by Keren Arbel
And how Ānanda, are the four establishing of mindfulness developed and cultivated so they fulfil the seven factors of awakening? Whenever, Ānanda, a bhikkhu dwells observing the body as a body,10 on that occasion, un-muddled mindfulness is established in that bhikkhu. Whenever, Ānanda, un-muddled mindfulness has been established in a bhikkhu, on that occasion, the awakening factor of mindfulness is aroused by the bhikkhu; on that occasion the bhikkhu develops the awakening factor of mindfulness; on that occasion, the awakening factor of mindfulness goes to fulfilment by development in the bhikkhu.11
The use of three different nouns in this context points at the process-oriented perspective of this description. Although the description of how each bojjhaṅga is developed is different (since it is a successive process in which each bojjhaṅga is founded upon the previous one), it is identical with regard to the processive nature of their fulfilment: each quality goes through the process of arousal and development until it is fulfilled and perfected. This is noteworthy for several reasons. It emphasizes the multilevel nature of the awakening factors, and in my view, it also emphasizes the multilevel nature of any other wholesome quality or unwholesome factors. By explicating the process, it shows that each quality can be developed on various levels of stability, strength, steadiness, breadth and depth.
The repeated description of each of the bojjhaṅgas as a quality that goes through arousal and development shows that each quality is developed gradually until it is fulfilled as a factor of awakening. What is particularly important is that the bojjhaṅga process formula accentuates that a quality becomes an ‘awakening factor’ (i.e., a bojjhaṅga) only when the practitioner develops it to a certain degree of stability and steadiness. It seems that the first level of development, when a quality is said to be established (upaṭṭhitā) is when a quality has been aroused and sustained in the mind to a certain extent. However, it is not yet steady, strong or continual enough to be called a ‘factor of awakening’ (bojjhaṅga). One can have moments of mindfulness, tranquillity or equanimity, but more effort and cultivation (bhāvanā) are needed for making a quality an ‘awakening factor’ – that is, stable, strong and continuous in the mind.12 By the continuous practice of ‘remembering’ (sati) to cultivate and sustain these wholesome qualities (and this is why ‘mindfulness’ is the foundation for the entire practice)13 one fulfils and perfects these wholesome qualities as ‘factors of awakening’. It should also be noted, however, that the preceding account indicates clearly that even when a quality becomes a bojjhaṅga, the practitioner still needs to develop it further until it is completely fulfilled or purified.
In light of this, I would suggest that the formulaic description of the jhānas delineates specifically the moment when a factor of awakening is established as one of the ‘awakening factors’. I believe that this observation can explain why mindfulness (sati) does not appear as one of the qualities of the first and second jhānas. This is an important point, since when we parallel the bojjhaṅga process formula with the attainment of the jhānas, the first question that comes to mind is why sati is not listed as one of the qualities of the first and second jhānas when it is obvious that one cannot attain the first jhāna without developing mindfulness first. We have seen in Chapter 2 that numerous suttas in the Nikāyas describes a gradual path to liberation; in this description, it is clear that one needs to develop mindfulness to a certain extent for attaining the first jhāna (and consequently the other three jhānas and liberation):14
Possessing this aggregates of noble virtue, and this noble restraint of the faculties, and possessing this noble mindfulness and full awareness, he resorts to a secluded resting place… Having thus abandoned these five hindrances, imperfections of the mind that weaken wisdom, quite secluded from kāma and unwholesome states, he enters upon and abides in the first jhāna.15
From this description of the gradual path to liberation, we can safely argue that before one abandons the hindrances and enters into the first jhāna, mindfulness16 and full awareness (sampajāna) have already been established to a high degree.17
Suppose we accept the suggestion that the formulaic description of the jhānas refers to the moment when a wholesome (kusala) quality is established as a ‘factor of awakening’ (and accompanied by other qualities that support its sustainment). Having accepted this supposition, it is plausible to argue that until the attainment of the third jhāna, sati (and upekkhā), are not yet bojjhaṅgas. This is why they are not mentioned as factors of the first two jhānas.18 This does not mean, however, that the practitioner did not develop mindfulness (and equanimity) or that mindfulness is not technically present in these attainments. It does mean, however, that it is yet to be called an awakening factor. I would further argue that only in the fourth and final jhāna are they fulfilled and perfected (pāripūri) as ones.
