure (sukha); in one who feels pleasure, mind becomes concentrated (samaadhi).[22]
Here we have a more detailed description of what is generally known as the first jhaana. The passage in question gives a realistic account of mental elements that arise one after another in sequence, without imagining that they constitute a mental state called “pa.thamajhaanam.” In this list two elements, viz. vitakka and vicaara of the first jhaana formula are missing. But this does not make any real difference; these elements are implied in the larger list of the Vatthupama-sutta, for no unethical mental element can be removed
p.115
without vitakka and vicaara. Such lists are seldom exhaustive. A comparison between these two lists will show that a number of elements likewise found no mention in the first jhaana formula. It appears that only those mental elements which were thought to be indispensable from the point of view of a particular philosophy or spiritual practice were included in such a list.
In the light of the Vatthupama-sutta we can understand better the message of the first jhaana formula. The separation from the akusaladhammas creates a condition identical with what follows the giving up of the mental imperfections (upakilesa). We may be, therefore, justified in holding that Gotama gained in confidence (pasaada) in the path he was following when he by spiritual exertions was able to attain a relative separation from kaama and akusaladhammas. Pasaada gives rise to the gladness (paamojja) without any intentional effort on the part of Gotama. In the same way the elements of piiti (joy), passaddhi (tranquillity) and sukha (happiness) sequentially arose in mind. Here each preceding element gives rise to the following element automatically. Samaadhi which arose due to sukha has not been mentioned here.
We are now in a position to point out the following features of the first jhaana formula which will improve our understanding of the entire system of meditation of the four jhaanas:
i) The first jhaana formula represents a selection from mental elements that arose in sequence. The formula being a selection is not concerned with the original sequence, but while recording the mental elements has maintained the order in which they actually occur in mind.
ii) The separation from kaama results in the separation from the unwholesome mental states which in its turn leads to the arising of confidence (pasaada), and not to any imaginary mental state.
iii) Neither piiti nor sukha is born of viveka. The existence of piiti is due to paamojja while the arising of sukha results from
p.116
passaddhi (physical tranquillity).
iv) The first jhaana formula should not be taken in a categorical sense. We have seen that the expression “vivicca kaamehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi” has been used in a relative sense. Viveka likewise implies only that awareness of separation from come unwholesome mental elements. The other terms used in this formula are also to be understood in a relative sense.
The jhaana formula next mentions the elements of piiti and sukha of which Gotama became aware. We know that a partial separation from akusaladhammas starts a chain reaction in course of which piiti and sukha appear. The element which directly causes piiti to appear is, however, paamojja while sukha is due to the physical tranquillity (passaddhi).
Piiti (joy) does not appear to be agitative and undesirable in the first jhaana. The very fact that this element is called piiti which is the same as somanassa, reflects the feeling of the meditator towards it in the first jhaana. That the meditator mainly feels delighted due to piiti without being particularly aware of the agitative aspect of this element appears to be due to two reasons: First, the disappearance of the akusaladhammas which represent the painful feelings peculiar to the pre-jhanic worldly mind. In consequence of this he, due to pasaada, feels glad (paamojja) which develops into piiti. In the Culavedalla-sutta one reads:[23]
Painful feeling is painful when it persists and pleasant when it changes.
Secondly, in the first jhaana, as we shall see later, the meditator remains preoccupied with the vitakka and vicaara, the most agitative of all the elements, and does not concentrate on piiti. His reaction
p.117
to piiti in the first jhaana is quite different from what he feels about piiti while abiding in the second jhaana. This point will be discussed later.
Piiti gives rise to mainly physical tranquillity (passaddhi) which in its turn leads to the feeling of sukha (happiness). His entire body is suffused with piiti and sukha[24] which are much less agitative than domanassa, dukkha etc. It should be noted here that the early Buddhist sources pay more attention to the physical aspect of sukha whereas the Nibbaanavada mainly deals with the mental aspect.
With the arising of the sukha, Gotama’s mind became concentrated (samaadhi), and the chain reaction that started with the separation from kaama now came to a natural end. Gotama attained the first jhaana.
The traditional jhaana formula states that Gotama abided in the mental state of the first jhaana. Immediately after this the Mahaasaccaka-sutta[25] adds the following statement:
The pleasant feeling remains without influencing the mind.
The Sutta repeats the statement again and again with all the new mental states that arose after the first jhaana, viz. the three higher jhaanas and the mental states connected with the three vijjaas (knowledge). Does this indicate that it was necessary to remain uninfluenced by the pleasant feeling in order to abide in a mental state? Conversely, does it imply that one falls down from a mental state if he gets influenced by the pleasant feeling? And how does one remain uninfluenced?
p.118
The tradition preserved in the Pa~nncattaya-sutta[26] offers solution to all these problems. According to this Sutta some `srama.na or brahmin through lack of sensual pleasures enters upon and abides in the mental state characterised by joy (piiti) due to separation from kaama etc. (paviveka-piiti). He thinks that “this is the peaceful, this is the perfect, that I enter and abide in the joy due to separation.” Then that joy due to separation ceases in him and grief arises; and with the cessation of grief, joy due to separation arises.
It is clear from the above account that a `srama.na or a brahmin mistakenly announces the first jhaana to be peaceful, the perfect. Such a description is given of the nibbaana. It appears that compared to the worldly mental state characterised by grief, pain etc. the higher mind (adhicitta) of first jhaana characterised by piiti is felt to be peaceful, and so he thinks this state to be peaceful and perfect. As he thinks like this he clings to this state. We know that clinging causes agitation in mind.[27] He thus becomes more agitated and he falls down to the lower and worldly mental state characterised by dukkha etc. Thus he gets influenced by the awareness of comparative peacefulness generated by piiti which is less agitative than dukkha, soka etc.
It should be noted that though the description of the mental state is that of the first jhaana, only piiti is mentioned here and not sukha. For of these two elements piiti is more agitative and exercises greater influence on mind. Piiti is the sukhaa vedanaa to which the Mahaasaccaka-sutta refers in connection with the first jhaana. Piiti at this stage is relatively both peaceful and pleasant. We may even say that it is peaceful and so it is pleasant (cf. the Vatthupama-sutta account states that sukhaa arises after passaddhi). The pleasant aspect of piiti is not a source of danger,
p.119
for a monk is trained to be wary of a pleasant feeling. But the relative sense of peacefulness created by the less agitative nature of a pleasant feeling can be the cause of his downfall. It is able to create an illusion of nibbanic peacefulness in his mind, for he is aspiring after nibbaana, and is too eager to realise it. So only the aspect of peacefulness (santam), and not that of pleasantness, is taken note of in the Pa~ncattaya-sutta passage noted above.
But Gotama was not influenced by such peacefulness, and so he could abide in the first jhaana. The statement of the Mahaasaccaka-sutta that Gotama was not influenced by the pleasant feeling actually implies that Gotama was not influenced by the less agitative nature of the pleasant feeling. One may think that Gotama was familiar with the Nibbaanavaadin tradition which rejects the identification of the first jhaana with the Nibbaana, the perfectly peaceful. Gotama therefore, could remain uninfluenced by the peacefulness of the feeling. In this case we could have expected some adverse criticism of the pleasant feeling on this ground. But there is not even a hint of such a criticism. There is a more cogent explanation. From the second formula we know that Gotama after attaining the first jhaana became preoccupied with the removal of the most agitative elements of the vitakka and vicaara. So he could remain uninfluenced by the pleasant feeling which compared to the vitakka and vicaara is less agitative.
While abiding in the first jhaana Gotama surveyed the entire mental state. Of all the mental elements he found the vitakka and vicaara to be most agitative. He aspired for perfect calmness, so he naturally took steps to calm down the vitakka and vicaara.
