This chapter is devoted to the expression “free from desires and discontent in regard to the world” and its implications. Since the freedom from desires and discontent envisaged in this final part of the “definition” points to the development of mental composure when practising satipaṭṭhāna, in this chapter I investigate the role of concentration in the context of insight meditation, and try to ascertain the degree of concentration needed for realization. Thereafter I examine the general contribution of concentration to the development of insight and their interrelatedness.
IV.1 FREEDOM FROM DESIRES AND DISCONTENT
The “definition” part of the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta concludes with the expression “free from desires and discontent in regard to the world”.1 According to the Nettippakaraṇa, to be “free from desires and discontent” represents the faculty of concentration.2 This suggestion finds support in some discourses, which slightly vary the “definition”, replacing “free from desires and discontent” with references to a concentrated mind or to experiencing happiness.3 These passages indicate that freedom from desires and discontent represents mental calm and contentment.
The commentaries go further and identify this part of the “definition” with the removal of the five hindrances.4 This is sometimes understood to imply that the five hindrances have to be removed prior to embarking on satipaṭṭhāna contemplation.5 Therefore this expression requires a detailed examination in order to see how far such a stipulation is justified.
The Pāli term rendered “free” is vineyya, from the verb vineti (to remove). Although vineyya is best translated as “having removed”, this does not necessarily imply that desires and discontent must be removed before undertaking the practice of satipaṭṭhāna; it can also mean that this activity takes place simultaneously with the practice.6
This way of understanding concurs with the general picture provided in the discourses. In a passage from the Aṅguttara Nikāya, for example, the practice of satipaṭṭhāna does not require, but rather results in, overcoming the hindrances.7 Similarly, according to a discourse in the Satipaṭṭhāna Saṃyutta, lack of skill in the practice of satipaṭṭhāna prevents the practitioner from developing concentration and overcoming mental defilements.8 This statement would be meaningless if the development of concentration and the absence of mental defilements were prerequisites for the practice of satipaṭṭhāna.
Desires (abhijjhā) and discontent (domanassa), the two mental qualities whose removal is stipulated in the “definition”, occur again in relation to the last four steps in the sixteen-step scheme for mindfulness of breathing described in the Ānāpānasati Sutta. According to the Buddha’s explanation, by this stage of practice freedom from desires and discontent has been achieved.9 This explanation suggests that the same was not yet the case for the previous twelve steps, which the Buddha nevertheless described as corresponding to the first three satipaṭṭhānas.10 The disappearance of discontent on its own occurs also in the “direct path” passage of the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta, where its removal is a goal of satipaṭṭhāna practice.11 All these passages clearly demonstrate that a complete “removal” of desires and discontent is not a prerequisite for satipaṭṭhāna, but comes about as a result of successful practice.12
The mental qualities to be removed are desires (abhijjhā) and discontent (domanassa). The commentaries identify these with the entire set of the five hindrances.13 As a matter of fact, in several discourses “desires” (abhijjhā) do replace the more usual sensual desire (kāmacchanda) as the first of the hindrances.14 It is difficult to understand, however, why discontent (domanassa) should correspond to the hindrance of aversion (byāpāda). In the discourses, discontent (domanassa) stands for any kind of mental dejection, which would not necessarily be related to aversion, and certainly not be synonymous with it.15 Besides, even if one were to accept the questionable equating of discontent with aversion, one would still have to account for the remaining three hindrances.16
If it really were essential to remove the five hindrances before undertaking the practice of satipaṭṭhāna, several of the meditation practices described in the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta would be rendered superfluous. These are the contemplation of unwholesome feelings and of unwholesome states of mind (worldly feelings, mind affected by lust or anger), and in particular awareness of the presence of just these five hindrances as the first contemplation of dhammas. These satipaṭṭhāna instructions clearly suggest that unwholesome states of mind, whether they be desires, discontent, or any of the hindrances, need not prevent one from practising satipaṭṭhāna, since they can profitably be turned into objects of mindful contemplation.
