I’d realised the need to re-establish a practice in my life and signed up to a month-long Jhana retreat just before stumbling across AYP.
Can anyone shed any light on jhana and nirvikalpa samadhi please?
Specifically the relationship between them - if any?
Also how do these concepts relate to what’s being taught here?
BTW, as a newbie, I can’t find a search facility on this board. Am I blind? 
Thanks in anticipation.
I can only shed light on where you can find the ‘Search box’ - it is at the top just next to FORUM FAQ. 
As for Jhana and Nirvikalpa Samadhi… some other members will pitch in.
Thank you for restoring my sight
Hi Gatito,
Nirvikalpa samadhi/Jhana , in Indian context refers to ‘undifferentiated consciousness’ (Nir - no ; kalpa - difference) - sort of non-dual awareness; state of pure radiant being.
Buddhists refer to IT as spontaneous naked awareness or luminous emptiness - though words stop before THAT.
AYP’ers are used to the term pure bliss consciousness. (Search for Inner silence within the forum on cultivating IT daily…).
Sometimes, I too wonder if the end states of Yoga and Buddhism are the same? For example, is Kaivalya the same as Nirvana?
Thanks chit-ananda51
That’s very helpful.
Can I ask a supplementary question please?
There are supposed to be eight “levels” of Jhana. Do you know how these relate to nirvikalpa samadhi?
My own sense is that eighth jhana is the “equivalent” of nirvikalpa samadhi (i.e. “Consciousness without objects” or “Consciousness shining in its own Light”) but I have never found anyone who can give me any kind of answer to this question at all. You are the first person who I’ve found who has helped me with this investigation and I’m hoping that you may be able to help me a bit more.
I have yet to search the forums properly but I will certainly do so and if you are unable to shed any further light, you have already helped m immensely with your previous answer, so thank you again.
Hi Gatito
I am not familiar with levels of Jhana experientially. However I will point to ‘Kashmir Shaivism’ texts for getting more clarity on levels or planes of consciousness descent from Spirit into matter. I have also read works by Sri Aurobindo/Sri Ramalinga Adigalar who were able to classify levels in the mental plane.
In AYP, not much importance is given to distinguishing between levels of samadhi achieved.
If you can let me know from which source you got to know about the eight levels, it can help me/others to chime in and reply to your query.
On a side-note, I am not very familiar with Buddhist terminologies though. 
Hi Gatito,
I would say that the fourth jhana is nirvikalpa samadhi due to the fact of stoppage of breathing…
Here is the link that that is from. It is a terse rendition of the levels of jhanas, but it does explain the differences between the material jhanas and the immaterial jhanas:
link: http://www.kktanhp.com/samatha.htm
Here is another more elaborate explanation of the jhanas.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html
For me, the interesting thing about the jhanas is that part of their formula is that they are produced by applied and sustained thought, which is very similar to Patanjali’s three steps of concentration, meditation and samadhi as mentioned in Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras.
From the first link:
From the second link:
TI
Hi Gatito and all,
You’ve got some useful replies already.
The word jhana is Pali and means meditation… the Sanskrit is dhyana. Samadhi means unity (from sam-a-dhi: coming together). A vikalpa is a fluctuation, so one translation of nirvikalpa is “without fluctuation”. So nirvikalpa samadhi is a state of unity without fluctuation. Fluctuations are movements, and movements always happen in the mind. So nirvikalpa samadhi is a state of unity beyond the mind. This is equivalent to the eighth jhana in Buddhist terminology.
In terms of what we are doing here at AYP, it is the same thing… darana (concentration), dhyana (meditation), samadhi (unity). These are the last three of the eight limbs of yoga.
Christi
Thank you to you all.
I’ve spent nearly 30 years trying to find an answer to this question.
At last, I’ve been given the final missing pieces to the puzzle (and far more than I ever expected to find in this lifetime! ).