Gotama undertook such activities while abiding in the first jhaana, but the first jhaana formula does not even hint at these activities. The relevant informations can be deduced from the second jhaana formula.
p.120
The second jhaana formula states that Gotama calmed down vitakka and vicaara, and consequently attained the second jhaana. The vitakka and vicaara, as we have already stated, refer to the appreciative deliberations on the merits of desirelessness regarding the objects which appear to be desirable to the worldly mind. Such deliberations according to the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta prevent the recurrence of the opposite thoughts of desire, and are conducive to the realisation of the nibbaana. Why then Gotama had to calm down the vitakka and vicaara? The Brahmajaala-sutta indicates that the vitakka and vicaara were the most agitative elements; so within all the agitative elements in the first jhaana only the vitakka and vicaara are called gross (olaarika), and the Nibbaanavaadins calmed them first. Likewise Gotama also, due to the same reason, calmed these elements first. But the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta is not explicit on this point. The first part of this sutta tells us that the continued cultivation of such appreciative deliberations was stopped for it tired the mind and impaired the concentration. There is, however, no contradiction between the accounts of these two Suttas, for when the mind is agitated it becomes tired, and the concentration suffers. But the shift in the emphasis should be noted. While concentration is specially valued for gaining knowledge, lack of agitation is associated with nibbaana. It is reasonable to surmise that in the beginning of his spiritual journey Gotama followed the earlier `srama.na tradition whose ultimate goal was calmness, and not knowledge. The emphasis on concentration, on the other hand, reflects the teachings of the Buddha to his disciples concerning the attainment of truly objective knowledge.
We can, therefore, following the Brahmajaala-sutta tradition conclude that Gotama stopped the vitakka and vicaara for the immediate reduction of mental agitation. This Sutta also indicates that Gotama stopped the recurrence of an undesirable mental element by adversely criticising it. So Gotama must have calmed the vitakka and vicaara by adversely criticising them on the ground
p.121
that such deliberations were gross, for they agitated the mind. Only to a certain extent the cultivation of the vitakka and vicaara is conducive to the realisation of nibbaana. When that limit is reached, it must be stopped. It should be noted that only further cultivation of nekkhamma-vitakka was stopped, but Gotama did not take any step against the spontaneous arising of the thoughts of desirelessness.
The calming down of the vitakka and vicaara
through adverse criticism led to a radical change in the mental state of Gotama. This new mental state was given the name of “dutiyajjhaanam” (second
jhaana) which was described as internal (ajjhattam), characterised by perfect clarity or
confidence (sampasaadanam) and unidirectional thought (cetaso ekodibhaavam), without
vitakka and vicaara (avitakkam avicaaram) born of concentration (samaadhijam), and
possessing joy and happiness (piitisukham). Gotama
abided in this mental state.
Scholars have generally taken these two adjectival words viz. ajjhattam and sampasaadanam as forming one unit, and have translated it as “internal calmness.” It is this unit that, according to them, characterises the second jhaana, i.e. the second jhaana characterised by internal calmness. But this translation cannot be accepted. In order to be a unit these two words should have formed such a compound as “ajjhatta-sampasaadanam” (cf. ajjhatta-santim, Sutta Nipata, verse 837). We will also see later that the term “sampasaadanam” should be taken in the sense of clarity or confidence. Moreover in the jhaana formula these two forms clearly occur as two separate words. The word ajjhattam thus characterises the second jhaana independently, and the phrase should be translated as:
p.122
the second jhaana is internal and possesses perfect confidence or clarity.
We will discuss later the exact meaning of “sampasaadanam.” It may be noted in this connection that the Vibha^nga[28] also appears to take the term as an independent characteristic of the first jhaana.
What does the word “internal” (ajjhattam) signify in the present context? Why this characteristic has not been mentioned in case of the first jhaana? The reason may be that the vitakka and vicaara are still there in the first jhaana, and these two elements are connected with the five types of external desirable objects. The mental state in the second jhaana is free from the vitakka and vicaara, i.e. the mind is no longer preoccupied with the external desirable objects. The meditator in this state becomes preoccupied more with internal elements than with external objects. It is to indicate this fact that the modifying word “ajjhattam” has been used.
Another characteristic of the second jhaana is sampasaadana. From the Vartthupama-sutta tradition we know that this characteristic of pasaada (confidence) is also present in the first jhaana due to the separation from kaama and akusaladhammas. But it was not mentioned in the first jhaana formula. It is for the first time mentioned in connection with the second jhaana, This suggests that this element becomes sufficiently developed only in the second jhaana to deserve explicit mention. The verbal root connected with the term sampasaadana is “sad” which can mean “to become calm,” “to become clear.”
Due to the calming down of the vitakka and vicaara the mind has certainly become calmer than before. But the second jhaana still contains other strong agitative elements and therefore it seems
p.123
unlikely that the sense of calmness is prominent enough to arrest attention. We will see later that it is the element of piiti that as the strongest agitative element becomes the object of concentration in this state. Moreover the third and fourth jhaanas which are calmer than the second jhaana, are not characterised by any special term that signifies calmness. It should also be noted that the four original jhaana formulas formulated by the Nibbaanavaadins contained the term nibbaana which indicated utter mental calmness. So there was no need to include another term in the jhaana formula signifying calmness. Again the word used to mean calmness or peace in the Nikaayas is “santi” while the word “santo” means calm. Thus it does not stand to reason that the term sampasaadana should be taken in the sense of calmness in the present context.
It is probable that this term here means clarity or clear. The verbal root “sad,” if used together with the prefix “pra” (Pali, “pa” ) generally means clear, bright (cf. the term prasanna). But mental clarity generates confidence. Therefore this term is also used in the sense of confidence. The vibha^nga[29] has glossed the term as saddhaa i.e. confidence.
Following this early tradition I have translated sampasaadana as perfect confidence. The second jhaana is characterised by perfect confidence.
Immediately after sampasaadanam the formula mentions four other characteristics of the second jhaana, viz. ekodibhaavam, avitakkam, avicaaram, and samaadhijam.
The term ekodibhaava requires some explanation. The udi of ekodi is the same as the uti in Sanskrit.[30] Uti means movement
p.124
(gati). The phrase cetaso ekodibhaavam refers to a state which is characterised by unidirectional movement of thoughts. The mind possess the quality of being unidirectional in thoughts. This means that the thoughts move towards one object only. The presence of this mental element shows that the meditator is now able to think of only one object to the exclusion of all other objects. With the arising of this element the meditator notices that the mind is now really free from the elements of vicaara and vitakka (avitakkam avicaaram). The continuous flow of thoughts remains unbroken, and he is able to concentrate (samaadhi) on an object. The element of samadhi is now developed enough to deserve mention in the formula. The elements of ekodibhaava, avitakka, avicaara and samadhi should be taken as one unit.
This unit of the four mental elements is preceded by sampasaadanam and followed by piitisukha. Our analysis of the art of formulation of the meditative experiences so far shows that the formula records the mental elements in the order they arise in the mind, but it does not attempt to present the elements in a sequence. So the formula only shows that the element of sampasaadana arose before that of the ekodibhaava while piitisukha were experienced after the arising the faculty of concentration. But on the basis of the Vatthupama-sutta we know that pasaada cannot give rise to ekodibhaava directly. The list moreover shows that piiti and sukhaa precede samadhi. Actually sukhaa leads to samadhi. According to the Vatthupama-sutta tradition there should be four elements between pasaada and samadhi, viz. paamojja, piiti, passaddhi and sukhaa. On the other hand we have seen from our study of the second jhaana formula that ekodibhaava, avitakka, avicaara and samadhi form a unit. They just represent different stages in the mental process that starts with ekodibhaava and culminates in the samadhi. So the reconstructed second jhaana should refer to the following mental elements arranged as follows:
p.125
Ajjhattam──sampasaadana──paamojja──piiti──passaddhi──sukhaa
──ekodibhaava──avitakkam──avicaaram──samaadhi──piiti and sukhaa.
Sati (mindfulness) is not mentioned in the list for it is not yet sufficiently developed. It finds mention only in the fourth jhaana for in this stage of spiritual development the mindfulness has become purified.
This more detailed account of the mental elements of the second jhaana when compared with the traditional second jhaana formula raises certain problems. For example, one may ask why the four mental elements between sampasaadanam and ekodibhaava (i.e. paamojja, piiti, passaddhi and sukhaa) are not mentioned in the first jhaana formula, or why this formula records the elements of piiti and sukhaa after samadhi, and not before it.
We have yet to explain the absence of paamojja and passaddhi in the second jhaana formula. We have to note that a feeling always found mention at least once in the formulas due to their pivotal role in this system of meditation. Actually the entire system of four meditations centers round the manipulation of feelings, specially the pleasant feelings. The feelings are mentioned either as the elements to be eliminated, or merely as a characteristic of a jhaana, or as an object of concentration. But such is not the case with other elements. If the omission of such elements does not hamper the understanding of the system of meditation, or if their presence can be logically ascertained, they are not mentioned in the formula. It is for such reasons that paamojja and passaddhi never found explicit mention in the formulas, or the vitakka and vicaara were not mentioned as objects of observation in the first jhaana formula. Even the painful feelings only find mention as elements that were eliminated before the attainment of the first jhaana, for their elimination is vital to this system of meditation. But their continuation in the first jhaana goes unnoticed, for they have become
p.126
greatly reduced in strength, and no longer play an active role in this system. This exercise in the strict economy of expression is a peculiarity of the jhaana formulations. The problem of piiti and sukhaa will be discussed later.
