Early Buddhist Meditation

by Keren Arbel

  It is no surprise that sense-based pleasures were considered an impediment to the spiritual life. We can even say that most ascetic-contemplative traditions fear sensual pleasures54 and conceive these pleasures as the foremost thing to be renounced by a true seeker of spiritual liberation.55 In fact, ascetic practices are a means to transcend sensual pleasures that are conceived as mundane.56 Some ascetic worldviews connect sensual pleasures with the body, which is viewed in its entirety as impure. A passage from the Nāradaparivrājaka Upaniṣad exemplifies this view:

  Let him abandon this impermanent dwelling place of the elements. It has beams of bones tied with tendons. It is plastered with flesh and blood and thatched skin. It is a foul-smelling, filled with feces and urine, and infested with old age and grief. Covered with dust and harassed by pain, it is the abode of disease.

  If a man finds joy in the body – a heap of flesh, blood, pus, feces, urine, tendons, marrow, and bones – that fool will find joy even in hell.57

  The desire for sensual pleasures and the body as the vehicle for enjoying these pleasures was regarded as the primary distraction to the spiritual seeker. In the Indian context, an underlying assumption was that painful feelings58 caused by tapas are the antidote to the desire for these pleasures. In this ascetic context, sense pleasures in general, no matter how subtle, were conceived as inappropriate to the spiritual life.59 A good example of this attitude was the disgust felt by the five ascetic companions of the unawakened Bodhisatta upon seeing him eat some rice porridge. This incident followed his realization that his severe ascetic practices did not lead him to awakening. That simple meal, indisputably not a feast, was interpreted by the five ascetics as the abandonment of the holy life and return to luxury by their companion.60

  In his book Tapta Mārga: Asceticism and Initiation in Vedic India, Walter O. Kaelber has pointed out that one of the connotations of the root tap, which can be translated as asceticism,61 is to suffer or feel pain.62 Some forms of tapas63 such as hunger, jealousy or anguish were not desirable in the Vedas since they are involuntary and are not self-generated for the purpose of knowledge or other religious aims. However, ‘pain’ (tapas) can also refer to self-generated pain.64 Self-imposed pain was considered in early Indian texts to ‘burn out’, ‘consume’ and ‘destroy’ evil forces and thereby purify. Kaelber asserts that the prevalent meaning of the word tapas in the Brāhmaṇas is self-imposed austerities:

  Just as Prajāpati exerted himself to become pure and cleanse himself of impurities, so at the Dīkṣā the sacrificer exerts himself through asceticism, through tapas, to become pure. Further, the dīkṣita, through his self-imposed ‘mortification’, his self-imposed suffering and pain, generates an inner heat, which is also referred to as tapas. 65

  Kaelber further points out that the early meaning of tapas, as pain experienced within the body, once undesirable, became religiously significant and necessary.66 The physical pain was viewed in the Brāhmaṇas and later on, as a way to be liberate – as pain that destroys evil, sin and impurities (e.g., Vasiṣṭha Dharma Śāstra 20, 47).67 The Jains understood karma as a physical matter that sticks to the soul and prevents it from being liberated.68 This notion led to the view that physical asceticism is the way to eliminate bad karma. In Jain philosophy, penance is the way to achieve the spiritual goal understood as (1) the elimination of karma, (2) the non-production of new karma69 and (3) omniscience and freedom of the soul after death. Enduring hardship was conceived of as a way to ‘prevent deviation from the spiritual path and wears of bound karma’.70 There are, according to the Tattvārtha Sūtra, twenty-two hardships such as hunger, thirst, cold heat, seat and posture for practicing austerities.71 There are six external austerities and six internal ones,72 which are aimed at eliminating karma. The difference between a hardship and austerities is that hardship is random while austerities are created by the soul to purify itself from impurities.73

  In the Buddha’s teaching, desire for sensual pleasures (kāma), or better put, desire for sense gratification (together with the pleasure attained dependent on this gratification) is also considered as a central impediment to attaining liberation.74 Kāma is enumerated in all the different lists of hindrances and obstacles. It is the first in the list of āsavas, the nīvaraṇas, the ogha (‘the floods’), the yoga (‘the bond’) and the anusayas (‘the latent tendencies’):

