..續本文上一頁quence is defeated.(32) Moreover, as the sammāsamādhi here is defined by the Commentary as including both path and fruit, whereas "the abandoning of the fetters" is just a path moment, one ends up with a situation where the effect precedes the cause.(33) This clearly makes no sense.

　　At this point it seems worthwhile to quote a larger portion of the passage we are concerned with:

　　" ”Not grasping the sign of the mind, one will fulfill right view”, this is not possible. ”Not having fulfilled right view, one will fulfill sammāsamādhi”, this is not possible. ”Not having fulfilled sammāsamādhi, one will abandon the fetters”, this is not possible. ”Not having abandoned the fetters, one will realize Nibbāna”, this is not possible."(34)

　　Of interest here is that sammāditthi must be fulfilled before sammāsamādhi can be fulfilled. In Sutta usage the fulfilment of sammāditthi is equivalent to the attainment of Sotāpatti. The attainment of Sotāpatti in turn is a lokuttarajjhāna moment according to Abhidhamma terminology. Thus, once again, if one is to follow the Commentarial interpretation, one arrives at a situation where lokuttarajjhāna (i.e. sammāditthi) is the cause for lokuttarajjhāna (i.e. sammāsamādhi). Thus the conditional relationship expressed in the Sutta is apparently reduced to something quite trivial. To summarise, both "the abandoning of the fetters" and "the fulfillment of right view" are redundant if sammāsamādhi (as lokuttarajjhāna) encompasses both of them.

　　The final question we need to answer is whether reading sammāsamādhi in the present passage as ”ordinary” jhāna is confirmed or negated by other Suttas. It is well known that jhāna and sammāsamādhi occur very frequently in the Suttas as part of the training leading to the attainment of Arahantship. Perhaps the most significant of these occurrences is the listing of the four jhānas in the gradual training immediately prior to the attainment of the three higher knowledges (tevijjā). This sequence is found countless times throughout the Suttas.(35) However, this does not establish that attaining Arahantship is impossible without ”ordinary” jhāna, as the So Vata Sutta seems to imply. To find such a passage we need to turn to M64:

　　"There is a path, Ānanda, a way to the abandoning of the five lower fetters; that anyone without relying on that path, on that way shall know or see or abandon the five lower fetters - this is not possible. Just as when there is a great tree standing possessed of heartwood, it is not possible that anyone shall cut out its heartwood without cutting through its bark and sapwood ...

　　And what Ānanda is the path, the way to the abandoning of the five lower fetters

　　 Here Ānanda a bhikkhu ... enters upon and abides in the first jhāna ... the second jhāna ... the third jhāna ... the fourth jhāna ...".(36)

　　Note that this passage is very clear that it is impossible to become an Anāgāmī without having attained at least the first jhāna. Also significant is that the Commentary does not define jhāna here as lokuttarajjhāna, and thus one has to assume that also the Commentary regards this as ”ordinary” jhāna.(37)

　　Again, given this evidence from the Suttas, one can only conclude that there is no evidence to support the Commentarial assertion that what is meant by sammāsamādhi in the So Vata Sutta is in fact lokuttarajjhāna. Quite the contrary, the standard Sutta explanation of sammāsamādhi, as referring to the (ordinary) four jhānas, fits the situation perfectly.

　　4.3 Other Suttas

　　The above examples are only two among a large number where the Commentaries claim that jhāna or samādhi in the Suttas actually refer to lokuttarajjhāna. It would be an enormous amount of work to investigate each one of these occurrences to evaluate whether the Co…

《Jhana and Lokuttarajjhana》全文未完，請進入下頁繼續閱讀…