This phrase has been translated by some scholars as “piiti and sukhaa born of concentration.” This translation is unacceptable. In our discussion of the term vivekajam we have seen that neither viveka nor samadhi can be the cause of piiti and sukhaa. It would be shown later that these two elements, as recorded in the second jhaana formula, are only objects of concentration (samaadhi), and not born of concentration. We also know from the Vatthupama-sutta list piiti develops out of paamojja while passaddhi leads to sukhaa.
Grammatically the term samaadhijam has to be taken as a modifier of dutiyajjhaanam or the second jhaana. So the second jhaana should be regarded as being born of concentration (samaadhi). On the other hand the second jhaana formula clearly indicates that this jhaana gradually came into existence due to the calming of the vitakka and vicaara. How could we reconcile these two contradictory statements?
We should keep the fact in mind that the second jhaana is nothing but a collective and conventional name for all the mental elements that one experiences in this state. And these elements gradually came into existence. The anomaly between the two statements mentioned above disappears if we understand that the calming of the vitakka and vicaara starts the process that led to the gradual emergence of the elements constituting the so called second jhaana while the element of samadhi marks the end of the same process. With the arising of the element of samadhi the second jhaana is thought to have come into existence. So the second jhaana is conveniently called samaadhijam. In reality there is
p.127
neither any second jhaana nor any element born of samadhi. Thus there is really no contradiction in the jhaana formula. We should also note here that the calming of the vitakka and vicaara actually takes place while the meditator is still in the first jhaana.
The piiti and sukhaa of the second jhaana are more developed than those of the first jhaana. According to the tradition, domanassa and dukkha of the pre-jhanic state disappear at the time of the attainment of the first jhaana and the second jhaana[31] respectively. Consequently the initial confidence (aveccapasaada) of the first jhaana develops into the perfect confidence (sampasaadana) of the second jhaana. This results in greater paamojja, and hence to greater piiti. The developed piiti results in greater physical tranquillity (passaddhi) which in its turn leads to greater happiness (sukhaa). Asa^nga has also pointed out that the sukhaa of the first jhaana is mild while that of the second jhaana is of middle intensity.[32]
The point to be noted is that the elements of piiti and sukhaa are mentioned after samadhi. This means that Gotama experienced piiti and sukhaa after the arising of the mental element of samadhi. This poses a problem for we know that the elements of piiti and sukhaa actually emerge before the arising of the element of samadhi. Why then does the second jhaana formula mentions piiti and sukhaa after samadhi? We have shown that after the attainment of the first jhaana Gotama surveyed the entire mental state and concentrated on the strongest mental elements of the vitakka and vicaara. These two elements thus became objects of concentration (samaadhi) and were experienced again after the arising of the element of samadhi. Similarly Gotama while abiding in the second jhaana found out that the elements of piiti and sukhaa are more agitative than the other
p.128
mental elements, and consequently concentrated on these two elements. The role of piiti and sukhaa as objects of concentration is indicated by their placement after samadhi. But how is it that the vitakka and vicaara do not find mention as objects of concentration in the first jhaana formula? Compared to the pivotal role played by pleasant feelings (in this case piiti and sukhaa) in this system, the role played by the vitakka and vicaara is of lesser importance. This appears to be the reason why the vitakka and vicaara are not mentioned as objects of concentration in the first jhaana formula. The elimination of the vitakka and vicaara is presented as an accomplished fact in the second jhaana formula, though nothing is said about the process of elimination. In case of the feelings of piiti and sukhaa, on the other hand, not only their elimination as accomplished facts are noted (cf. piitiyaa viraagaa in the third jhaana formula, or sukhassa pahaanaa in the fourth jhaana formula) but also the process of elimination is indicated by pointing them out as objects of concentration. This makes the concept of jhaana quite explicit. The term jhaana not only notes the mental elements as they arise but also indicates those elements which later become objects of concentration. This concept of jhaana is in conformity with the meaning of the verbal root dhyaa or jhe (i.e. to think) out of which the terms dhyaana or jhaana were derived.
From different Suttas we know that Gotama was able to abide in the second jhaana for he was not influenced by the pleasant feeling (sukhaa vedanaa) inherent in this state. The problem is whether the sukhaa vedanaa in this case should be identified with piiti or sukhaa. Either of these two elements can be taken as a sukhaa vedanaa. Each of them can create an impression of less agitation and deeper peace seen against the background of the stronger agitation caused by the vitakka and vicaara. We have, however, to remember that piiti being more agitative than sukhaa succeeds in arresting the attention of the
p.129
meditator who consequently feels the relative peacefulness of piiti. Seen in the light of the Pa~ncattaya-sutta this means that Gotama did not mistake the comparative calmness of piiti as nibbaana, did not take delight in it, did not cling to it, and so he could abide in this state. Moreover, as we shall see, that during his stay in the second jhaana the element of piiti became the object of concentration, and he found the same piiti to be agitative and unpleasant; so he became preoccupied with the process of detachment from piiti. Thus he could remain uninfluenced by the pleasant feeling, and abide in the second jhaana.
We have already pointed out that Gotama while abiding in the second jhaana concentrated on the two elements of piiti and sukhaa. Consequently he found out that piiti was the more agitative of these two elements. He strove to get rid of it.
From the third jhaana formula we know that Gotama due to his detachment from piiti (piitiyaa viraagaa) could go beyond the second jhaana and gradually attain the third jhaana. On the basis of the Brahmajaala-sutta we can conclude that Gotama became averse to piiti for it was gross (olaarika). But wherein lies the grossness of piiti? We know that piiti is associated with strong physical sensations, and intense mental agitation (cetaso ubbilaavitattam). piiti causes great physical and mental agitation; it is, therefore, called gross.
As the agitative influence of piiti ran counter to his avowed goal of mental calmness, Gotama became free of its influence by developing aversion to it through adverse criticism, the contents of which must have dealt with piiti’s grossness as well as its contrariness to nibbaana. This we can surmise on the basis of the traditions recorded in the Brahmajaala-sutta and the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta.
p.130
The third jhaana formula states that Gotama
became detached from “piiti,” and this detachment generated a process that gradually led to the
appearance of different mental elements. Gotama
became upekkhako, sato (mindful) and sampajaano (properly knowing). Next he experienced happiness through the body (kaayena sukham
pa.tisamvedeti). All these elements contribute to
the constitution of the third jhaana. It is needless
to point out that the formula is not an exhaustive list of all the mental elements he
experienced in this state. It is a selective list of
mental elements the recording of which facilitates the practice and enunciation of this
system.
The first two jhaana formulas and even the larger Vatthupama-sutta, as shown before, are only selections from the mental elements which actually arise in sequence, the preceding element being directly responsible for the arising of the subsequent element. Being a selection such an account does not maintain the original sequence; but the compilers of the formulas were careful enough to record them in the same order they are actually experienced. We have seen in case of the second jhaana that such a record of experience not only notes the mental elements as they arise but also those elements which later become objects of concentration. The third jhaana formula also follows the same pattern.
The formula indicates that the new mental element to be recorded first is upekkhaa and that its appearance is due to the meditator’s detachment from piiti. The meditator is now called upekkhako. Upekkhaa results in the further development of the faculties of mindfulness and cognition. The formula also mentions sukhaa as an object of concentration, and points out that the experience of sukhaa is due to the body. In order to understand the message of the jhaana formula we have to determine first what is exactly meant by the technical term Upekkhaa in the present context.
p.131
The term upekkhaa is generally translated as “equanimity” or “indifference.” Upekkhako can be likewise translated as “equanimous” or “indifferent.” We have already seen in our discussion of sampasaadana that no technical term over and above the term nibbaana was used in the jhaana formulas to indicate mental calmness. Moreover the presence of the fully developed element of sukhaa which is the most agitative element in this state does not warrant the assumption that a meditator feels the third jhaana to be calm. We know that Gotama was acutely aware of sukhaa in the third jhaana (sukham patisamvedeti). How can Gotama be said to experience calmness when he is acutely aware of the agitation caused by sukhaa. The interpretation of “upekkhaa” as “equanimity” should be rejected.
