Stages of Samadhi According to the Ashtanga Yoga Tradition - Discussion
People, you have to be careful when you venture off the reservation (i.e. the Dhamma) and find yourself in unknown or uncharted territory (i.e. the Yoga Sutras). Despite their obvious similarities, these two are not fully describing the same territory. You have to pay attention to detail if you wish to be able to distinguish between the two territories. In this same way, you also have to be able to pay attention to the details in the discourses of Gotama in order to discern what he was endeavoring to bring to your attention. Otherwise, it flies over your head and you do not see it! 
How am I able to say this? Because I am familiar with the territory that these two disciplines describe. I have studied them both in depth and have been able to see their differences. And the reason how I am able to make this statement is because I have practiced them both and know whereof I speak. In other words, I know the territory and have witnessed the results of each practice. But this is only applicable to me and not to anyone else who has not taken the time to explore these disciplines within their own practice.
In the interest of saving others time in learning about this, you can read all you wish about the ways that Patanjali's Yoga Sutras define meditation, and if it helps to deepen your understanding of the term in terms of how that term is used in the Dhamma, then fine. There is an interesting write up of the Yoga Sutras distinction of meditation, dhyana, and samadhi at the following link:
http://ocoy.org/soham-yoga-the-yoga-of-the-self/dharana-dhyana-samadhi-and-meditation/
However, be very careful what you buy into when reading through that link. There are many descriptions that do refer to the same things between the two systems of practice, but not all. As soon as you begin seeing terms like "unity mastery" and "permanent state" and the like, that alone should provide you with a red flag about what is being discussed. Consider yourselves as having been warned should you venture over to that link.
According to the scholar Alexander Wynne (The Origins of Buddhist Meditation), the Buddha was schooled in Vedic practice that used jhana meditation as a sort of blissing-out, or hiding from dukkha, so to speak, during life, and then at death finding liberation in merging with Brahma. But he thought something better was possible, and figured out a path infusing the older idea of meditation / dhyana with mindfulness / insight cultivation so as to arrive at release during life -- using samadhi and vipassana together.
(As Ayya Khema, and other Theravadans, put it: samadhi is necessary but not sufficient for unbinding.)
Yes, I would agree with the explanation provided here by Chris. And I would also posit that the devil is in the details, and how well one can discern those details.
How am I able to say this? Because I am familiar with the territory that these two disciplines describe. I have studied them both in depth and have been able to see their differences. And the reason how I am able to make this statement is because I have practiced them both and know whereof I speak. In other words, I know the territory and have witnessed the results of each practice. But this is only applicable to me and not to anyone else who has not taken the time to explore these disciplines within their own practice.
In the interest of saving others time in learning about this, you can read all you wish about the ways that Patanjali's Yoga Sutras define meditation, and if it helps to deepen your understanding of the term in terms of how that term is used in the Dhamma, then fine. There is an interesting write up of the Yoga Sutras distinction of meditation, dhyana, and samadhi at the following link:
http://ocoy.org/soham-yoga-the-yoga-of-the-self/dharana-dhyana-samadhi-and-meditation/
However, be very careful what you buy into when reading through that link. There are many descriptions that do refer to the same things between the two systems of practice, but not all. As soon as you begin seeing terms like "unity mastery" and "permanent state" and the like, that alone should provide you with a red flag about what is being discussed. Consider yourselves as having been warned should you venture over to that link.
Chris J Macie:
According to the scholar Alexander Wynne (The Origins of Buddhist Meditation), the Buddha was schooled in Vedic practice that used jhana meditation as a sort of blissing-out, or hiding from dukkha, so to speak, during life, and then at death finding liberation in merging with Brahma. But he thought something better was possible, and figured out a path infusing the older idea of meditation / dhyana with mindfulness / insight cultivation so as to arrive at release during life -- using samadhi and vipassana together.
(As Ayya Khema, and other Theravadans, put it: samadhi is necessary but not sufficient for unbinding.)
Yes, I would agree with the explanation provided here by Chris. And I would also posit that the devil is in the details, and how well one can discern those details.