  Udāyin, the pleasure and joy that arises dependent on these five cords of sensual pleasure are called, sensual pleasure – a filthy pleasure, a coarse pleasure, an ignoble pleasure. I say of this kind of pleasure that it should not be pursued, that it should not be developed, that it should not be cultivated, that it should be feared.75

  We know from Gotama’s own spiritual quest that asceticism, with its severe bodily pain, did not lead him to awakening. Although the young Siddhattha Gotama practiced severe asceticism, his desire was not eradicated and liberation was not achieved. In light of this, we may ask, compared with other ascetic worldviews of his time, what was different about the Buddha’s notion of kāma and the way he prescribed to eradicate the basic tendency of mind to cling to sense pleasures? This, I believe, is answered quite directly in the famous story about how he suddenly remembered his attainment of the first jhāna when he was younger. This reflective memory, of a unique body-mind attainment, was a pivotal turning point in his spiritual quest. At this important moment, he realized what the path to awakening is (and what it is not):

  After the Bodhisatta had practiced severe asceticism, [he thought to himself], ‘Even with this severe and hard practice, I have not attained states beyond [ordinary] human [condition], and any distinction in insight and knowledge which fits the noble ones. Could there be a different path of awakening?’ Then this occurred to me: I realized that when my father the Sakyan was working, while I was sitting under the cool shade of the rose-apple tree, separated from sensual pleasures and unwholesome states, I entered and abided in the first jhāna, which is happiness and [bodily] pleasure born from viveka, accompanied with applied and sustained thought. Could that be the path of awakening? Then, following that memory, I realized, ‘This is the path of awakening.’ Then it occurred to me, ‘Why am I afraid of that pleasure, which is apart from sensual pleasures and unwholesome states?’ Then in occurred to me, ‘I am not afraid of that pleasure, which is apart from sensual pleasures and unwholesome states.’76

  This passage describes how Gotama realized that he should not fear all types of pleasure, as he did when he practiced tapas. He understood that there are pleasures (sukha) and joys (pīti) that lead one to awakening and do not perpetuate desire.77 Although the Buddha was quite adamant in explaining that kāma should be feared,78 since it is ‘the first army of Māra’,79 he has also stated time and again that another type of pleasure should not be feared. On the contrary, it should be cultivated: ‘I say of this kind of pleasure that it should be pursued, that it should be developed, that it should be cultivated, and that it should not be feared.’80

  In this statement, the Buddha makes an important distinction: there are various types of pleasure; some pleasures should be renounced and feared and some should be cultivated and seen as aids to purify the mind. This distinction points out that different types of pleasures (mental and physical) impact the mind in different ways. The path to awakening, according to the Buddha’s own spiritual journey, goes through these types of physical and mental pleasures, presumably having the power to transform and liberate the mind. This was Gotama’s breakthrough when he realized that the first jhāna leads the way to awakening (bodhi).81

  According to DN III.131–2, this unique understanding – that specific types of pleasure and joy lead to liberation – incited accusations that the followers of Gotama are addicted to a life of devotion to pleasure.82 However, the Buddha did not hesitate to announce that the end of the spiritual path will be gained through pleasure, not pain, meaning a specific kind of (bodily) pleasure and (mental) joy. The statement that the end of the spiritual path will be ga
ined through pleasure, not pain, needs to be further clarified and put into context. It is clear from the Buddha’s own story that his memory of the nature of the first jhāna was a reflective moment in which he understood what is the right path to liberation (contrary to his practices up to that point). In the context of Indian ascetic practices, this was no trivial realization. Other ascetic traditions considered any kind of pleasure as something that should be avoided, yet while performing painful practices (tapas),83 the Buddha discovered that pleasure – a specific kind of pleasure – is an important mental and physical factor for purifying and liberating the mind from attachment and clinging. There are pleasures and joys that operate as tools for purification. This, however, is not the ‘bliss of liberation’ (ānanda) described in various Indian spiritual texts (i.e., the fruit of liberation) but pleasure attained while one is still ‘walking the path.’ This realization was a counter understanding to ascetic worldviews about pleasure and pain in the spiritual path.

  In the Kandaraka Sutta of the MN, the Buddha enumerates four types of persons:

  A person who torments himself and pursues the practice of torturing himself.