The other translation of upekkhaa as “indifference” and of upekkhako as “indifferent” also cannot be accepted. Indifference means complete lack of interest in something or someone, and shows that one does not care at all for it. But the translators never took the trouble to indicate the object of such indifference. If we take Upekkhaa in the sense of indifference, we have to assume that in the third jhaana sukhaa is the only agitative element towards which it would be necessary to exercise indifference; or, to be more precise, we can, in the light of the Pa~ncattaya-sutta, assert that it would be necessary to be indifferent to the awareness of relative calmness generated by the comparatively less agitative element of sukhaa. This calmness may affect the mind, and create the illusion of nibbaana. But we know from the Mahaasaccaka-sutta that Gotama was not influenced by it. Even before Gotama the `Srama.nas and the Brahmins who had attained the fourth jhaana knew that the third jhaana does not represent the nibbanic calmness. As Gotama was following the system of four jhaanas one may reasonably assume that Gotama was familiar with the tradition that rejected the identification of the third jhaana with the nibbaana.
p.132
But the mere knowledge of this tradition is not enough to make one indifferent to the influence of the pleasant feeling. Moreover it was neither possible nor judicious to try to be indifferent to sukhaa. Sukha was the only agitative element in the third jhaana of which Gotama was acutely aware of (cf. kaayena sukham pa.tisamvedeti). He could see that sukhaa was agitative and its presence in the mind was an impediment to the realisation of nibbaana. The Buddha later pointed out that one should be afraid of vedanaa.[33] So instead of being indifferent to sukhaa Gotama would rather try hard to get rid of it. We will see later that Gotama actually gave up sukhaa. So the rendering of Upekkhaa as “indifference” cannot be accepted.
The term “upekkhaa” is a combination of the prefix “upa” and the noun “ikkhaa” (skt. iik.saa). All the scholars agree on this point. But the significance of the prefix “upa” and the noun iik.saa or ikkhaa has been misunderstood. One of the meanings of the prefix “upa” is end, extinction. Its use in this sense can be seen in case of words derived from the verbal root “ram” with the prefix “upa.” For example, “uparati” means desisting from enjoyment, cessation, stopping; again “uparata” means disengaged, ceased.[34] Moreover the word “uparama.na” has been used in the Abhidharmako`sa[35] in the sense of dying. Iik.saa or ikkhaa is derived from the verbal root “iik.s” or “ikkh” which can mean “to think” or “to perceive.” So the word upek.saa or upekkhaa can mean “without thought” or “without perception.” In the present article the term has been translated as “without thought,” for the early Chinese translation in the Aagama interprets the term as ch’u nien (除念) that is, “to give up thoughts.”[36] We have to accept this interpretation for in the system of four jhaanas the perception remains intact. But the mere
p.133
linguistic analysis of the term does not tell us about the contents of such thoughts. Both Paramaartha and Hsuan Chwan have rendered “upek.saa” in their translations of the Abhidharmako`sa as “she shou” (捨受)[37] which means “giving up vedanaa (feeling).” So “Upekkhaa” should mean “giving up the thoughts (of feeling).”
But in the third jhaana the feeling of sukhaa is still present, and the meditator is well aware of it. So the term Upekkhaa in the third jhaana should mean the absence of thoughts of only those feelings already surmounted. So Upekkhaa in this case should signify the absence of the thoughts of domanassa, dukkha and somanassa. This is the reason why “Upekkhaa” has been mentioned twice in the jhaana formulas, once in the expression “upekkhako” in the third jhaana formula, and another time in the phrase “upekkhaa-sati-paarisuddhi” in the fourth jhaana formula. The term Upekkhaa in the fourth jhaana includes the feeling of sukhaa and means without any thought of sukhaa. Our interpretation is supported by the tradition of the gradual disappearance of the agitative mental elements, for example, domanassa disappears at the time of attainment of the first jhaana while dukkha, somanassa, and sukhaa disappear at the time of attaining the second jhaana, third jhaana, and fourth jhaana respectively.[38] It is to be noted that “somanassa” is the same as “piiti.”[39]
The negative aspect of the term “Upekkhaa” is expressed by the use of the prefix “upa” in Sanskrit and Pali. In Chinese translations this is indicated by the use of the verbs “ch’u or she” (除，捨) meaning to exclude, to give up. Such a translation shows that the absence of thoughts is due to intentional act on the part of the meditator.
p.134
We have already stated that the detachment from piiti sets in motion a mental process which leads to the arising of different mental elements. Gotama first notices the element of Upekkhaa, i.e. the absence of thoughts about domanassa, dukkha and somanassa.
We have seen that piiti strongly agitates both body and mind. When Gotama became detached from piiti, he became free from the overwhelming influence of piiti. Consequently his body (and mind) became calmer. This relative calmness led to greater happiness and thus helped the development of the instruments of knowledge, and his ability of being mindful of an object proportionately increased. A meditator in this state is, therefore, called mindful (sato). As a result he has now acquired the ability to be perfectly aware of an object (sampajaano). The element of samadhi (concentration) is not mentioned by name here, but its presence in the mind can be ascertained due to the mention of sukhaa in the third jhaana formula.
The first jhaana formula read in the light of the Vatthupama-sutta and the Saama~n~naphala-sutta shows that physical tranquillity (passaddhi) increases due to the influence of piiti, and consequently one feels happy (sukhaa). The third jhaana, on the other hand, clearly implies that the physical tranquillity which causes happiness is due to the detachment from piiti, and the overcoming of its influence. Moreover sukhaa in the third jhaana is more developed than that in the first jhaana. Both these formulas have been recorded in numerous Suttas of the Nikaayas. It is obvious that neither the Buddha nor his disciples consider these two traditions contradictory. This apparent contradiction between the two jhaana formulas can be resolved if we remember that sukhaa is due to passaddhi (physical tranquillity) and not directly due to piiti. On the evidence of the Vatthupama-sutta we can hold that piiti is not
p.135
even directly causing passaddhi. Piiti is really creating relatively less physical agitation. It means that passaddhi, irrespective of its cause, will always cause happiness (sukhaa). Thus there is no real contradiction between these two traditions. Actually these two traditions can be shown to belong to two different stages of spiritual development and thus to refer to the different degrees of physical tranquillity and happiness. In case of the first jhaana Gotama due to the separation from kaama and painful mental elements (akusaladhammas) felt relieved and piiti arose. Piiti also agitates the body and mind, but compared to dukkha (pain) etc. it agitates in a much lesser degree. So Gotama felt to a certain extent physical tranquillity which generated happiness. This is the happiness mentioned in the first jhaana. But after attaining the spiritually advanced state of the second jhaana which is free from the stronger agitative elements of kaama and dukkha etc. Gotama must have been acutely aware of the strong physical sensations and the resultant mental agitation (cetaso ubbilaavitattam) caused by piiti. So Gotama generated aversion to piiti through adverse criticism. As he did not take delight in piiti, his mind became free from its agitative influence. Consequently his body became appreciably calmer and this resulted in greater happiness. This is the happiness mentioned in the third jhaana formula.
The presence of sukhaa in the mind presupposes the existence of all the other elements from pasaada to samadhi. Piiti is also there, though not exclusively mentioned in the third jhaana formula. But its functioning as an active element is greatly reduced due to the meditator’s detachment from it. We may hold that piiti, though regarded as a feeling, is not explicitly mentioned in this formula due to the following reasons: First, piiti has no influence on the mind of the meditator due to his detachment from it; and so does not play any important role in the third jhaana; secondly, the existence of piiti can be easily surmised.
p.136
On the basis of the Mahaasaccaka-sutta we know that Gotama could abide in the third jhaana for he was not influenced by the pleasant feeling (sukhaa vedanaa). In the first and second jhaanas the elements of vitakka-vicaara and piiti are more agitative than the pleasant feeling. So he had to concentrate on them in order to get rid of them, and the pleasant feeling could not affect his mind. But in the third jhaana there is no element that is stronger than the feeling of happiness (sukhaa) which is the same as the pleasant feeling mentioned in the Mahaasaccaka-sutta. So it is not possible for him to be preoccupied with some element other than sukhaa and thereby remain unaffected by sukhaa. Being the strongest element present in the mind sukhaa becomes the object of concentration and Gotama could remain unaffected by it only by adversely criticising it and thus generating aversion for it. This point will be discussed in detail in the next section.
