<p>My understanding is,</p>
<p>Absolute means, level of concentration is max(for typical people),</p>
<p>positive means, the focus object / thought is a positive thought / object.</p>
<p>I mean even absolute samadhi wouldn't have any value if it wasn't positive.</p>
<p>And positive samadhi wouldn't have value if it wasn't absolute.</p>
<p>The values of samadhi rises when both reach high.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-04-07T06:59:34.043Z
2024-04-07T06:59:34.043Z
Pycm
<p><strong>Katsuki Sekida's Four Types of Samadhi | #4 Neither Man nor Circumstances are Deprived
September 25, 2016 in Zen, Katsuki Sekida:</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>So far we've looked at three types of samadhi, or states of mind
developed through Zen.  Sekida's fourth type of samadhi is &quot;neither
man nor circumstances are deprived.&quot;</p>
<p>(1) Man is deprived; circumstances are not deprived. (2) Circumstances
are deprived; man is not deprived. (3) Both man and circumstances are
deprived.  (4) Neither man nor circumstances are deprived.</p>
<p>As we have seen, &quot;man,&quot; as Sekida defines it, is &quot;that certain
self-ruling power (which) dominates the mind. This spiritual power is
the ultimate thing we can reach in the innermost part of our
existence.&quot;  This &quot;man&quot; is what is developed through zazen meditation.</p>
<p>In the first form of samadhi, &quot;man&quot; is absent (although he is ready to
make his appearance when needed), and one is wholly absorbed is
outward events.  This state of samadhi is the surgeon immersed in his
operation, the basketball player immersed in the game, the pianist
immersed in the performance.  As far as I can tell, it is what Mihaly
Csikzentmihalyi calls &quot;flow.&quot;</p>
<p>In the second form of samadhi, experienced during zen meditation,
&quot;man&quot; is present, but circumstances are not.  The picture is of one
completely absorbed in inward meditation as practiced in the zen
tradition.</p>
<p>In the third form of samadhi, one enters into an even deeper state of
meditation in which all self-reflective consciousness (i.e. &quot;I know
I'm meditating&quot;) ceases.  This is a rare state according to Sekida,
and seems to be simply an intensification of the second form of
samadhi.</p>
<p>Finally, we come to Sekida's fourth form of samadhi, in which both man
and circumstances are present.  Here's how he speaks of this type
samadhi:</p>
<p>&quot;This category, 'neither man nor circumstances are deprived,' is the
condition attained in the Zen student's maturity. He goes into the
actual world of routine and lets his mind work with no hindrance,
never losing the 'man' he has established in his <em>absolute
samadhi</em>. If we accept that there is an object in Zen practice,
then it is this freedom of mind in actual living.</p>
<p>To put it another way: when you are mature in practicing <em>absolute
samadhi</em>, returning to ordinary daily life you spontaneously
combine in yourself the first and third categories. You are active
in <em>positive samadhi</em> and at the same time you are firmly rooted
in jishu-zammai – the self-mastery of <em>absolute samadhi</em>. This is
'neither man nor circumstances are deprived,' the highest condition of
Zen maturity. True <em>positive samadhi</em> achieved through Zen
practice ultimately resolved into this fourth category.</p>
<p>A man may practice zazen and make certain progress in <em>absolute
samadhi</em> and be successful in establishing the 'man' within
himself. Then a new problem will arise, that of how he can exercise
this man in his actual life in the busy world. When sitting on a
cushion doing zazen he can attain samadhi and experience the man, and
can realize that the man is really his absolute self. But when he
comes out into his daily routine and eats, talks, and is active in his
business, he often finds he has lost the inner man. He wonders how he
can manage to maintain the man in himself in his daily life...</p>
<p>In short, the student who is puzzled how to retain the inner man in
his daily life – who wonders how he can embody Mu in himself in his
actual life – is striving for the condition in which both the inner
man and the outward concerns – man and circumstances – are not
deprived but are freely in action. In the first category man was
inactive; in the fourth category man has returned to the front line.
One who has attained maturity in Zen can behave freely and does not
violate the sacred law: both man and circumstances are in vigorous
activity and there is no hindrance. Only maturity in Zen will secure
this condition – the ultimate aim of Zen practice.&quot;</p>
