사마타(止) 없는 위빠사나(觀)는 가능한가?

Abstract

This study will be devoted to discuss the relation between <italic>Samatha</italic> and <italic>Vipassanā-bhāvanā</italic>. Some Modern practitioners of meditation hold the view that <italic>Vipassanā-bhāvanā</italic> itself is sufficient for the realization of Nibbāna. Some canonical references, too, appear to support this view. This issue, whether <italic>Vipassanā</italic> alone is enough for the attainment of enlightenment, is examined here in. In meditative practice, whether everybody gets enlightenment through the same process or not is not quite clear. Though the final outcome of enlightenment is same, the process through which one attains enlightenment could differ. Thus, though it is generally held that the mind should be cultivated through the four jhānic process to make it pliant and suitable for the arising of super-cognitive powers that lead to knowing and seeing, there are instances in the canon which say that one could develop insight knowledge (<italic>vipassanā</italic>) after successfully accomplishing the first jhāna through <italic>samatha</italic> practice. By whatever name or designation it is known <italic>samādhi</italic> or mental concentration is a compulsory requirement for the attainment of insight knowledge. However, commentarial literature refers to a type of person who is finally emancipated without going through the jhānic process and they refer to as ‘<italic>Sukkhavipassaka</italic>.’ But, there are some problematic issues that deserve attention. Therefore, this study focuses on the ‘<italic>sukkhavipassaka</italic>,’ ‘<italic>khaṇika samādhi</italic>’, ‘<italic>Susīma sutta</italic>,’ ‘<italic>cetovimutti</italic>,’ ‘<italic>paññāvimutti</italic>,’ etc. and their problems of interpretation. In many early suttas, the attainment of jhānic states are shown as necessary condition for the attainment of <italic>nibbāna</italic>. It is very clear that <italic>Vipassanā</italic> practice alone is not enough for final emancipation. Therefore, <italic>jhāna</italic> cannot be discarded from the course of training laid down by the Buddha if the proper end of that training, deliverance from suffering, is to be achieved. And the <italic>Visuddhimagga</italic> also clearly says that ‘there is no supramundane without <italic>jhāna</italic>.’ Hence, the attainment of jhāna is a necessary condition for the development of that insight. Through this study, it could be surmised that the state of <italic>Sukkha-vipassaka</italic> - if it means a state reached without any jhānic attainment - is not possible and not compatible with the practice explained in the <italic>Nikāyas</italic>. In the early suttas, the development of insight after emerging from one of the <italic>jhānas</italic> is certainly the normative pattern. Perhaps, it is reasonable to conclude that <italic>Sukkha-vipassaka</italic> is a commentarial development to give a new interpretation to the practice given in the early <italic>Nikāyas</italic>. Therefore, this study shows that practitioners in order to engage in <italic>Vipassanā-bhāvanā</italic> properly should focus on the <italic>Pāli Nikāya</italic> before they accept the commentarial interpretations.