[Buddha-l] Re: there he goes again (sam harris)

[L.S. Cousins]

Joy,

>I quite like 'direct path', since I definitely see directness, no 
>intermediary, and simplicity (as the opposite of complexity) as 
>Buddhist objectives and as criteria that can again be applied to 
>Buddhism, which some later schools (e.g. ch'an) have actually tried 
>to do.

Well, I quite like 'direct path' too for the reasons you give. But 
there is no such meaning as 'without intermediary' nor much 
connotation of 'simplicity' in ekaayano.

>  >He then goes on to suggest that satipa.t.thaana is so-called to 
>>distinguish it from the approach that proceeds through the jhaanas or 
>>brahmavihaaras. But, as he admits, there is neither canonical nor 
>>commentarial support for this view. In fact, it is explicitly 
>>indicated in the Canon (in the Niddesa passage I quoted earlier) that 
>>various other lists can also be called ekaayana.
>
>Sorry for my ignorance, but is this because jhaanas can be pretty 
>'blind' without the apport of vipassana etc. and are the 
>satipa.t.thaana considered as as sort of blend: a combination of 
>focussing and knowing?

This seems to be indeed what is intended, but it makes no sense 
(except perhaps for the very highest stages of insight). The jhaanas 
are precisely a process of developing mindfulness and clear 
comprehension, as is quite clear from the formulae of the successive 
jhaanas.

Lance Cousins