<p>This feeling that one is absorbed in the content of daily life, and
is, at the same time, being directed by the &quot;inner man&quot; is, according
to Sekida, the aim of Zen practice.</p>
<p>The way he describes this form of samadhi is very similar to the
language of working with an &quot;Inner Observer&quot; or &quot;doubled awareness&quot; in
other traditions.  This reality has been described as being aware of
the contents of consciousness and the field of consciousness at the
same time.  In Centering Prayer, it might be spoken of as being fully
present to God and the present moment circumstance at the same time.
Drawing parallels between traditions is sometimes dangerous and fails
to respect the uniqueness of each tradition, but the parallel here
jumps out at me.  As I mentioned in the first post of this series,
when describing types of samadhi, Sekida almost seems to be describing
my own experience of Centering Prayer, just with different
terminology.</p>
<p>. . . I highly recommend Sekida's Zen Training as an accessible
introduction to Zen.  It's important to note that it is an
introduction from only one persons's perspective; and different
authors from the Zen tradition often describe it in very different
ways.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.thecontemplativelife.org/blog/2016/8/27/katsuki-sekidas-four-types-of-samadhi-2-circumstances-are-deprived-man-is-not-deprived" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.thecontemplativelife.org/blog/2016/8/27/katsuki-sekidas-four-types-of-samadhi-2-circumstances-are-deprived-man-is-not-deprived</a></p>
<p><strong>Katsuki Sekida's Four Types of Samadhi | #2 Circumstances are Deprived; Man is Not Deprived
August 27, 2016 in Zen, Katsuki Sekida:</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>When we work on Mu or practice shikantaza, we concentrate inwardly and
there develops a samadhi in which a certain self-ruling spiritual
power dominates the mind. This spiritual power is the ultimate thing
that we can reach in the innermost part of our existence. We do not
introspect it, because subjectivity does not reflect itself, just as
the eye does not see itself, but we are this ultimate thing itself. It
contains in itself all sources of emotion and reasoning power, and it
is a fact we directly realize in ourselves.</p>
<p>Rinzai Zenji calls this ultimate thing 'man.' When this 'man' rules
within us in profound samadhi, circumstances are forgotten. No outward
concern appears. This state of mind is 'Circumstances are deprived,
man is not deprived.'It is an inward samadhi and it is what I have
called absolute samadhi, because it forms the foundation of all
zazen practice. It contrasts with the outwardly directed samadhi
described in the first category, which I call positive samadhi.
Positive samadhi is a samadhi in the world of conscious
activity. Absolute samadhi is a samadhi that transcends
consciousness. When we simply use the term samadhi by itself we
generally refer to this absolute samadhi.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.thecontemplativelife.org/blog/2016/8/27/katsuki-sekidas-four-types-of-samadhi-2-circumstances-are-deprived-man-is-not-deprived#:%7E:text=(2)%20Circumstances%20are%20deprived%3B,totally%20absorbed%20in%20outward%20circumstances" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.thecontemplativelife.org/blog/2016/8/27/katsuki-sekidas-four-types-of-samadhi-2-circumstances-are-deprived-man-is-not-deprived#:~:text=(2)%20Circumstances%20are%20deprived%3B,totally%20absorbed%20in%20outward%20circumstances</a>.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-06-17T23:04:42.240Z
thank you, this is a genuinely helpful answer. I can confirm from my own practice, this is the core.
Andriy Volkov
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-06-17T15:23:27.973Z
2024-06-18T01:28:17.760Z
2024-06-18T01:28:17.760Z
Cdn_Dev
<p>Reading through Sekida's translation of The Blue Cliff Record I keep coming across mentions of both absolute and positive Samadhi, and I'm interested in hearing some clearer definitions of these two terms.</p>
<p>My interpretation of them is that:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>when we're in absolute samadhi we recognize the unity of reality but we haven't attained a state of pro-activity yet. Reality seems unchangeable</p>
</li>
<li><p>positive samadhi is when our meditative state becomes intrinsically tied with our everyday behavior, we embody the meditative state in everything we do, and take an active role in the world</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Does this sound correct?</p>