I’ll certainly follow-up all the suggestions including the pointer towards Kashmiri Shaivism, which I’ve come across on the non-duality circuit in the last few years but never really looked into properly, although I had intended to go on a retreat with Francis Lucille in Paris this Christmas because I understand that this formed part of his Path via Jean Klein (his teacher). As I’ve spent a great deal of time with Rupert Spira (Francis’s student) exploring the Direct Path teachings of Krishna Menon, I was curious to meet Francis personally and to find out directly about the Kashmiri Yoga, which I had heard he teaches.
Regarding where I found information on the eight levels of Jhana: -
There were a few sources all leading back ultimately to Pa Auk Sayadaw http://www.paaukforestmonastery.org/index.htm via his students: -
Tina Rasmussen and Stephen Snyder http://www.jhanasadvice.com and their books and
Shaila Catherine http://imsb.org/about/teachers.php via her book Focused and Fearless.
I recently bought her latest book Wisdom Wide and Deep but since coming across AYP, my interest in pursuing the Path of Jhana has ended (because I’ve found the Deep Meditation to be exactly what I was looking for and Jhana seems to be extremely hard to learn!! ) I haven’t got round to reading Wisdom Wide and Deep yet, although on skimming through, it seems excellent if you want to pursue the Jhana/Vipassana Path. It’s also of great interest to me because my wife teaches Mindfullness and I don’t really understand it very well! . However, at the moment, I’m devouring yogani’s books and lessons and I feel that I’ve more than enough to learn here in this lifetime, although I’m still very interested in “comparative religion” (for want of a better description) and I guess that at some time in the future I’ll study Wisdom Wide and Deep.
Having found AYP just before going off to the States on a month-long Jhana retreat has been a real stroke of luck (if there is any such thing ) AYP and its membership are a truly priceless resource.
Thank you all again.
Hi Gatito
If I had the chance to meet Francis I would certainly take it. Being in the presence of a realized being is one of the most elevating experiences that a person can have. I can see it in his eyes and feel it in his being.
I had a look at the instructions for anapansati on that site and I believe that they have missed the mark.
link: http://www.jhanasadvice.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/AnapanasatiMeditationInstructionsCard.pdf
Anapanasati is not about watching the breath although that is a minor part of it. It is about relaxing the body, being mindful of the body and letting go. One simply makes a note periodically to assess the breath. Here is a link to what is claimed as the ‘correct’ interpretation of anapanasati:
link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Triplegem/message/9675
I found that book kind of interesting but it fell down near the end when she starts downplaying the need to attain the immaterial jhanas (jhanas 5 to 8). By the time I finished that book, I had a bad taste in my mouth and felt that she was missing some important part. I wouldn’t recommend her book at all. Instead I would read “Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond” by Ajahn Brahm and “Dharma Paths” by Khenpo:
link: http://www.amazon.ca/Dharma-Paths-Khenpo-Karthar-Rinpoche/dp/1559390026
You will eventually pass through the jhanas as long as the technique has the depth to bring you there. It is called many things… samadhi, satori. Depends on the teaching… Jhana is not that hard to learn. Beware of the ‘easy ways’ especially if your knowledge base is weak.
Here is an interesting quote about Buddha’s awakening:
link: http://www.dhammasukha.org/Study/Books/Pdf/The%20Anapanasati%20Sutta%202.pdf
Good luck with your search.
TI
Hi Christi
Where did you find that? I found this:
link: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html
And later it says this:
I disagree that nirvikalpa samadhi is the eighth jhana simply because nirvikalpa samadhi is characterized by stoppage of the breath and that occurs in the fourth jhana.
But I’m not here to argue about the variations of definitions from various traditions and how they have hindered good communication.
I am curious about something. Perhaps you can answer me because nobody else here seems to want to.
You said:
Here is AYP’s definition of dharana (the bolding is mine):
link: http://www.aypsite.org/149.html
Christi, what is your interpretation of ‘dharana’? Is it sustained concentration or is it ‘touching the object of attention and then letting it go’?
When you meditate (do you do Deep Meditation?) do you make any effort to maintain constant awareness on the mantra? Do you put in effort? Do you sustain a constant stream of attention?
You know, I found this the other day about the TM style meditation and it seems that even back in 1972 there was a debate about this.
From “The Complete Yoga Book” by James Hewitt, page 449/450:
Isn’t there a kind of problem here? Isn’t this all very easy to misinterpret?