II Dhamma-vicaya
After mindfulness has been established, the bojjhaṅga process formula continues by explaining that
[d]welling thus mindfully, he discriminates that dhamma19 with wisdom, examines it, makes an investigation of it… on that occasion, the bhikkhu develops the awakening factor of discrimination of states (dhamma-vicaya).20
The awakening factor ‘discrimination of dhammas’21 (dhamma-vicaya) does not appear as such in the description of the jhānas. Furthermore, holding the view that the jhānas are in conflict with discrimination and wisdom, one might argue that this quality cannot be developed and sustained when one attains the jhānas. However, I would contend the opposite. I suggest that the quality of dhamma-vicaya is analogous in nature to the quality of viveka of the first jhāna. We have seen in Chapter 2 that the first meaning of viveka in Sanskrit is ‘discrimination’22 and that this interpretation of viveka is supported by SN V.301, which clearly states that the quality of viveka is developed by the practice of observing the four satipaṭṭhānas.23
It seems that the cultivation of the four satipaṭṭhānas develops the ability to discern the mechanism of mind and body, thereby arousing viveka. Thus viveka, just as dhamma-vicaya, seems to designate the ability to discern the true nature of phenomena. I therefore suggest that SN V.301 portrays the same process as the earlier account from the bojjhaṅga process formula. Both passages explain that when one develops mindfulness, the mind is able to discern and discriminate phenomena clearly, and both passages associate these two qualities with discursive discernment (vitakka, vicāra, pavicarati).24 Therefore, I will argue that the quality of viveka of the first jhāna (from which pīti and sukha are born) is similar to the quality of dhamma-vicaya. That is, both dhamma-vicaya and viveka are qualities conditioned by the previous development of mindfulness, and both qualities refer to some kind of wholesome discursive discernment of that which one experiences (dhamma).25
Furthermore, the preceding description of discriminating dhamma with wisdom (dhammaṃ paññāya pavicināti) might very well refer to a mind in which the hindrances (nīvaraṇas) are no longer present. The hindrances are identified time and again in the suttas as that which obstructs wisdom;26 they are described as ‘the makers of blindness, causing lack of vision, lack of knowledge, destroyers of wisdom, tending one to vexation, not conducive to [the attainment] of nibbāna’.27 Thus, it seems that the ability ‘to discern phenomenon with wisdom’ (dhammaṃ paññāya pavicināti)28 can veritably occur only when the five hindrances cease to arise and clear seeing is not obstructed.29 This seems to be possible only when one attains the jhānas – more accurately, when one dwells in the first jhāna, where the nīvaraṇas are no longer present, but wholesome discursive discernment is still operative.
III Viriya
According to the bojjhaṅga process formula, the dhamma-vicaya factor of awakening serves as a foundation and condition for the arising of the next awakening factor: the ‘awakening factor of energy’ (viriya-sambojjhaṅga). Similar to dhamma-vicaya, energy does not appear as one of the jhāna factors explicitly. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to maintain that, similar to dhamma-vicay
a, energy is aroused as a bojjhaṅga when one abandons the five hindrances (and more specifically ‘sloth and torpor’) while entering into the first jhāna. According to SN V.105–6, what prevents the hindrance ‘sloth and torpor’ (thina-middha) from arising is the cultivation of the element of arousal (ārambhadhātu), the element of endeavour (nikkhamadhātu) and the element of exertion (parakkamadhātu).30 Interestingly, SN V.104 explains that these same three ‘elements’ are the nutriment for the arising of the awakening factor of energy:
There are, bhikkhus, the element of arousal, the element of endeavour, the element of exertion: frequently giving attention to them is the nutriment for the arising of the un-arisen awakening factor of energy and for the fulfilment by development of the arisen awakening factor of energy.31
It ensues from these two suttas that the abandonment of ‘sloth and torpor’ means that one has developed the element of arousal, the element of endeavour and the element of exertion. When these elements are aroused, they act as a nutriment for the arising of viriya as an awakening factor (viriya-sambojjhaṅga). In other words, it is only when one enters and abides in the first jhāna, in which sloth and torpor have ceased, that one has aroused and perhaps even has fulfilled, the awakening factor of energy.