<samadhi>
What is the difference between absolute and positive Samadhi?
# What is the difference between absolute and positive Samadhi?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2024-04-02)

Reading through Sekida's translation of The Blue Cliff Record I keep coming across mentions of both absolute and positive Samadhi, and I'm interested in hearing some clearer definitions of these two terms.

My interpretation of them is that:

* when we're in absolute samadhi we recognize the unity of reality but we haven't attained a state of pro-activity yet. Reality seems unchangeable
* positive samadhi is when our meditative state becomes intrinsically tied with our everyday behavior, we embody the meditative state in everything we do, and take an active role in the world

Does this sound correct?

**Tags:** samadhi


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_0 on 2024-06-17. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

**Katsuki Sekida's Four Types of Samadhi | #4 Neither Man nor Circumstances are Deprived
September 25, 2016 in Zen, Katsuki Sekida:**

> So far we've looked at three types of samadhi, or states of mind
> developed through Zen. Sekida's fourth type of samadhi is "neither
> man nor circumstances are deprived."
>
> (1) Man is deprived; circumstances are not deprived. (2) Circumstances
> are deprived; man is not deprived. (3) Both man and circumstances are
> deprived. (4) Neither man nor circumstances are deprived.
>
> As we have seen, "man," as Sekida defines it, is "that certain
> self-ruling power (which) dominates the mind. This spiritual power is
> the ultimate thing we can reach in the innermost part of our
> existence." This "man" is what is developed through zazen meditation.
>
> In the first form of samadhi, "man" is absent (although he is ready to
> make his appearance when needed), and one is wholly absorbed is
> outward events. This state of samadhi is the surgeon immersed in his
> operation, the basketball player immersed in the game, the pianist
> immersed in the performance. As far as I can tell, it is what Mihaly
> Csikzentmihalyi calls "flow."
>
> In the second form of samadhi, experienced during zen meditation,
> "man" is present, but circumstances are not. The picture is of one
> completely absorbed in inward meditation as practiced in the zen
> tradition.
>
> In the third form of samadhi, one enters into an even deeper state of
> meditation in which all self-reflective consciousness (i.e. "I know
> I'm meditating") ceases. This is a rare state according to Sekida,
> and seems to be simply an intensification of the second form of
> samadhi.
>
> Finally, we come to Sekida's fourth form of samadhi, in which both man
> and circumstances are present. Here's how he speaks of this type
> samadhi:
>
> "This category, 'neither man nor circumstances are deprived,' is the
> condition attained in the Zen student's maturity. He goes into the
> actual world of routine and lets his mind work with no hindrance,
> never losing the 'man' he has established in his *absolute
> samadhi*. If we accept that there is an object in Zen practice,
> then it is this freedom of mind in actual living.
>
> To put it another way: when you are mature in practicing *absolute
> samadhi*, returning to ordinary daily life you spontaneously
> combine in yourself the first and third categories. You are active
> in *positive samadhi* and at the same time you are firmly rooted
> in jishu-zammai – the self-mastery of *absolute samadhi*. This is
> 'neither man nor circumstances are deprived,' the highest condition of
> Zen maturity. True *positive samadhi* achieved through Zen
> practice ultimately resolved into this fourth category.
>
> A man may practice zazen and make certain progress in *absolute
> samadhi* and be successful in establishing the 'man' within
> himself. Then a new problem will arise, that of how he can exercise
> this man in his actual life in the busy world. When sitting on a
> cushion doing zazen he can attain samadhi and experience the man, and
> can realize that the man is really his absolute self. But when he
> comes out into his daily routine and eats, talks, and is active in his
> business, he often finds he has lost the inner man. He wonders how he
> can manage to maintain the man in himself in his daily life...
>
> In short, the student who is puzzled how to retain the inner man in
> his daily life – who wonders how he can embody Mu in himself in his
> actual life – is striving for the condition in which both the inner
> man and the outward concerns – man and circumstances – are not
> deprived but are freely in action. In the first category man was
> inactive; in the fourth category man has returned to the front line.
> One who has attained maturity in Zen can behave freely and does not
> violate the sacred law: both man and circumstances are in vigorous
> activity and there is no hindrance. Only maturity in Zen will secure
> this condition – the ultimate aim of Zen practice."
>
> This feeling that one is absorbed in the content of daily life, and
> is, at the same time, being directed by the "inner man" is, according
> to Sekida, the aim of Zen practice.
>
> The way he describes this form of samadhi is very similar to the
> language of working with an "Inner Observer" or "doubled awareness" in
> other traditions. This reality has been described as being aware of
> the contents of consciousness and the field of consciousness at the
> same time. In Centering Prayer, it might be spoken of as being fully
> present to God and the present moment circumstance at the same time.
> Drawing parallels between traditions is sometimes dangerous and fails
> to respect the uniqueness of each tradition, but the parallel here
> jumps out at me. As I mentioned in the first post of this series,
> when describing types of samadhi, Sekida almost seems to be describing
> my own experience of Centering Prayer, just with different
> terminology.
>
> . . . I highly recommend Sekida's Zen Training as an accessible
> introduction to Zen. It's important to note that it is an
> introduction from only one persons's perspective; and different
> authors from the Zen tradition often describe it in very different
> ways.