It is evident from the fourth jhaana formula that Gotama gave up the mental element of sukhaa and attained the fourth jhaana. While abiding in the third jhaana Gotama surveyed all the mental elements, and found sukhaa to be most dominant. In this state sukhaa suffuses the body thoroughly so that no spot remains untouched.[40] We know that sukhaa is dependent on the physical tranquillity that also covers the whole body. The Brahmajaala-sutta points out that sukhaa is gross (olaarika), i.e. the meditator find this element to be agitative. How can sukhaa which is closely connected with the all pervasive physical tranquillity be regarded as agitative?
The Brahmajaala-sutta implies that sukhaa is considered gross because it is the “aabhoga” of mind. The term aabhoga is derived from the verbal root “bhuj” which means to bend or to enjoy. The
p.137
term aabhoga thus can mean either mental enjoyment or the bending (of mind).
In the present context the term aabhoga cannot mean enjoyment, for it would suggest that the mind is delighting in, and clinging to an object. This would cause an increase in mental agitation, and the meditator would not be able to abide in the third jhaana and would fall down to the second jhaana. But according to the jhaana formula Gotama was abiding in the third jhaana. So the term aabhoga should mean the bending of mind towards an object, paying attention to an object. Vasubandhu supports our conclusion. According to him aabhoga of mind means paying attention (manaskara`s cetaso aabhogo). But such mental activity would show that his mind was agitated. The term aabhogo indicates mental action which disturbs mental peace. Sukha is, therefore, gross. The Brahmajaala-sutta suggests that it is because of this grossness that Gotama gave up sukhaa.
This sutta, however, is not explicit about the method Gotama followed to give up sukhaa. On the basis of the Dvedhaavitakka-sutta we may surmise that he adversely criticised sukhaa constantly for its grossness, and became averse to it. As he aspired for nibbaana, we can reasonably suggest that he criticised the grossness of sukhaa for it was not conducive to the realisation of nibbaana which was utter calmness.
The thoughts of sukhaa ceased to arise in his mind due to this adverse criticism, and he attained the fourth jhaana.
The fourth jhaana formula states that due to the
giving up of sukhaa and dukkha, and due to the disappearance of somanassa and domanassa
even before (pubbeva), Gotama attained and abided in the fourth jhaana characterised by
the neither-painful-nor-happy feeling (adukkham-asukham) and the purification of
mindfulness due to Upekkhaa (upekkhaa-sati-paarisuddhi).
p.138
The expression “pubbeva” indicates that somanassa and domanassa disappeared even before the giving up of sukhaa and dukkha respectively. We know that somanassa is given up at the time of the attainment of the third jhaana. So the last act he performed while abiding in the third jhaana was the giving up of sukhaa only. Consequently this action led to the arising of a series of mental elements whose conventional name was the fourth jhaana. Only two of these elements find mention in the jhaana formula due to their novelty and importance, namely, the feeling of adukkham-asukham and Upekkhaa-sati- paarisuddhi.
The system of four jhaanas apparently follows the tradition of five types of feelings, namely, domanassa, dukkha, somanassa (=piiti), sukhaa and adukkham-asukham.[41] The presence of the feeling of adukkham-asukham indicates the absence of the other four feelings,[42] e.g. the absence of dukkha indicates the absence of domanassa while the absence of sukhaa signifies that of somanassa. The long list of the feelings absent from the mind has been uncharacteristically enumerated in the beginning of the formula. It is possible that the original formula only contained the phrase “sukhassa pahaanaa” (due to the giving up of sukhaa) to which the other feelings were added latter.
As the name adukkham-asukham suggests this feeling is free from the characteristics of dukkha and sukhaa. This feeling in itself should not be agitative. So far the question of feeling is concerned,
p.139
one cannot go beyond it. There is no other feeling which is subtler than this. The range of feeling ends with this feeling. It remains in higher states also. This feeling should be identical with the sukhaa vedanaa which Gotama experienced while abiding in the fourth jhaana.
The attainment of the feeling of adukkham-asukham shows that his mind has become free from the thoughts of dukkha and sukhaa. This, in its turn, indicates that his mind is also free of the thoughts of domanassa and somanassa. The term Upekkhaa in the expression “Upekkhaa-sati-paarisuddhi” suggests the absence of thoughts of all these feelings, but it specially indicates the absence of sukhaa. The agitations previously created by these feelings no longer disturb his mindfulness which thus becomes perfect. The mindfulness which has thus become properly purified due to Upekkhaa is indicated by the term Upekkhaa-sati-paarisuddhi, or the complete purification of mindfulness due to Upekkhaa.
We know that the elimination of an agitative mental element starts a chain reaction as a result of which a series of mental elements arise in sequence. This process comes to a natural end with the arising of the element of samadhi (concentration). If the jhaana formula mentions an object of concentration, it is always placed after samadhi. The fourth jhaana formula mentions the element of “Upekkhaa-sati-paarisuddhi” which should be placed after “ekodibhaava” and before “samadhi.” The feeling of adukkham-asukham has been mentioned before the expression of “Upekkhaa-sati-paarisuddhi”; this means it has been mentioned before “samadhi.” Thus the fourth jhaana formula notes only the experiencing of the feeling as it arises, but does not mention an object of concentration.
p.140
The Mahaasaccaka-sutta states that the pleasant feeling (sukhaa vedanaa) remained in the fourth jhaana without affecting the mind of Gotama. Why the feeling of adukkham-asukham is called sukhaa vedanaa? According to the Culavedalla-sutta[43] the feeling of adukkham-asukham is pleasant when there is knowledge of it, and painful if there is no knowledge of it. It appears that the statement that there is no knowledge of it means that the meditator has lost the feeling of adukkham-asukham and fallen back to the third jhaana which is characterised by sukhaa. Against the background of his previous experience of adukkham-asukham the feeling of sukhaa appears to be agitative and unpleasant. Consequently he adversely criticises sukhaa, gets rid of it, and again attains the fourth jhaana. In the Pa~ncattaya-sutta[44] we read that some recluse or brahmin enters upon and abides in the neither-painful-nor-happy feeling and thinks: “This is peaceful (santam), this is perfect (panitam) that I enter upon and abide in the neither-painful-nor-happy feeling”. When he thinks like this the feeling ceases in him.
With the cessation of neither-painful-nor-happy feeling the unworldly happiness (niraamisam sukham) arises in him, and with the cessation of unworldly happiness, neither-painful-nor-happy feeling arises in him. That the meditator thinks this feeling to be calm (santam) and perfect (panitam) shows that he mistook this feeling to be nibbaana. But Gotama was not affected by the relative calmness associated with this feeling, and so he could abide in the fourth jhaana.
Why was not Gotama affected by this feeling? We have pointed out that there is no question of adversely criticising and getting rid of it. Normally this feeling of adukkham-asukham cannot be the object of concentration, for it is not agitative at all.
p.141
If a meditator mistakes this state for nibbaana, this non-agitative feeling is replaced by the agitative feeling of sukhaa, and he falls down to the third jhaana Gotama did not make this mistake. The reason may be that immediately after attaining the fourth jhaana he became pre-occupied with the attainment of the vijjaas, and consequently the awareness of relative peacefulness could not affect his mind.
Here ends the traditional description of the fourth jhaana. We will see later that Gotama added an extra description of the same jhaana in order to emphasise certain other mental qualities which one also attains in this state. The significance of this description will be discussed later. At present we may make the following observations on the traditional system of four jhaanas.
We may draw attention to the following salient
features common to the four jhaanas in order to understand clearly how this system of
meditation functions:
1) Gotama was not practising this system in order to enjoy the pleasant feelings. He adversely criticised the pleasant feelings of piiti and sukhaa, and got rid of them. He was not affected by the pleasant effect of adukkham-asukham for he was paying attention to other objects.
2) The development of utter mental calmness was the ultimate goal but his immediate goal was to get rid of the agitative elements. But while pursuing the immediate goal he neither paid the slightest attention to the ultimate goal nor to the immediately higher mental state that would follow the elimination of the agitative element. Therefore the only intentional act of Gotama that is recorded in the jhaana formulas is the rejection of the agitative element. The meditative technique was that the mind would be fully occupied with the task in hand, viz. the elimination of the agitative element. This point is brought into
p.142
clear relief with reference to the cessation of perception and feeling in the Cuulavedalla-sutta.[45] Here the bhikkhunii Dhammadinnaa states that:
when a bhikkhu is attaining the cessation of perception and feeling, it does not occur to him: “I shall attain the cessation of perception and feeling,” or “I am attaining the cessation of perception and feeling,” or “I have attained the cessation of perception and feeling”; but rather his mind has previously developed in such a way that it leads him to that state.