In the light of these considerations, it seems quite probable that the Buddha did not envisage the removal of the five hindrances as a necessary precondition for the practice of satipaṭṭhāna. In fact, if he intended to stipulate their removal as a requirement for undertaking satipaṭṭhāna, one might wonder why he did not explicitly mention the hindrances, as he invariably did when describing the development of absorption (jhāna).
The two mental qualities of desires and discontent, which the Buddha did mention in the satipaṭṭhāna “definition”, often occur in the discourses in relation to sense-restraint, a stage in the gradual path scheme prior to formal meditation.17 At this stage, the meditator guards the sense doors in order to prevent sense impressions from leading to desires and discontent. Judging from these contexts, the expression “desires and discontent” refers in a general way to “likes” and “dislikes” in regard to what has been perceived.
According to the presentation in the Ānāpānasati Sutta, the absence of such desires and discontent constitutes an important factor in carrying out the comparatively subtle and sophisticated meditations listed for contemplation of dhammas. This relates the absence of desires and discontent to an advanced stage of satipaṭṭhāna. Thus, vineyya as the completed action of “having removed” desires and discontent represents more advanced levels of satipaṭṭhāna. The discourses often refer to such advanced stages of satipaṭṭhāna contemplation as “well-established” (supatiṭṭhita).18 At these more advanced stages of satipaṭṭhāna, impartial awareness is so firmly established (supatiṭṭhita) that one is effortlessly able to maintain dispassionate observation, without reacting with desires and discontent.
Conversely, vineyya as a simultaneous action, as the act of “removing” taking place in the present, indicates a purpose of the initial stages of satipaṭṭhāna practice. During these initial stages the task is to build up a degree of inner equipoise within which desires and discontent are held at bay. These initial stages of satipaṭṭhāna parallel sense-restraint, which combines bare sati with deliberate effort in order to avoid or counterbalance desires and discontent. Although sense-restraint precedes proper meditation practice in the gradual path scheme, this does not imply that sense-restraint is completed at an exact point in time, only after which one moves on to formal practice.19 In actual practice the two overlap to a considerable degree, so that sense-restraint can be considered part of satipaṭṭhāna practice, particularly at those stages when desires and discontent have not yet been completely removed.
Although the initial stages of satipaṭṭhāna practice may not require the prior establishment of a high level of concentration, or the complete removal of unwholesome states of mind, these are necessary for the advanced stages of the practice that are to lead up to realization. This necessity will occupy me during most of the remainder of this chapter, in which I will investigate in more detail the relationship of concentration to the progress towards realization. As a preparation for this investigation, I will first attempt to clarify the implications of the relevant terms: concentration (samādhi), right concentration (sammā samādhi), and absorption (jhāna).
IV.2 CONCENTRATION, RIGHT CONCENTRATION, AND ABSORPTION
The noun samādhi is related to the verb samādahati, “to put together” or “to collect”, such as when one collects wood to kindle a fire.20 Samādhi thus stands for “collecting” oneself, in the sense of composure or unification of the mind.21
The discourses use the term “concentration” (samādhi) in a surprisingly broad manner, relating it to walking meditation, for example, or to observing the arising and passing away of feelings and cognitions, or to contemplating the arising and passing away of the five aggregates.22 In a passage from the Aṅguttara Nikāya, even the four satipaṭṭhānas are treated as a form of concentration.23 These occurrences demonstrate that, as used in the discourses, the term “concentration” (samādhi) is not restricted to the development of calm (samatha) only, but can also refer to the realm of insight meditation (vipassanā).