  A person who torments others and pursues the practice of torturing others.

  A person who torments himself and pursues the practice of torturing himself and torments others and pursues the practice of torturing others.84

  A person who does not torment himself or pursue the practice of torturing himself and does not torment others or pursue the practice of torturing others.

  Only the first and fourth types are relevant to our discussion. The first refers to various types of ascetics, such as those who reject conventions, practice restriction on food and so on, while the fourth describes the one who practices the Buddhist path. The Buddha explains in regard to the fourth type that by the practice of sīla, restraining the impressions brought about by sense experience, the development of mindfulness and the abandonment of the hindrances, one attains the jhānas and liberation (the gradual path discussed above). The result is that

  [s]ince he torments neither himself nor others, he is here and now hunger-less, extinguished, and cooled, and he abides experiencing pleasure (sukha) having himself become holy.85

  While the fourth type is the one the Buddha extols, the first type can be identified mainly with the practice of the Nigaṇṭhas (and perhaps also the Ājīvikas). In the Nikāyas, the view of the Nigaṇṭhas is presented as that which advocated ‘severe, painful, racking, piercing feeling’ (opakkamikā dukkha tibbā kharā kaṭukā vedanā vedayanti) as the way to achieve liberation. The Cūḷadukkhakkhandha Sutta describes an encounter between the Buddha and a number of Nigaṇṭhas. To the Buddha’s question why they practice such painful practices, they reply with the teaching they were given by their teacher, Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta, probably a Jain teacher:

  Nigaṇṭhas, evil action was done by you in the past. Annihilate this by severe and hard practice. If you are restrained here and now in body, speech and mind, then, there is no formation of evil action in the future. That is, by annihilation of past actions by asceticism (tapasā), [and] by refraining from doing any new karma, there is no effect in the future. With no effect in the future, there is the destruction of karma. With the destruction of karma, there is the destruction of suffering…86

  The Buddha first criticizes the Nigaṇṭha’s blind acceptance of a doctrine which relies on information that cannot be verified by them, that is, information about their evil actions in previous existences and the misleading way to annihilate it. The Nigaṇṭhas reply to his criticism by explicating the rationale behind their view:

  Pleasure is not to be gained by pleasure; pleasure is to be gained by pain. For were pleasure to be gained through pleasure, then King Seniya Bimbisāra of Magadha would gain pleasure, since he abides in greater pleasure than the Venerable Gotama.87

  This statement indicates that the Nigaṇṭhas classified ‘pleasure’ (sukha) into only two types: first, the pleasure of the senses (kāma), which is the kind of pleasure that a wealthy king experiences quite frequently. This type of pleasure should be feared and avoided. The second type of pleasure is pleasure gained at the end of the spiritual path, the pleasure that the Buddha himself described as one of the characteristics of nibbāna. 88 For the Nigaṇṭhas, the only acceptable pleasure is the ‘ultimate pleasure’, the pleasure experienced at the end of the spiritual path. This is the only pleasure that is worthy of seeking, since in their view, there is no pleasure that can be conducive (or necessary) for attaining liberation. Moreover, for attaining this ‘ultimate pleasure’ – the pleasure of liberation – one must practice painful asceticism (tapas) as their statement indicates: ‘pleasure is to be gained by pain’. Thus, according to the doctrine of Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta, pain, brought about by tapas, is the way to annihilate past karma, which leads to the cessation of suffering.

  Interestingly, the same question about kamma and its ending is explained by Ānanda in a way that coincides with Buddhist understanding and differs from the aforementioned Nigaṇṭhas’ view. Ānanda explicates in AN I.220: (1) how to stop producing fresh kamma; (2) how to put an end to former kamma; and (3) how to realize nibbāna. He explains that the Buddha taught this can be done by training in morality, by attaining the four jhānas89 and by the destruction of the āsavas. From this explanation it appears that sīla is the way to stop producing fresh kamma. In other words, one can stop producing unwholesome kamma by acting wholesomely in body, speech and mind through the training in sīla. Note, however, that in Buddhist philosophy, the complete stopping of kamma is the domain of only awakened beings. That is, only Arahants and Buddhas do not produce kamma. Those on the path train and make an effort to produce only wholesome kamma (and stop producing unwholesome kamma). As to the four jhānas, it seems from Ānanda’s explanation, that one can make an end to former kamma by attaining these states.