<https://www.thecontemplativelife.org/blog/2016/8/27/katsuki-sekidas-four-types-of-samadhi-2-circumstances-are-deprived-man-is-not-deprived>

**Katsuki Sekida's Four Types of Samadhi | #2 Circumstances are Deprived; Man is Not Deprived
August 27, 2016 in Zen, Katsuki Sekida:**

> When we work on Mu or practice shikantaza, we concentrate inwardly and
> there develops a samadhi in which a certain self-ruling spiritual
> power dominates the mind. This spiritual power is the ultimate thing
> that we can reach in the innermost part of our existence. We do not
> introspect it, because subjectivity does not reflect itself, just as
> the eye does not see itself, but we are this ultimate thing itself. It
> contains in itself all sources of emotion and reasoning power, and it
> is a fact we directly realize in ourselves.
>
> Rinzai Zenji calls this ultimate thing 'man.' When this 'man' rules
> within us in profound samadhi, circumstances are forgotten. No outward
> concern appears. This state of mind is 'Circumstances are deprived,
> man is not deprived.'It is an inward samadhi and it is what I have
> called absolute samadhi, because it forms the foundation of all
> zazen practice. It contrasts with the outwardly directed samadhi
> described in the first category, which I call positive samadhi.
> Positive samadhi is a samadhi in the world of conscious
> activity. Absolute samadhi is a samadhi that transcends
> consciousness. When we simply use the term samadhi by itself we
> generally refer to this absolute samadhi."

[https://www.thecontemplativelife.org/blog/2016/8/27/katsuki-sekidas-four-types-of-samadhi-2-circumstances-are-deprived-man-is-not-deprived#:~:text=(2)%20Circumstances%20are%20deprived%3B,totally%20absorbed%20in%20outward%20circumstances](https://www.thecontemplativelife.org/blog/2016/8/27/katsuki-sekidas-four-types-of-samadhi-2-circumstances-are-deprived-man-is-not-deprived#:%7E:text=(2)%20Circumstances%20are%20deprived%3B,totally%20absorbed%20in%20outward%20circumstances).

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: thank you, this is a genuinely helpful answer. I can confirm from my own practice, this is the core.  

---

### Answer by username_1 on 2024-04-07. Score: 1

My understanding is,

Absolute means, level of concentration is max(for typical people),

positive means, the focus object / thought is a positive thought / object.

I mean even absolute samadhi wouldn't have any value if it wasn't positive.

And positive samadhi wouldn't have value if it wasn't absolute.

The values of samadhi rises when both reach high.


---