I have found all of this very confusing, but this next excerpt from that same book has helped tremendously:
Any logical mind would conclude that if the end-result is “absolutely no effort”, and the progression to that state is “less and less effort” then it stands to reason that at the beginning of the progression there is effort.
So, if I interpret all of this correctly, when you first start out with mantra repetition, you have to put in effort. Your goal is to maintain a steady stream of attention on the mantra (or object of meditation). The longer you spend at it, the more other thoughts die down thus giving your focus more energy. Eventually, due to the extra energy and the controlled focus, it requires less effort to maintain a constant stream of attention at which point the balance between the extraneous thoughts (which have died down) and the focus of attention tips into the meditation stage and then you’re on to samadhi.
I think that if you don’t put in any effort at the start of meditation, you will inevitably cause a ‘relaxation response’, which is the mind’s natural tendency to let go and fall asleep, which to me is not meditation. So, if you don’t do the technique properly, you still get the benefit of taking a short cat nap, which of course is beneficial for your well-being, but it isn’t Patanjali’s last three limbs of yoga.
Comments?
TI
Hey TI.
It seems like you already understand your own questions. Why keep asking questions you know the answer to? Do you feel that DM is not working? Or that you are doing it wrong? Does it matter if you are doing it wrong if it’s working? Does it matter if DM does not match your interpretation of Patanjali if both methods work?
You can try and try and try and try try try so hard to concentrate for as long and as powerfully as you can, until you are FORCED to stop because you have spent all your efforts. In this forced period of no effort, no concentration - you are still fully aware.
You can concentrate so fully and so perfectly and so intently on an object until everything else drops away, and only the object remains. You can dissolve the object, and dissolve what’s left of it, and dissolve the empty space where that was, and keep concentrating and refining down until NOTHING is left to concentrate on, and you are FORCED to stop. And in this forced period of no concentration - you are still fully aware.
Each time you enter this state of effortless, unfocused, full awareness is like a repetition. It doesn’t matter how get there, as long as you keep getting there over and over again. The state naturally wants to happen, given the right conditions - and DM is an easy way of getting there.
DM allows for both of the above possibilities to sometimes occur. You easily concentrate, and easily refocus when you’re off the mantra. It’s easy on purpose. I don’t think you reach samadhi each time you lose the mantra, but you do sometimes. But it’s such little compared to the above methods, that there’s a long term habitual tendency toward easily reaching the state of samadhi. An added bonus. Over many repetitions of occasionally going to samadhi, you begin to naturally let go of the concentration and just favor samadhi. The state is naturally favorable, and by using so little effort to begin with, it’s that much easier to let go into that unfocused full awareness. Over months and years, that sometimes and occasional samadhi from DM becomes more frequent. That tiny bit of effort to pick up the mantra is all it takes, and wham, off into samadhi. If some other way seems easier or more complete to you, by all means do it. Most of the brilliance in the AYP system is in the twice daily consistent practice. If you use some other method of meditation that works for you, it will have the same effect over the long run, as long as you’re using it daily.
Hi TI,
A state of deep mental unification which results from the centering of the mind upon a single object with such power of attention that a total immersion in the object takes place, is dhyana, and is meditation.
What we normally refer to as meditation where we sit on a cushion and think about things, is actually just preparation for meditation.
Dharana is bringing the concentration onto an object. It is what we do in Deep meditation with the mantra, and what we do in samyama before that object is released into silence.
Yes, I practice Deep Meditation. In the beginning effort is needed to bring the attention to the mantra. This is dharana. If no effort is used then the mind will just wander randomly from one thought to another. Effort is also needed to bring the mind back to the mantra when it wanders off onto thoughts. In time, the mind will rest more continuously on the mantra and will wander less. This is the beginning of sustained concentration. After more time the mind will begin to merge with the mantra. Very little effort is needed at this stage to hold the concentration on the mantra. This is dhyana (jhana).