  Former kamma, in the Buddhist context, means the underlying tendencies (anusaya). It seems that the jhānas are the way to eliminate these tendencies, which are impressions of former actions and intentions imbedded in the mind. These latent impressions condition future actions of body, speech and mind. Here, the Nikāyas imply a connection between the attainment of the jhānas and the uprooting of the underlying tendencies.90 While this is only implied in this context, it is stated explicitly elsewhere; I will return to this issue later on.

  Having made these observations, we are still left with two important questions. The first one is what kind of pleasure and happiness is conducive to nibbāna; the second is how does it work? The later will be address shortly, but the former has a straightforward answer given in the Pāsādika Sutta. In this sutta, the Buddha states that if wanderers of other sects say that the followers of Gotama are addicted to life of devotion to pleasure, one should answer them that there are four kinds of pleasure which are conducive to nibbāna. These are the four jhānas:91

  These [four jhānas] are the four kinds of life devoted to pleasure that are entirely conducive to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to tranquillity, to special knowledge, to full awakening, to nibbāna. 92

  Most importantly, however, is the Buddha’s statement that one needs ‘to know how to define pleasure and knowing that, one should pursue pleasure within oneself’.93 In this statement, there is a hidden criticism against other traditions that were not able to discern the differences among types of pleasure and joy correctly, with their different qualities and effects on the mind.94 Jhānic pīti and sukha are states of (mental) joy and (bodily) pleasure which aid the process of purification and liberation.95

  VI Jhānic sukha and pīti

  The Nikāyas enumerates three types of sukha and pīti: 96 (1) carnal (sāmisa) sukha and pīti, which are pleasure and happiness that arise in dependence of the five cords of sensual pleasures (kāma); (2) spiritual (nirāmisa) sukha and pīti, which are the pleasure and happiness experienced in the jhānas; and (3) sukha and pīti, which are more spiritual
than the spiritual (nirāmisā nirāmisataraṃ). The latter is explained in this way:

  When a bhikkhu whose taints are destroyed reviews his mind liberated from lust (rāga), hatred (dosa) and delusion (moha), there arises happiness. This is called happiness more spiritual than the spiritual.97

  This last type of joy and pleasure seems to refer to the same type of pleasure the Nigaṇṭhas accept as worthy. However, it is not relevant to our discussion, since it describes the happiness attained after liberation, when the liberated person reviews his mind and realizes that his mind is now liberated.98 What is relevant here are spiritual (nirāmisa) sukha and pīti, which are the pleasure and joy experienced in the jhānas and before one attains liberation.

  According to the Visuddhimagga, sukha is included in the vedanā khandha while pīti is included in the saṅkhāra khandha. 99 This interpretation is compatible with the Nikāyas, especially since ‘spiritual’ (nirāmisa) sukha is characterized in the third jhāna as ‘happiness experienced with the body’ (sukhañca kāyena paṭisaṃvedeti). This suggests that sukha is a physical pleasure while pīti is a mental one.

  In MN II.203–4 the Buddha uses a simile of a fire for describing two types of pīti. He asks the brahmin student Subha:

  Which of these two fires would have a better flame, colour and radiance – a fire that might burn in dependence on fuel, such as grass and woods, or a fire that might burn independent of fuel such as grass and wood?100

  Subha, of course, answers that the one which burns independent of fuel such as grass and wood is better. The Buddha then explains that pīti of the first two jhānas is like a fire that does not depend on fuel to burn, while pīti that depends on the five cords of sensual pleasures is like a fire that depends on fuel to burn (it seems reasonable to assume that this characterization applies to the two types of sukha as well). But what does it mean that jhānic pīti (and sukha) are not dependent on the five cords of sensual pleasures? What does it mean to not be dependent on sense experiences, while not being cut off from them? I believe that the preceding paragraph from the same sutta can elucidate this point. In this paragraph, the Buddha explains how the brahmin Pokkharasāti relates to the five cords of sensual pleasures (which produce the unwholesome pīti). According to the Buddha,