Turning to “right concentration” (sammā samādhi), here one finds time and again that the discourses equate right concentration with the four absorptions (jhānas).24 This is of considerable importance, since “right” concentration is a prerequisite for awakening. Taking this definition literally, the development of “right” concentration requires the ability to attain all four absorptions. However, several discourses allow for full awakening based “only” on the ability to attain the first absorption.25 This suggests that even the first absorption may be sufficient, in terms of concentrative ability, to enable the breakthrough to full awakening.26
Interestingly, in the Mahācattārīsaka Sutta and several other discourses another definition of right concentration can be found that does not mention the absorptions at all.27 The importance of the Mahācattārīsaka Sutta to the present discussion is further highlighted in the preamble to this discourse, which states the topic to be a teaching on right concentration.28 The definition of right concentration given here speaks of unification of the mind (cittassekaggatā) in interdependence with the other seven path factors.29 That is, in order for unification of the mind to become “right” concentration it needs to be contextualized within the noble eightfold path scheme.30 Definitions of right concentration that do not mention absorption attainment can also be found in the Abhidhamma and the commentaries.31
Thus the decisive factor that qualifies concentration as “right” is not just a question of the depth of concentration achieved, but is concerned with the purpose for which concentration is employed. In particular, the presence of the path factor right view is indispensable.32 By way of contrast, the Buddha’s former teachers, Āḷāra Kālāma and Uddaka Rāmaputta, despite their deep concentration attainments, were not endowed with “right” concentration because of the absence of right view.33 This goes to show that the ability to attain absorption in itself does not yet constitute the fulfilment of the path factor of right concentration.
A similar nuance underlies the qualification sammā, “right”, which literally means “togetherness”, or “to be connected in one”.34 Thus to speak of the four absorptions or of unification of the mind as “right” concentration does not simply mean that these are “right” and all else is “wrong”, but points to the need to incorporate the development of concentration into the noble eightfold path.
Such a stipulation is not without practical relevance, since although the experience of absorption is a powerful tool to diminish craving and attachment in regard to the five senses, it all too easily lends itself to stimulating craving for and attachment to these sublime “mind door” experiences. But only concentration untainted by craving can act as a full-fledged path factor of the noble eightfold path leading to the eradication of dukkha. It is this quality, and not just the depth of concentration achieved, that turns a concentrative attainment into right concentration.
To sum up: to speak of “right” concentration is not simply a question of being able to attain absorption, since the decisive criterion for describing concentration as “right” is whether it is developed in conjunction with the other factors of the noble eightfold path.
The word jhāna (absorption) is derived from the verb jhāyati “to meditate”.35 Although jhāna usually refers to the attainment of deep absorption, the word occasionally retains its original meaning of meditation. The Gopakamoggallāna Sutta, for example, mentions a form of jhāna in which the hindrances still obsess the mind.36 Such “jhāna” does not qualify as a meditative absorption, since it is the absence of the hindrances that characterizes true absorption.
In order to assess the practical implications of such a true state of absorption, a brief examination of the first absorption is required at this point. The problem with understanding the first absorption is that two of its mental factors, initial mental application (vitakka) and sustained mental application (vicāra),37 have been differently interpreted. As vitakka, initial mental application, is etymologically related to takka, which denotes thought and logical reasoning, several scholars conclude that conceptual thought continues in the first stage of absorption.38 Some discourses appear at first sight to support this, since they refer to the second absorption as the “cessation of wholesome intentions”, or as a state of “noble silence”.39
This point is of considerable relevance to an understanding of the nature of absorption. The issue at stake, simply stated, is whether the first absorption is a deep state of concentration, achieved only after a prolonged period of practice and seclusion, or a stage of relaxed happy reflection within easy reach of anyone and without much need for meditative proficiency.
The latter assumption stands in contradiction to the commentarial presentation, which describes in detail the stages of development prior to absorption.40 These sources indicate that to attain the first absorption a considerable amount of meditative development is required. Although references to this preliminary development appear only obliquely in the discourses, in one instance at least, the Upakkilesa Sutta, the Buddha gave a detailed account of his own struggle to attain the first absorption.41 This passage leaves no doubt that the Buddha himself encountered considerable difficulty when he attempted to attain the first absorption, even though in his early youth he had already once experienced it.42
The Upakkilesa Sutta is addressed to Anuruddha and a group of monks who were evidently in similar difficulties. On another occasion the Buddha also had to assist Moggallāna to attain the first absorption.43 It is noteworthy that Anuruddha and Moggallāna, who both later excelled all other disciples with their concentrative powers,44 needed the Buddha’s personal intervention to attain “merely” the first absorption. These examples suggest that the attainment of the first absorption requires a considerable degree of meditative proficiency.