At a certain point there will be no manta, no thoughts and no effort. This is samadhi. But there can still be events happening, lights, worlds, universes, luminous beings. Time and space can still appear to exist. This is savikalpa samadhi. Beyond the subtle celestial are the realms of pure light. These are beyond even time and space but still within the realms of savikalpa samadhi. Beyond these are the unmanifest, nirvikalpa samadhi. Very little can be said about this, it can only be experienced.
So in answer to your question about applied and sustained effort. It is as the Maharishi said, that over time, less and less effort is needed. Sahaja samadhi, which is the highest form of samadhi, is an effortless state. Pure joy, pure peace. No effort is required.
Try not to read too much, if you can help it. Just practice using the simple technique given in lesson 13. And enjoy.
Christi
Thank you Christi for the excellent description.
An ounce of practice is worth tons of theory - Swami Sivananda
Yes - but the theory is very interesting!!!
yes Gatito… For the writings of Yogani have the potential to re-engineer genes of the present/future generation and to express divinity on Earth - when put to practice. I too dip myself and revel in good books/articles 
Hi JDH
Let’s be clear here. It is not “my” interpretation of Patanjali’s last three limbs of yoga, it is the commonly accepted interpretation which is Raja Yoga. AYP has diverted from the commonly accepted interpretation and so has the TM - Maharishi teaching.
I now understand the difference between the two techniques, and they are different. TM style meditation (such as the effortless DM) elicits the ‘relaxation response’. It does not take you to superconsciousness. Instead, it takes you to the same place you go when you fall asleep. And yes, it can be said to work because the ‘relaxation response’ is hard to miss. It is a beneficial thing to do as it does refresh your mind especially at first. It is like taking a cat nap. I’m not putting it down and saying that it does not benefit human beings. The relaxation response is a great thing to do for health, well-being and is effective at reducing stress. It is a good thing to help people learn how to benefit themselves. But it is not Patanjali’s last three limbs of yoga, nor does it produce siddhis or superconsciousness. Nor is it spiritual. It is a scientifically proven function of how the body/mind funtions. The relaxation response is basically training yourself to fall into conscious sleep.
If you do this properly, you discover that kundalini kicks in with more energy when it’s available. And yes, when the mind shuts off there is still awareness, and there are still things to be aware of like vast space, lights, colors, motion up to a point.
I can tell by your description that you have not experienced the state of samadhi that is produced by effortful concentration by sustaining awareness on only one point, because, if you had you would not say that the object dissolves. Nor would you say that you were “forced to stop”. The stopping place is after the realization occurs, after you tap into the eternal source. When you are in the realization, you have no more will or motion. The stopping is when you finally come out of it on it’s own.
In my experience, the object does not dissolve. Instead, everything gets extremely bright; the watcher, the watching and the object become one or fuse together. Then there is tremendous bliss and you are propelled into a state that is hard to describe. It can only be remembered that you were there. When you come back, your mind is super fast, like greased lightning. And then later, it is impossible to sleep, you just watch your body sleep while the clump of thoughts that is the mind keeps churning away. TM and DM do not do that, do they?
What do you mean by “full awareness”? Are you aware of all forms to infinity at once? Are you aware of all the planes and beings in all the planes? Have you ever experienced that?
Yes, it certainly is very easy. And the mind prefers “easy” to “hard”. Isn’t that human nature? The mind does like to fall asleep. But what state do you end up in? That is the point.
It is also written in “Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond - Ajahn Brahm”, that the effort that is put into the initial part of meditation is the enertia that propels you into the higher stages of the jhanas, and you need that effort because once your mind shuts off you no longer have volitional control to go deeper.
I think the West has been fooled by the Maharishi and his TM-style of meditation. TM produces the “relaxation response”, which of course if very beneficial to our stressed out society. The benefits of alleviating stress and helping people live more healthy and productive lives is a great benefit. But it is not Patanjali’s last three limbs of yoga. And, the Maharishi’s sales pitch has only served to muddy the waters of clear understanding of Raja Yoga. I don’t believe that TM or DM take you to the same state that Patanjali is talking about. Do they?
The general impression that I get from reading these next two excerpts from the Maharishi, is that the Maharishi is saying that TM takes you directly to “Being”, to Moksha, to enlightenment, and the challenge is to bring that state back to fill the mind with transcendence.