3) His efforts were not directed towards the development of concentration (samaadhi) and mindfulness (sati). While practising the four jhaanas Gotama did not take a single step that directly led to the development of these mental elements. They got incidentally developed with the intentional gradual elimination of agitative mental elements and the resultant development of mental calmness.
4) None of the mental elements constituting a jhaana was intentionally brought into existence by the meditator. The only step he intentionally took was to eliminate an agitative element in the preceding mental state. Even the appearance of such elements which were the direct result of the elimination of an agitative element, was not intended. They are not there to fulfil any subjective expectation. To this extent the four jhaanas are objective.
5) While composing the jhaana formulas the Buddhists, like the Nibbaanavaadins, did not enumerate all the mental elements in sequence in the sense that the preceding element is the direct cause of the following element. They moreover did not record all the mental elements that were experienced in a jhanic state. They presented only a selection of such elements. Such a
p.143
selection only shows which elements arise before and which later.
6) All agitative elements such as vitakka-vicaara, piiti and sukhaa were treated as objects of concentration so that they can be adversely criticised, and the mind can be free from their thoughts.
7) Each jhanic state, except that of the fourth jhaana, in its origin, continuation and transformation for the better is indebted to three different factors. Its origin is due to the aversion to and elimination of the thoughts of the strongest agitative element in the preceding mental state. Its continuation is dependent on the time one takes to give up the thoughts of the strongest agitative mental element in the present mental state. Its transformation to a higher mental state is due to the elimination of the same agitative element in the present mental state. The mental state can also get transformed for the worse if the meditator develops clinging for a pleasant feeling; in this case he reverts to the preceding, lower mental state.
The reason for such transformations of a mental state is change in the degree of mental agitation. When one has aversion to a mental element, that element disappears, and the adverse criticism of that element naturally comes to an end. The mind being free from such disturbing influences naturally grows calmer. Consequently a higher mental state is attained. But if the meditator takes delight in and clings to an element, his mental agitation increases. He therefore, reverts to the preceding, lower mental state. So long the degree of mental agitation remains the same or within a certain limit, the meditator continues to remain in the same mental state.
8) An agitative, pleasant element causes downfall neither because of its agitative nature, nor because of its pleasantness; it causes downfall due to its association with calmness which creates the illusion of nibbaana in this world.
p.144
9) A pleasant element (sukhaa vedanaa) is pleasant and comparatively peaceful only so long it is less agitative than other elements in the jhaana. When with the disappearance of other stronger elements, it becomes the most agitative of the elements present in the mental state, and hence the object of concentration, it is found to be both agitative and unpleasant. For example, piiti is pleasant in the first jhaana and also as an arising element in the second jhaana, but later as an object of concentration in the same second jhaana it is felt to be agitative and unpleasant.
Immediately after recording the traditional
description of the fourth jhaana formula the different Suttas describe a mental state with
which Gotama acquired the three vijjaas. The
description runs as follows:
So evam samaahite citte parisuddhe pariyodaate ana^ngane vigatupakilese mudubhuute kammaniiye thite aane~njapatte pubbe-nivaasaanussati-j~naanaaya cittam abhininnaamesim.[46]
When the mind was thus (evam) concentrated, purified, rendered clean, without blemish and afflictions, workable, has become pliant, steady and immovable, he (i.e. Gotama) bent his mind for the knowledge based on recollection of past lives.
How was this mental state related to the fourth jhaana? The word “evam” in the beginning of the description of the mental state may indicate cause-effect relationship between them or it may signify the identity of the fourth jhaana with this mental state. In support of the first possibility we may point out that the description of this mental state does not include the feeling of adukkham-asukham or
p.145
any other feeling, but the traditional fourth jhaana formula, on the other hand, is characterized by the feeling of adukkham-asukham. Moreover, this additional mental state is not recorded in the formula followed by the Nibbaanavaadins who also attained the fourth jhaana. Finally, the expressions used and the concepts contained in the description of this mental state are not found in the traditional fourth jhaana formula. It thus appears that here we are dealing with a mental state different from the fourth jhaana.
But there is no evidence at all to show that one mental state follows from the other. There is no tradition that Gotama got rid of the feeling of adukkham-asukham or changed the mental state of the fourth jhaana in any other way, and consequently attained the additional mental state. This suggests that both the fourth jhaana formula and this additional description of a mental state refer to the same mental state which Gotama experienced when he was abiding in the fourth jhaana.
We may point out a number of facts which would show that this additional description of a mental state does not indicate a new mental state but refers to the fourth jhaana itself.
a) A new mental state arises if an element from the existing mental state disappears (vide four jhaana formulas) or a new mental element is added to it (e.g. the acquisition of the three vijjaas). And if a new mental state arises, it is described including either a feeling or vijjaa. But the additional mental state recorded immediately after the fourth jhaana does not fulfil any of these conditions. It neither states that a mental element has been given up nor does it mention the acquisition of a new mental element. It is clear that here we do not have a new mental state different from the fourth jhaana. The mental elements mentioned in this additional description should be regarded as belonging to the mental state of the fourth jhaana.
b) This conclusion is strengthened by the account of the Mahaasaccaka-sutta. This sutta describes all the mental states
p.146
from the first jhaana to the third vijjaa attained by Gotama, and states that each of these mental states included a pleasant feeling (sukhaa vedanaa) But the additional description of the mental state recorded just after the traditional fourth jhaana formula does not speak of a pleasant feeling. It is obvious that the sutta does not regard this state as a new mental state distinct from the fourth jhaana.
This conclusion is also borne out if we make a more thorough and critical comparison between the traditional fourth jhaana and the additional description of the mental state given immediately after the fourth jhaana. The term “parisuddhe” of the additional description refers to the same purified mindfulness as indicated by the phrase “upekkhaa-sati-paarisuddhi” of the jhaana formula. Again this mindfulness should be identical with the mindfulness referred to in the phrase “anuttaram upekkhaa-sati-paarisuddhim” of the Sekha-sutta.[47] For in both the cases this developed mindfulness comes into existence with the attainment of the fourth jhaana and before the acquisition of the three vijjaas. The other terms qualifying the mind, viz. Pariyodaate (clean), ana^ngane and vigatupakkilese (without blemish and defilement) only express the idea of mental purity more elaborately. Again the expression “mudubhuute” in the additional description indirectly refers to the element of Upekkhaa. The pliability of mind indicates that the meditator, if necessary, can move from one object to another freely. This is due to perfect “Upekkhaa” which frees the mind from liking and disliking. Moreover the element of concentration (samaadhi) though not explicitly mentioned in the jhaana formula, is certainly present in this mental state, for the sequence of the arising of different mental elements always ends with “samadhi.” The presence of the pleasant feeling in the jhaana formula also shows the presence of samadhi, for this feeling results in concentration.
p.147
These two descriptions, thus, refer to the same mental state attainable in the fourth jhaana. They represent only two different selections from a longer series of mental elements experienced by the meditator. This difference is due to the difference in emphasis. The Nibbaanavaadins wanted to emphasise the mental calmness and therefore did not elaborate the mental elements that serve as instruments of knowledge while Gotama in the additional formulation wanted to draw attention only to the instruments of knowledge necessary for the realisation of the three vijjaas.
The fourth jhaana not only came into existence
objectively but also was absolutely objective in its functioning. This is the reason why Gotama was able to realise the three types
of knowledges (vijjaa) and bodhi with the help of this mental state.
Let us try to understand why this mental state could function objectively. The awareness of “I” as an agent was still there, for Gotama had not yet achieved “bodhi.” But Gotama had now become free from the influence of all types of feelings. He freed himself from the feelings of domanassa, dukkha, piiti (=somanassa) and sukhaa and thereby attained the fourth jhaana. He remained uninfluenced by the feeling of adukkham-asukham, and so he could abide in the fourth jhaana. Consequently the awareness of “I” did not give rise to the attitudes of liking and disliking. The mind of Gotama was not tainted by any subjective reaction and was capable of making truly objective observation. In fact the mind in this state is incapable of distorting the reality of what is observed. The mind is only capable of seeing an object as it really is (yathaabhutam). This mental state is unique for it is ignorant of the unreality of “I,” and yet does not distort the objectivity of observation. Thus this mental state is ideally suitable for gaining truly objective knowledges, including “bodhi.” “Whilst part of what we perceive
p.148
comes through our senses from the object before us, another part (and it may be the larger part) always comes out of our mind” (William James, The Principles of Psychology). Gotama found out that the subjective part of our perception (i.e. what comes out of our own mind) is due to the influence of vedanaa (feeling). He also showed the way to be free from this influence. Consequently Gotama’s perception of an object was free from all subjective colourings and was thus completely objective. In this respect the observation made by a `srama.na while abiding in this state is superior to the result of any scientific observation which is inevitably and inextricably mixed up. Any scientific observation made by a scientist who is influenced by dukkha and sukhaa is bound to be mixed up with subjective reactions to what is observed. The scientific observation, thus, can never be truly objective.