According to the discourses, one who has entered the first absorption is no longer able to speak.45 This would not apply if the first absorption were merely a state of calm mental reflection. Not only speech, but also hearing does not occur during the deeper stages of absorption; in fact, sound is a major obstacle to attaining the first absorption.46 The experience of the first absorption is an “unworldly” experience;47 it constitutes another world in the psychological and the cosmological sense.48 To attain the first absorption is to reach a “superbly extraordinary state”.49 Already the first absorption “blindfolds” Māra, since on entering this state one goes beyond the range of Māra’s vision.50
These passages support an understanding of the first absorption as a deeply absorbed state of mind, beyond mere reflection and conceptual thought. It is therefore reasonable to suppose that, as absorption-factors, initial mental application (vitakka) and sustained mental application (vicāra) do not imply full-fledged thinking activity. Rather, they refer to the initial and sustained application of attention. Such application of attention can also take place in the domain of thought or verbal communication, when initial mental application directs the mind towards what is to be thought or said, while sustained mental application maintains the coherence of a particular sequence of thoughts or words. In the context of absorption, however, this same activity is nothing more than an intentional deployment of attention, directed towards the object of concentration.
To translate vitakka as “initial mental application” finds support in the Mahācattārīsaka Sutta, which includes “application of the mind” (cetaso abhiniropanā) in a list of synonyms for “right thought” along with vitakka.51 To understand vitakka as initial application of the mind can moreover claim support from the Abhidhamma and the commentaries, and from numerous modern meditation teachers and scholars.52
This way of understanding can also be applied to the above-mentioned passages, which at first sight seemed to suggest that conceptual thought continues in the first stage of absorption, since they spoke of the “cessation of wholesome intentions” on attaining the second absorption, a state of “noble silence”. Although initial mental application as a factor of the first absorption is different from discursive thought, initial mental application is nonetheless in this context a kind of “intention” and thereby involves a very subtle degree of deliberate mental activity. Only on entering the second absorption, when this last vestige of mental activity is abandoned and concentration has become fully stable,53 does the mind reach a state of complete inner stillness (“noble silence”), leaving behind even these subtle “wholesome intentions”.
Based on the passages considered so far, it seems reasonable to suppose that “absorption” (jhāna) refers to profound experiences of deep concentration achieved after having developed a considerable degree of meditative proficiency.
IV.3 ABSORPTION AND REALIZATION
Countless discourses recommend the development of concentration as an essential factor for “knowing things as they really are”.54 Concentration is a requirement for full awakening,55 and this concentration has to be “right” concentration.56 These specifications recommend absorption concentration as a requisite for full awakening. However, the question might be asked if the same is also required for stream-entry. Although, owing to the powerful impact of experiencing Nibbāna at stream-entry, the concentrative unification of one’s mind (cittassekaggatā) will momentarily reach a level comparable to absorption, how far does this require the previous development of absorption with a calmness object of meditation?57
The qualities listed in the discourses as essential for the realization of stream-entry do not stipulate the ability to attain absorption.58 Nor are such abilities mentioned in the descriptions of the qualities that are characteristic of a stream-enterer subsequent to realization.59
According to the discourses, what is a necessary condition for being able to gain stream-entry is a state of mind completely free from the five hindrances.60 Although a convenient way to remove the hindrances is the development of absorption, this is not the only way to do so. According to a discourse in the Itivuttaka, the hindrances can also be removed and the mind become concentrated even during walking meditation, a posture not suitable for attaining absorption.61 In fact, another passage shows that the hindrances can be temporarily absent even outside the context of formal meditation, such as when one is listening to the Dhamma.62
This alternative is corroborated by a fair number of the attainments of stream-entry recorded in the discourses where the person in question might not even have meditated regularly in this life, much less be able to attain absorption.63 Yet these reports invariably mention the removal of the hindrances previous to the arising of insight.64 In all these instances, the hindrances were removed as a result of attentively listening to the gradual instructions given by the Buddha.
In fact, a substantial number of well-known modern meditation teachers base their teachings on the dispensability of absorption abilities for the realization of stream-entry.65 According to them, for the mind to become momentarily “absorbed” in the experience of Nibbāna at stream-entry, the ability to attain mundane absorption is not a necessary requirement.