IV Pīti
The ‘bojjhaṅga process formula’ further explains that after the awakening factor of energy has been aroused, ‘spiritual joy’ (nirāmisa pīti) arises:
Whenever Ānanda, spiritual joy (pīti-nirāmisā) arises in a bhikkhu whose energy is aroused, on that occasion, the awakening factor of joy (pītisambojjhaṅga) is aroused by the bhikkhu.32
The important implication of this depiction is that the bojjhaṅga process formula makes it unequivocally clear that pīti-sambojjhaṅga is actually nirāmisa pīti. I would like to point out that nirāmisa pīti is a different designation for jhānic pīti.33 This identification, between the awakening factor pīti and the pīti of the first two jhānas, means that the awakening factor pīti can only arise and become fulfilled when one enters and abides in the first and second jhānas.
V Passadhi
When one has established the awakening factor of (spiritual) joy, the bojjhaṅga process formula explains that it serves as a foundation for the arousal of the awakening factor of tranquillity (passadhi-sambojjhaṅga):
For one whose mind is uplifted by [spiritual] joy, the body becomes tranquil and the mind becomes tranquil. Whenever, Ānanda, the body becomes tranquil and the mind becomes tranquil, in a bhikkhu whose mind is uplifted by [spiritual] joy, on that occasion, the awakening factor of tranquility is aroused.34
Since we have already established the identity between pīti-sambojjhaṅga and jhānic pīti, we can safely maintain that the awakening factor of tranquillity must arise in the first or second jhānas. It is therefore reasonable to suggest that the awakening factor of tranquillity might be a different appellation for the experience of ‘inner stillness’ (ajjhattaṃ sampasādanaṃ) in the attainment of the second jhāna. This parallelism, between passadhi-sambojjhaṅga and ajjhattaṃ sampasādanaṃ, can assist in clarifying the latter. This is significant, since we have no clear explanation in the Nikāyas as to the nature of ‘inner stillness’. If we identify the awakening factor passaddhi with ajjhattaṃ sampasādanaṃ, we can understand the latter as relating to stillness of both body and mind (kāyopi passambhati, cittampi passambhati). I would suggest that passadhi-sambojjhaṅga and ajjhattaṃ sampasādanaṃ refer to a general sense of well-being when the in-and-out breathing tranquillizes (kāyopi passambhati) conjointly with the tranquilization of the thinking and intending processes (cittampi passambhati)35 in the second jhāna.36 It also elucidates the relation between spiritual joy (jhānic pīti) and the resultant arising of mental and physical tranquillity or ‘inner stillness’ in the attainment of the second jhāna. It seems that the bojjhaṅga process formula, just as the jhāna model, describes a process in which the mind (and the body) is first energetic, uplifted and joyful but gradually becomes more contented, calm and balanced.
VI Samādhi
The bojjhaṅga process formula further explains how these qualities function as a condition for the arising of samādhi.37 At this point, I think it is safe to postulate that samādhi is aroused and fulfilled as an awakening factor when one attains the second jhāna. The bojjhaṅga process formula explains that
[F]or one whose body is tranquil and who [experiences] pleasure (sukhino) the mind has samādhi. Whenever, Ānanda, the mind has samādhi in a bhikkhu whose body is tranquil and who [experiences] pleasure, on that occasion, the awakening factor of samādhi is aroused by the bhikkhu.38
Again, this description appears tantamount to the experience of the second jhāna.39 Furthermore, since we have already established the identity between pītisambojjhaṅga and jhānic pīti, it is reasonable to argue that the experience of pleasure (sukhino) in this context, refers to ‘spiritual [bodily] pleasure’ (nirāmisa sukha), that is, jhānic sukha. What is interesting, however, is that although the bojjhaṅga process formula mentions the experience of sukha here, this factor is not listed as one of the bojjhaṅgas. This absence is especially odd since nirāmisa pīti is recognized as a bojjhaṅga. Nevertheless, I think there is a simple explanation for this. I would suggest that the bojjhaṅga list has to do with mental qualities rather than physical ones.40 Since jhānic sukha41 seems to refer to the experience of physical pleasure exclusively,42 it is not listed as one of the bojjhaṅgas. Yet, the bojjhaṅga process formula does not exclude this important and valuable factor from its account, and indicates that this type of pleasurable spiritual physical experience accompanies the development of the other factors of awakening. As to the reason why sukha is mentioned only in the account of samādhi, there is no apparent explanation for this. I think that even though the bojjhaṅga process formula mentions sukha only at this point of its analysis, it is possible to surmise that sukha is experienced before; in other words, it is experienced in conjunction with the experience of pīti-sambojjhaṅga.