It should be noted that the absence of influence of all feelings and the resultant non-clinging to any object are not due to knowledge but due to the constant cultivation of particular types of thoughts. The clinging was suppressed but not uprooted. The possibility that the clinging may surface again is still there.
The mental faculties in the fourth jhaana were
such that Gotama by being merely mindful could gain three types of true knowledge and “bodhi,” the absolutely
objective knowledge of the Conditioned.
The first knowledge was due to the recollection of his own past lives in all details (pubbenivaasaanussati-j~naana). This knowledge is not knowing what was not known before. It is a case of recollection, anussati i.e. regaining the knowledge of something that was forgotten.
The first vijjaa was gained with the mental state that was attained in the fourth jhaana. With the acquisition of the first vijjaa a new mental state comes into existence. This is clear from the account of the Mahaasaccaka-sutta. But the mental instruments of knowledge
p.149
must have remained fundamentally the same, for the stock description of the cognitive faculties of mind has been repeated verbatim while relating the acquisition of the second and third vijjaas.
The other two knowledges (vijjaa) deal with knowing what was not known to him before. The second knowledge was about the ever-recurring phenomenon of death and rebirth of living beings (cutupapaata-j~naanam) following the consequences of their actions. This knowledge he acquired directly through divine vision.
The first two knowledges brought Gotama face to face with the endless recurrence of the cycle of birth, death and rebirth that is the ineluctable destiny of the unenlightened beings. This spurred him on to discover the wisdom that would lead him out of this cycle.
The liberating wisdom which he gained through direct vision found its first expression with reference to aasava (defilement) which is responsible for our bondage in the sa.msaara. He had the truly objective knowledge (yathabhuutam) of the existence, origin, destruction, and the path leading to the destruction of aasavas.[48] The knowledge regarding aasava involves the law of paticca-samuppaada. This is bodhi or enlightenment that destroyed all attractions for an individual existence, and uprooted the illusory ‘I’ and all clingings.
After the attainment of the third vijjaa which assured Gotama of his final liberation, he declared thus:
When I knew and saw thus, my mind was liberated from the taint of sensual desire (kaamaasava), from the taints of being (bhavaasava) and the taint of ignorance (avijjaasava). I directly knew: “Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what has to be done has been done, there is no more coming to any state of being”. This was the third knowledge attained by me in the third watch of the night.
p.150
This knowledge is called born of bodhi. The declaration of Gotama is a testimony to the fact that the final liberation was attained. There is no more birth for Gotama. This shows that even if one has attained only bodhi, and not nibbaana in this world, he is still assured of nibbaana after the dissolution of the body.
The Mahaavedalla-sutta[49] states that an unshakeable deliverance of mind is attained after
the realisation of bodhi. Again it is only after the
attainment of bodhi that Gotama could really know that the nibbaana, the Unconditioned
really exists. With him nibbaana was no longer a
matter of faith. But the knowledge he had of the
existence of nibbaana and its characteristics was the result of logical deductions. Bodhi not only revealed the true nature of the Conditioned but also
showed that it was possible to go beyond and attain the nibbaana, the Unconditioned. Being unconditioned, the nibbaana must be permanent. As it is permanent, it must be changeless. Being changeless it is completely devoid of all actions and,
therefore, utterly calm. And what is calm should be
free from all clingings, for clinging causes agitation. All these logical conclusions are valid being based on absolutely
objective knowledge. Accordingly the Suttas describe
nibbaana as the cessation of all formative actions (sabba-sa^mkhaara-samatha) and as
supreme state of excellent peace (anuttaram santivarapadam).[50] It is because of such a characterisation of nibbaana that a
`srama.na or brahmin, whenever he attained a comparatively peaceful state, he mistook it
for nibbaana, and declared:
I am calm, I have attained nibbaana, I am without any attachment (santo'ham asmi, nibbuto'ham asmi, anupaadaano'ham asmi).[51]
p.151
Such a brahmin or `Srama.na was wrong, for, as the Buddha pointed out, such a statement made by a person who is without wisdom (bodhi) showed that he took delight in this state, clung to it, and, therefore, his mind was not perfectly calm. The Buddha was not objecting to the characterisation of nibbaana as calm and non-clinging. He was only pointing out that such a `sama.na or brahmin had not yet experienced these characteristics of nibbaana.
Gotama also attained this mental state but, as
already pointed out, remained unaffected by it. Instead
of trying to attain still calmer mental state and realise nibbaana, he strove for the
realisation of bodhi. The spiritual goal of Gotama
was nibbaana. So this striving for the realisation
of bodhi may appear to be enigmatic, especially because this step taken by Gotama did not
conform to the general spiritual practice of the `srama.nas who were not interested in
gaining knowledge; they were all for attaining an utterly peaceful mental state. Moreover the mind of one who has only realised “bodhi” is not utterly calm. It is not bereft of all formative actions (sa^nkhaara). Thus it appears Gotama revolutionised the spiritual world of the
`srama.nas by striving for and realising bodhi. What
is the reason for such an action?
In the Samyutta Nikaaya Gotama tells Susimaparibbaajaka that nibbaana is to be realised after “bodhi.” In the Rathaviniita-sutta[52] the same message has been given more clearly and elaborately. The Sutta mentions a series of spiritual achievements in an ascending order at the apex of which stands nibbaana, immediately preceded by the mental state of purification of knowledge and vision, i.e. bodhi. The sutta states that it is for the sake of nibbaana, and not for other spiritual achievements, that the bhikkhus follow the teaching of the Tathaagata. But nibbaana
p.152
cannot be experienced without first attaining bodhi and other spiritual states. Thus bodhi had to be attained first and only then the nibbaana in this world could be experienced. The implication of this passage should not be literally taken. What the text here actually means is that nibbaana cannot be realised without first attaining the mental state necessary for the realisation of bodhi, i.e. the mental state Gotama experienced in the fourth jhaana. We have to remember that all these passages speak of the nibbaana in this world, and not of the nibbaana which is unconditioned.
A person who has realized bodhi can
automatically attain nibbaana after the dissolution of the body. So why was nibbaana declared to be the ultimate spiritual goal to
be attained in this world? What does the realization of nibbaana-in-this-world precisely
mean? Or how can one attain this nibbaana?
All these problems can be solved if we pay closer attention to the nature of nibbaana. We have seen that all the characteristics attributed to nibbaana are logically deduced. The main characteristics of nibbaana, namely, the unconditionedness, and permanency can never be experienced by mind, for the mind is conditioned and impermanent. So these two characteristics never came to be associated with the nibbaana in this world.
The other characteristics such as absence of all activities, utter calmness and complete non-clinging follow from the two main characteristics, and they characterize the nibbaana-in-this-world. So the chief signs of the attainment of nibbaana-in-this-world are the cessation of all formative actions and the utter mental peacefulness. This mental state as we shall see is not the bodhi mind, but the cessation of perception and feeling which also stands for the cessation of all formative actions (sabba-sa^nkhaara-samatha). We can even say that as nibbaana marks the cessation of all sa^nkhaaras, it is perfectly calm. In bodhi all the sa^nkhaaras are not perfectly destroyed. Before
p.153
the attainment of bodhi the verbal sa^nkhaaras (vicaara and vitakka) and the bodily sa^nkhaaras (that is, the in-breathing and the out-breathing) are temporarily suppressed in the second jhaana and the fourth jhaana respectively. But in the state of sa~n~naa-vedayita-nirodha (cessation of perception and feeling) even the mental sa^nkhaaras of perception and feeling, are relatively absent from mind.
It is obvious that to attain such a state another object of meditation was necessary. Gotama now followed the pre-Buddhist system of formless meditations which deals with different types of perception. Gotama gradually went beyond the perceptions of form, infinite space, nothingness, infinite consciousness, and obtained the state of neither-perception-nor-non-perception. Then he made an end of perception in this state and attained the cessation of perception and feeling.