The issue at question becomes even clearer when the next stage of awakening is considered, that of once-returning. Once-returners are so called because they will be reborn only once again in “this world” (i.e. the kāmaloka).66 On the other hand, those who have developed the ability to attain absorption at will, and have not lost this ability, are not going to return to “this world” in their next life.67 They will be reborn in a higher heavenly sphere (i.e. the rūpaloka or the arūpaloka). This certainly does not imply that a stream-enterer or a once-returner cannot have absorption attainments. But if they were all absorption attainers, the very concept of a “once-returner” would be superfluous, since not a single once-returner would ever return to “this world”.
According to the discourses, the difference between the realizations of “once-returning” and “non-returning” is related to differing levels of concentrative ability. Several passages point out that the once-returner, in contrast to the non-returner, has not yet fulfilled the development of concentration.68 Judging from this, the attainment of absorption might be of relevance for the realization of non-returning. In fact, several discourses relate progress towards the higher two stages of the path, non-returning and arahantship, to having had the experience of the first or higher absorptions.69 The reason for this could be that the insightful contemplation of meditative absorption fulfils an important role in overcoming and completely eradicating the last traces of desire, and thereby facilitates the breakthrough to non-returning or full awakening.70
The concluding passage of the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta, the “prediction”, appears at first sight to contradict this, since it predicts the realization of full awakening or non-returning for successful satipaṭṭhāna practice without making any additional stipulations.71 This could be taken to imply that absorption abilities can be dispensed with even for the higher stages of awakening. However, such assumptions need to be weighed against other evidence in the discourses, where the need for at least the first absorption is clearly and explicitly stated.72 Although absorption abilities are not directly mentioned in the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta, the general picture provided by the discourses suggests that the ability to attain at least the first absorption is required for the higher two stages of awakening. Otherwise it would be difficult to understand why the Buddha mentioned absorption in the standard expositions of the noble eightfold path leading to full awakening.
When considering the concluding passage of the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta, one needs to take into account that this passage is concerned with the fruits of the practice, not with the need for a particular level of concentration as a prerequisite for realization. The fact that it mentions only the higher two fruits of realization highlights the potential of proper practice. The same holds true for a group of twenty discourses in the Bojjhaṅga Saṃyutta, which relate a broad range of meditation practices to these two higher realizations.73 These instances, too, do not bear any relation to the presence or absence of absorption abilities, but rather call attention to the potential of the respective meditation practices. Moreover, the Madhyama Āgama and the Ekottara Āgama both mention absorption attainment as part of their expositions on satipaṭṭhāna.74 This suggests that for satipaṭṭhāna to unfold its full potential of leading to non-returning or full awakening, the development of absorption is required.
Another term relevant to the present topic is “purification of mind” (cittavisuddhi). This expression occurs in the Rathavinīta Sutta, which enumerates a series of seven successive stages of purification.75 The discourse compares each stage of purification to a single chariot in a relay of chariots connecting two locations. In this sequence, purification of mind occupies the second position between the preceding purification of ethical conduct and the subsequent purification of view. The fact that purification of mind precedes purification of view is sometimes taken to imply that absorption is a necessary basis for realization.76
In this discourse, however, the question leading to the chariot simile was not at all concerned with the conditions necessary for realization. Rather, the topic discussed in the Rathavinīta Sutta was the aim of living the life of a monk or nun in the early Buddhist monastic community. The point was that each purification, though a necessary step on the path, falls short of the final goal. To illustrate this, the chariot simile was introduced. The need to move beyond different stages of purification in order to reach the final goal is in fact a recurrent theme in the discourses.77
Although the chariot simile in the Rathavinīta Sutta does imply a conditional relationship between the various stages mentioned, to take this as stipulating that absorption must be attained before turning to the development of insight pushes this simile too far. Such a literal interpretation needs to regard the establishment of ethical conduct, concentration, and wisdom as a matter of strict linear sequence, whereas in practical reality these three have a symbiotic character, each enhancing and supporting the other. This is illustrated in the Soṇadaṇḍa Sutta, which compares the mutual interrelatedness of ethical conduct and wisdom to two hands washing each other.78
Besides, according to two discourses in the Aṅguttara Nikāya it is impossible to purify concentration (viz. purification of the mind) without having first purified right view (viz. purification of view).79 This statement proposes exactly the reverse sequence to the Rathavinīta Sutta, where purification of the mind preceded purification of view.