Having said that, it is also unclear how body-mind tranquillity (passadhisambojjhaṅga) can be experienced together with (spiritual) bodily pleasure. Are they not contradictory? How can body-tranquillity be experienced with (spiritual) bodily pleasure? To the best of my knowledge, there is no plain answer to this question in the Nikāyas. My own interpretation to this ostensible problem is that the awakening factor of tranquillity (passadhi-sambojjhaṅga) pertains to the aggregate (khandha) of rūpa and to the aggregate of saṅkhāra, 43 while the experience of pleasure (sukhino), refers to the ‘feeling tone’ (vedanā) of the experience. If one follows this line of reasoning, it explains how body-mind tranquillity (passadhi-sambojjhaṅga) can be experienced together with (spiritual) bodily pleasure, as the formula states: when the process of breathing has been quieted down in the second jhāna, jointly with the fading away of discursive thinking, one experiences body-mind tranquillity; at the same time, the practitioner experiences pleasure with the body (sukha-vedanā). In other words, passadhi-sambojjhaṅga and sukha quite possibly refer to distinct processes according to Buddhist psychology.
VII Upekkhā
We have now arrived at the final account from the bojjhaṅga process formula, the description on the arousal of the last awakening factor: the upekkhā-sambojjhaṅga. The bojjhaṅga process formula concludes its depiction on the fulfilment of the seven factors of awakening by explaining that when the awakening factor of samādhi goes to fulfilment by development (most probably when one dwells in the second jhāna). On that occasion,
[H]e becomes one who observe closely and thoroughly44 the imperturbable mind. Whenever, Ānanda, a bhikkhu becomes one who observes closely and thoroughly the imperturbable mind, on that occasion, the upekkhā awakening factor is aroused by the bhikkhu; on that occasion the upekkhā awakening factor goes to fulfilment by development in the bhikkhu.45
Up to this point, we have seen a noticeable parallelism between the development of the first six
bojjhaṅgas and the attainment of the first and second jhānas. In light of this, I would argue that the final account from the bojjhaṅga process formula implies that the arousal of upekkhā, as a factor of awakening, occurs when one enters into the third jhāna, an attainment characterized by the full expression of sati, sampajāna and upekkhā.46 More particularly, I would suggest that this description/prescription expresses the way that one progresses from the second jhāna to the third, thereby illuminating the relation between these two jhāna- states. I will offer some preliminary reflections here, while a full discussion will be offered in the chapter on the third jhāna.
A close reading of the final account from the bojjhaṅga process formula reveals and elucidates a few things. First, it points out that the arousal of upekkhā as factor of awakening is conditioned by the previous fulfilment of samādhi as an awakening factor. The description/prescription points out that upekkhā is aroused as a bojjhaṅga when samādhi serves as a foundation for ‘becoming one who observes closely and thoroughly the imperturbable mind’ (samāhitaṃ cittaṃ sādhukaṃ ajjhupekkhitā hoti). This statement is interesting since it emphasizes that that which arouses upekkhā as a bojjhaṅga is the attention and close observation of a specific phenomenon: the ‘imperturbable mind’ (samāhitaṃ cittaṃ). For arousing upekkhā as a factor of awakening, one must turn one’s attention to the mind itself, characterized here as samāhitaṃ. This specification raises an obvious question: what is an ‘imperturbable mind’ and when does the mind become identified as samāhitaṃ according to Buddhist analysis?