The cessation, however, does not mean complete cessation of perception. The Buddha uses the term in a relative sense. According to the Cuulasu~n~nataa-sutta [53] the sa~n~naa-vedayita-nirodha state is created, impermanent, and a source of disturbance. The meditator finds it disturbing, for there is still the perception of signless concentration of mind (animittaa cetosamaadhi) in this state. As there is perception and feeling, there should be also an awareness of “I.” Not to speak of this state which Gotama attained after the realisation of “bodhi,” even while abiding in the mental state of the fourth jhaana Gotama remained unaffected by any feeling or the awareness of “I.” Moreover the perception in this state is even more reduced than the perception in the neither-perception-nor-not-perception state. This is the calmest mental state that one can experience in this world. This state is the closest possible approximation to the nibbanic calmness. Therefore the experience of this state is considered to be identical with the experience of the nibbaana in this world.
p.154
There are several Suttas which confirm that the state of sa~n~naa-vedayita-nirodha is attained after the neither-perception-nor-not-perception. The Ariyapariyesanaa-sutta[54] confirms this tradition; moreover this Sutta also states that Gotama experienced the nibbaana in this world after the attainment of the neither-perception-nor-not-perception. It is obvious that the cessation of perception and feeling is the same as the nibbaana-in-this world. This is also proved by the description of the nibbaana-in-this-world as the cessation of all formations and as the state of utter peacefulness, for we know that the state of sa~n~naa-vedayita-nirodha also relatively marks the end of all formative actions and is, therefore, utterly calm. With the attainment of this state Gotama’s spiritual journey came to an end. He declared himself to be the Tathaagata, the Sammaasambuddha.
p.155
佛教傳統認為喬達摩是歷史上第一位在這個世界成佛的人，亦即如來。非佛教傳統間接證實這種說法，因為在他們的文獻中沒有一位佛教以外的老師被稱為「佛陀」。喬達摩之所以成佛，在於他了解了漏盡或苦滅的真實知識，那就是「菩提」。廣義來說，菩提可以說是處理有為法的客觀知識。了悟菩提使喬達摩確證涅槃的存在，那是無為的真相。從此，涅槃的存在，也不再僅僅是他個人的信仰。
喬達摩的成就顛覆了傳統沙門的精神世界。佛教之前的沙門，對於有為法的真相顯然並不是真的感興趣；他們汲汲於接近無為寂滅的心靈狀態。他們努力壓抑由貪或苦等不善念頭所引起的心靈擾動，但卻不設法根除這些惡念。
佛教之前的沙門主要修習兩種禪法：一種是努力達到不被感受影響的自在；另一種則是通過漸次消除形相與空間等知覺，最終達到滅除受與想的狀態。第一種禪法能導向菩提的覺悟，因為它完整保留了想，因此而有克服知障的可能空間；第二種禪法則為體驗現法涅槃所必要，因為它能逐步去除一切有為法的痕跡。
喬達摩是歷史上第一位同時修習這兩種禪法的人，他不僅改善這些禪法，並且還將它們結合為唯一的禪法，終而了悟最終的精神目標。本文嘗試對喬達摩成佛──如來──的過程作一詳細而嚴謹的探討。
關鍵詞：1. 四禪 2. 菩提 3. 現法涅槃
[1] Diigha Nikaaya (abbrev. D), I, pp.36-38. (PTS ed.)
[2] Majjhima Nikaaya (abbrev. M) I, pp.115-17. (Ed. V. Trenckner, PTS)
[3] M I, pp.21-23; pp.117; 247-49, etc.
[5] See, B. Mukherjee, “A pre-Buddhist Meditation System and its Early Modifications by Gotama the Bodhisattva,” Chung Hwa Buddhist Journal, July, 1995, p.457; for further reference, see note no.1.
[6] For the original version of the jhaana formulas, see, D.I, p.36; for the modified version of the same, see, M. I, pp.21, 117 etc.
[7] Diighanakha-sutta, M. I, pp.500-01; here the Buddha states that one can attain liberation if he is not attracted by the feelings; also see, the Pa~ncattaya-sutta. (M. II, p.237)
[8] For the English translation of the relevant passages of the Brahmajaala-sutta, see, Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, July, 1995, pp.460-63.
[9] For the meanings of abyaapaada and avihimsaa, see, Mukherjee, PDM, Pt.II, p.313, note no.7. (Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, 1996)
[10] M I, pp.62-63.
[11] See, the present article, pp.147-148.
[12] Though not expressly stated there are several clear indications in the traditions preserved that the Nibbaanavaadins were striving for mental calmness. This is evident from the fact that they rejected any mental element which found to be most agitative (olaarika). It is clear from the identification of any relatively calmer mental state with nibbaana. Moreover some non-Buddhist `srama.nas, and brahmins who attained the fourth jhaana expressed their appreciation for this mental state in the following way: “It is calm (santam), it is perfect (panitam), it is nibbaana.” As they felt this state to be very peaceful they identified it with nibbaana.
[13] See also, Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal (1996), pp.460, 468.
[14] Maagandiya-sutta, M I, pp. 504ff; Devadaha-sutta, M II, p.22.
[15] Dukkhas disappears at the time of attainment of the second jhaana, see, ~Sraavakabhuumi of Acarya Asa^nga, p.454 (Ed. Dr. K. Sukla, Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series, Vol. XIV, K. P. Jayaswal Institute, Patna, 1973.
[16] Sekha-sutta, M I. p.356. Here all the four jhaanas are called ‘adhicitta’.
[17] See the present article, p.114.
[18] For the translation of vitakka-vicaara, see, Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, 1995, p.470.
[19] Ibid.
[20] M II, p.235.
[21] See the Vatthupama-sutta account given later.
[22] I have followed the translation given in the Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha, p.119 (Bhikkhu Nanamoli & Bhikkhu Bodhi, Wisdom Publication, Boston, 1995) except that I have not accepted the translation of “aveccapasaada” as perfect confidence. We know that this account corresponds to the first jhaana. I have translated “aveccapasaada” of the first jhaana as initial confidence which develops into perfect confidence (sampasaadana) in the second jhaana.
[23] M I, p.303.
[24] D I, p.74.
[25] M I, pp.247-49.
[26] M II, p.235.
[27] Culatanhasamkhaya-sutta, M I, p.251.
[28] Vibha^nga, p.27.
[29] Ibid.
[30] The term “ekotiibhaava” occurs in ~Sraavakabhuumi, p.451. For a detailed analysis of the term, see Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal (1995) p.462, note no.10.
[31] ~Sraavakabhuumi, p.454.
[32] See also, ibid. p.453 where the sukhaa of the third jhaana is indicated to be most developed.
[33] D.I, p.40.
[34] See under ‘upa’ and ‘iksa’ in Sanskrit-English Dictionary by M. Monier Williams and V. S. Apte.
[35] 《阿毗達磨俱舍論本頌ソ研究──界品．根品．世間品──》, supervised by 福原亮嚴, 京都：永田文昌堂, 1977, p.200, Section 3, verse 15.
[36] Taisho Tripitaka, Vol.1, p.93b29.
[37] 《阿毗達磨俱舍論本頌ソ研究──界品．根品．世間品──》, supervised by 福原亮嚴, 京都：永田文昌堂, 1977, p.400, Section 3, verse 42.
[38] ~Sraavakabhuumi, p.454.
[39] Abhidharma-ko`sabhaa.sya (Ed. P. Pradhan, K. P. Jayaswal Research institute, Patna, 1967) p.42.
[40] D. I, p.75.
[41] A number of Suttas speak of only three types of feelings, e.g. Cuulavedalla-sutta etc. while others deal with five feelings. It appears that the Buddhists recognised five different feelings which they arranged into three categories, viz. dukkha, sukhaa, and adukkham-asukham. Domanassa belongs to the category of dukkha while somanassa to that of sukhaa.
[42] There can be only one feeling at a time; see, Diighanakha-sutta (M I, p.500).
[43] M I, p.303.
[44] M II, p.237.
[45] M I, p.301.
[46] For example Dvedhaavitakka-sutta, Bhayabherava-sutta etc.
[47] M I, p.358.
[48] M I, pp.175, 265 suggest that the enlightenment Gotama gained through direct vision found its first expression with reference to aasava.
[49] M I, p.298; I, p.167 etc.
[50] M II, pp.234-38.
[51] Samyutta Nikaaya II, pp.148-9.
[52] M I, pp.148-9.
[53] M III, p.107. I am indebted to Venerable Dhammadiipa for this reference.
[54] M I, pp.167-68.