On further perusing the discourses one finds that they depict a variety of approaches to final realization. Two passages in the Aṅguttara Nikāya, for example, describe a practitioner who is able to gain deep wisdom, though lacking proficiency in concentration.80 Another discourse in the same Nikāya speaks of two alternative approaches to full realization: the pleasant approach by way of absorption, and the much less pleasant approach by way of contemplating the repulsiveness of the body.81 In addition, the Yuganaddha Sutta (in the same Aṅguttara Nikāya) states that realization can be gained by developing either concentration or insight first and then developing the other, or both can be developed together.82 This discourse clearly shows that although some practitioners will build up concentration first and then turn to insight, others can follow the reverse procedure. It would do little justice to these passages if one were to limit the approach to realization to only one of these sequences, presuming that the development of concentration invariably has to precede the development of insight.
IV.4 THE CONTRIBUTION OF ABSORPTION TO THE PROGRESS OF INSIGHT
Nevertheless, in many discourses the Buddha pointed out that the cultivation of absorption is particularly conducive to realization.83 The development of deep concentration leads to a high degree of mastery over the mind.84 Not only does absorption attainment entail the temporary removal of the hindrances, it also makes it much more difficult for them to invade the mind on later occasions.85 On emerging from deep concentration the mind is “malleable”, “workable”, and “steady”,86 so that one can easily direct it to seeing things “as they truly are”. Not only that; when things are seen as they truly are by a calm and malleable mind, this vision affects the deeper layers of the mind. Such a vision goes far beyond a superficial intellectual appreciation, because, owing to the receptivity and malleability of the mind, insights will be able to penetrate into the deeper regions of the mind and thereby bring about inner change.
The advantages of developing absorption concentration are not only that it provides a stable and receptive state of mind for the practice of insight meditation. The experience of absorption is one of intense pleasure and happiness, brought about by purely mental means, which thereby automatically eclipses any pleasure arising in dependence on material objects. Thus absorption functions as a powerful antidote to sensual desires by divesting them of their former attraction.87 In fact, according to the Cūḷadukkhakkhandha Sutta wisdom alone does not suffice to overcome sensuality, but needs the powerful support available through the experience of absorption.88 The Buddha himself, during his own quest for awakening, overcame the obstruction caused by sensual desires only by developing absorption.89
Deep concentration promotes inner stability and integration.90 In this way, the experience of deep concentration fulfils an important role in fortifying the ability to withstand the destabilizing effect of those experiences that might be encountered during advanced stages of insight meditation.91 Without a calm and integrated mind, able to withstand the impact of such experiences, a practitioner might lose the balanced stance of observation and become overwhelmed by fear, anxiety, or depression. The development of mental calm thus builds up a healthy degree of self-integration as a supportive basis for the development of insight.92
Clearly, there are substantial advantages to be gained when the development of insight is supported and counterbalanced by the development of samatha. The experience of higher forms of happiness and the concomitant degree of personal integration are benefits that show that the development of samatha makes its own substantial contribution to progress along the path. This importance is expressed vividly in the discourses with the statement that one who has respect for the Buddha and his teaching will automatically hold concentration in high regard.93 On the other hand, one who looks down on the development of concentration thereby only approves of those who have an unsteady mind.94
Nevertheless, it needs to be said that the Buddha was also keenly aware of potential shortcomings of deep states of concentration. The attainment of absorption can turn into an obstacle on the path to realization if such attainment becomes a cause for pride or an object of attachment. The satisfaction and pleasure experienced during absorption, though facilitating the relinquishment of worldly pleasures, can make it more difficult to arouse the dissatisfaction and disenchantment required for the complete relinquishment of everything that leads up to realization.95
The Māra Saṃyutta even reports a casualty of concentration meditation: a monk committed suicide because he had several times failed to stabilize his concentrative attainment.96 On another occasion, when a monk was mourning his loss of concentration owing to physical illness, the Buddha dryly commented that such a reaction is characteristic of those who consider concentration the essence of their life and practice.97 He then instructed the monk to contemplate the impermanent nature of the five aggregates instead.