I just don’t buy it. The Maharishi is saying that transcendence is the state of enlightenment. He is saying that by eliciting the relaxation response, you, anyone can experience enlightenment. I don’t believe it. I guess that’s my problem.
So how is TM-style mantra meditation to produce enlightenment?
The Maharishi said:
link: http://www.jyotish.ws/wisdom/review_maharishi_gita.html
Is this pure deception? Is the Maharishi saying that the transcendental state is the “Eternal life of Brahman”? Is he saying that TM will take you directly to the Absolute?
I have read so many buddhist texts that say that shamata, concentrative meditation resulting in samadhi, is not sufficient to produce enlightenment. Nor are the jhanas. Shamata must be used to attain superconsciousness, and then once the meditator has gained that state, the empowered mind is then turned towards self-inquiry. So, here the Maharishi is saying that constantly dipping into the transcendental state eventually causes it to stick to the mind “such that it then never goes away”. Sounds way too easy, doesn’t it? Just how many successful meditations (producing the “transcending state”) does “many, many, many” mean? And, where is the self-inquiry in that?
This is a quote from the Maharishi from “The Complete Yoga” by James Hewitt, page 471/472:
The reasons that I don’t believe what the Maharishi has said are these:
- For many thousands of years, spiritual teachings have emphasized continuous effort/attention as the key that opens the gate to the eternal. Even, the continous effort of mindfulness and letting go. All of a sudden someone comes along and says "you don’t have to perform any effort, you just repeat this one-sylable mantra, easily, effortlessly, and presto, you are there. And there is not even any religious or spiritual significance to the technique…
- The Maharishi invented his technique not even more than 100 years ago. Why has nobody else ever written about that same meditation technique, including Buddha, Christianity, Taoism etc? I have never read anything similar to that technique before, claiming the things that it does, and I have read hundreds of books.
- I have never heard about anyone becoming enlightened using TM but I have heard of TM meditators meditating for 40 years or more. Not only does that scare me but it also tells me that perhaps the method is not effective.
- It follows that any meditation practice which is founded on the TM method of ‘enlightenment’ also is subject to these same arguments of disbelief.
That’s what my problem is. I just don’t believe it.
So, if somebody here has experience with both methods and can prove to me that effortless mantra repetition (relaxation response) takes you to the same place beyond superconsciousness, beyond the causal, into the atman, the soul, the purusha, the one, the Tao, then please let me know.
TI
[quote=“Christi”]
…
Hi TI,
A state of deep mental unification which results from the centering of the mind upon a single object with such power of attention that a total immersion in the object takes place, is dhyana, and is meditation.
What we normally refer to as meditation where we sit on a cushion and think about things, is actually just preparation for meditation.
Yes, I practice Deep Meditation. In the beginning effort is needed to bring the attention to the mantra. This is dharana. If no effort is used then the mind will just wander randomly from one thought to another. Effort is also needed to bring the mind back to the mantra when it wanders off onto thoughts. In time, the mind will rest more continuously on the mantra and will wander less. This is the beginning of sustained concentration. After more time the mind will begin to merge with the mantra. Very little effort is needed at this stage to hold the concentration on the mantra. This is dhyana (jhana).
At a certain point there will be no manta, no thoughts and no effort. This is samadhi. But there can still be events happening, lights, worlds, universes, luminous beings. Time and space can still appear to exist. This is savikalpa samadhi. Beyond the subtle celestial are the realms of pure light. These are beyond even time and space but still within the realms of savikalpa samadhi. Beyond these are the unmanifest, nirvikalpa samadhi. Very little can be said about this, it can only be experienced.
So in answer to your question about applied and sustained effort. It is as the Maharishi said, that over time, less and less effort is needed. Sahaja samadhi, which is the highest form of samadhi, is an effortless state. Pure joy, pure peace. No effort is required.
Try not to read too much, if you can help it. Just practice using the simple technique given in lesson 13. And enjoy.
Christi
Hi Christi, :) I appreciate the time and effort that you took to respond to my questions. All the best. :) TI