Nibbana tangent part 1 (Agnosticism)

by David Turell , Wednesday, May 15, 2024, 16:55 (115 days ago) @ xeno6696

1. "...and abides in the first jhana, which is accompanied by applied and sustained thought, with rapture and pleasure born of seclusion.

Matt: Rapture and pleasure seem mighty positive to me, but at a single stroke the jhana eliminates what for me is the greatest imaginable source of rapture and pleasure, which is love for others, including partner and children. Seclusion demands absolute focus on the self, which contradicts what I thought was another central precept of Buddhism: empathy and compassion for others.

To be direct, it isn't possible to reach the first jhana if you aren't engaging in empathy and compassion for others. Just, full stop, it's never going to happen. The most rapid way to the first Jhana is a series of meditations referred to as the "Divine Abodes," or "Brahmaviharas."

These are summarized here:

• Metta: goodwill – desire for the welfare and happiness of all beings (opposite: ill will).
  
• Karuna: compassion – empathy with the suffering of others and the desire to remove the suffering (opposite: cruelty).
  
• Mudita: appreciative joy – joy produced by others’ success and good fortune (opposite: envy, discontent, aversion).
  
• Upekkha: equanimity – impartiality towards living beings (opposite: attachment and resentment).

While I suspect Upekkha might give you heartburn, and answer part of your next question, I feel the issue you might have is less with equanimity and more with attachment. The best way I can explain this, is that attachment implies a notion of control. Approach friendships and your ties with others with the realization that you cannot control their actions and reactions. This is incredibly hard for some personalities. But it should be clear: First Jhana isn't open to you if you're not doing those other practices in that list. This is a non-exhaustive list by the way, several sects take it a step further. Tonglenin particular has been a life-changing practice for me, and it's not technically in my school. IN that practice you willingly imagine the suffering of others and taking it in to breathe back out peace and calmness. Two meditation sessions with that (I don't do it frequently, its exhausting) in particular set me on some radical new paths. I've done less than ten total.

But at any rate, when you see the word "attachment" in Buddhism, you should be thinking more along the lines of a love that does not control or make demands. Think of the Greek terms philia, storge, pragma, and philautia, and add the Roman agape. Stay far away from Mania. Attachment's strongest version is equivalent to this Greek version of love. Any feeling that creates a sense of possession ought to be discarded. "This is ME! That is MINE!" are OK with a healthy detachment. Buddhism has much more in common with Heraclitus than with Plato or Aristotle.

8. "It is possible here that by completely surmounting the base of nothingness, some bhikkhu enters upon and abides in the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception."

dhw: I see that the literal meaning of “bhikkhu” is “beggar”. All part of the journey to total focus on the self, even at the expense of others? And this is the last stage before entering “nothingness”, or as I said in my own brief summary and you now repeat:

Matt: Yes, the literal translation is correct, because monks are required to live purely off of the kindness of others. This is something that should be familiar to anyone who's studied Diogenes and the Cynics, but the name has come to represent "monk" in common parlance.

Part of the problem here, if I may make a suggestion, is that I think you find it difficult to see why someone would want to become a monk. There's half a billion Buddhists in the world, less than one-half of one-percent are monks. Buddhism and the monks in particular take a long-term view from the cosmic perspective. Maybe I'm not a monk in this life, no matter, doing the right things now will prepare me for an existence that--if I come back around to those practices--will continue my development. While we should always be wary of hierarchical thinking, this is what sits behind the general principle "if you don't like a teaching, drop it." IN my own experience, not liking a teaching is almost always an example of an unhealthy attachment.

Thanks again for teaching us. The goals ae the same for all of us, I hope.