The central point that emerges when considering the relationship between calm and insight is the need for balance. Since a concentrated mind supports the development of insight, and the presence of wisdom in turn facilitates the development of deeper levels of concentration, calm (samatha) and insight (vipassanā) are at their best when developed in skilful cooperation.98
Considered from this perspective, the controversy over the necessity or dispensability of absorption abilities for gaining a particular level of realization is to some extent based on a misleading premise. This controversy takes for granted that the whole purpose of calmness meditation is to gain the ability to enter absorption as a stepping-stone for the development of insight, a sort of preliminary duty that either needs or does not need to be fulfilled. The discourses offer a different perspective. Here calm and insight are two complementary aspects of mental development. The question of practising only insight meditation does not arise, since the important function of calmness meditation, as a practice in its own right, is never reduced to its auxiliary role in relation to insight meditation.
This need for both calm and insight on the path to realization leads me on to another issue. Some scholars have understood these two aspects of meditation to represent two different paths, possibly even leading to two different goals. They assume that the path of samatha proceeds via the ascending series of absorptions to the attainment of the cessation of cognition and feeling (saññāvedayitanirodha) and thence to the cessation of passion. In contrast to this, the path of insight, at times mistakenly understood to be a process of pure intellectual reflection, supposedly leads to a qualitatively different goal, the cessation of ignorance.99
A passage from the Aṇguttara Nikāya does indeed relate the practice of samatha to the destruction of passion and the practice of vipassanā to the destruction of ignorance.100 The distinction between the two is expressed by the expressions “freedom of the mind” (cetovimutti) and “freedom by wisdom” (paññāvimutti) respectively. However, these two expressions are not simply equivalent in value relative to realization. While “freedom by wisdom” (paññāvimutti) refers to the realization of Nibbāna, “freedom of the mind” (cetovimutti), unless further specified as “unshakeable” (akuppa), does not imply the same. “Freedom of the mind” can also connote temporary experiences of mental freedom, such as the attainment of the fourth absorption, or the development of the divine abodes (brahmavihāra).101 Thus this passage is presenting not two different approaches to realization but two aspects of the meditative path, one of which is not sufficient by itself to bring realization.102
Another relevant discourse is the Susīma Sutta, which reports various monks declaring realization.103 Since these monks at the same time denied having attained supernatural powers, this passage has sometimes been understood to imply that full awakening can be attained merely by intellectual reflection.104 In reality, however, the monks’ declaration that they were only “freed by wisdom” indicates that they were not in possession of the immaterial meditative attainments. It does not mean that they gained realization without meditating at all, by a purely intellectual approach.105
A similar problem is sometimes seen in regard to the Kosambi Sutta, where a monk declared that he had personal realization of dependent co-arising (paṭicca samuppāda), although he was not an arahant.106 This passage becomes intelligible if one follows the commentarial explanation, according to which the monk in question was “only” a once-returner.107 The point here is that personal realization of the principle of dependent co-arising is not a characteristic of full awakening only, but is already a feature of stream-entry.
Instead of perceiving these passages as expressing an “underlying tension” between two different paths to realization, they simply describe different aspects of what is basically one approach.108 As a matter of fact, full awakening requires a purification of both the cognitive and the affective aspect of the mind. Although on theoretical examination these two aspects of the path might appear different, in actual practice they tend to converge and supplement each other.
This is neatly summarized in the Paṭisambhidāmagga, which emphasizes the importance of appreciating the essential similarity between calm and insight meditation in terms of their function.109 A practitioner might develop one or the other aspect to a higher degree at different times, but in the final stages of practice both calm and insight need to be combined in order to reach the final aim – full awakening – the destruction of both passion and ignorance.