AN 2.68-2.72 Ven. Sunyo wrong about sukha being mental in the 4 jhānas

@Ven. Sunyo wrote:

https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/how-to-reconcile-these-2-suttas-with-absorption-jhana/34061/56


But to finish with just one argument I don’t think I’ve shared before, which is somewhat relevant to this discussion:
In AN2.68–70 the Buddha says that of all pleasant (sukha) feeling tones, whether mental or physical,
the best is that which is mental (cetasika) and non-physical (or literally “not of the flesh”, nirāmisa).

Now, an even better “sukha” is the neutral feeling tone of the fourth jhana and beyond, but as far as pleasant feelings go, the third jhana is the highest.

@frankk response:

Perhaps this is just an honest mistake on his part.

What the sutta actually says:

2.70 - AN 2.70

70	70
“Dvemāni, bhikkhave, sukhāni.	“There are, monks, these two kinds of happiness.
Katamāni dve?	What two?
Kāyikañca sukhaṃ cetasikañca sukhaṃ.	Physical happiness and mental happiness.
Imāni kho, bhikkhave, dve sukhāni.	These are the two kinds of happiness.
Etadaggaṃ, bhikkhave, imesaṃ dvinnaṃ sukhānaṃ yadidaṃ cetasikaṃ sukhan”ti.	The better of these two kinds of happiness is mental happiness.”

It's contrasting cetasika (mental) with kāya (physical), not nirā-misā as Ven. Sunyo claims above.

nirā-misā literally tranlsated is "not of the flesh", but whether that means a state where 5 senses are shut off is a disputed point.

nirā-misa sukha (not of the flesh pleasure) is a code phrase defined in SN 36.1 as the first 3 jhānas.

Whether sukha is physical or mental is the point that needs to be proved,

simply taking a translation literally "not of the flesh" as proof of 5 senses being shut off, is not evidence, is not a proof.

It's circular reasoning.

Asserting what's true before you've proved it. 

Like saying the Bible is the word of God because God says so in the bible.

If anything, AN 2.68 is proving the sukha in third jhāna is physical.

It's contrasting kāya (physical) with cetasika (mental),

and the standard 3rd jhāna formula explicitly says sukha is experienced with kāya.

🌖 Third Jhāna

🚫😁 pītiyā ca virāgā	With [mental] rapture fading,
👁 upekkhako ca viharati	he lives equanimously observing [☸Dharmas with subverbal mental processing].
(S&S🐘💭) sato ca sam-pajāno,	remembering [and applying relevant ☸Dharma], he lucidly discerns.
🙂🚶 sukhañca kāyena paṭi-saṃ-vedeti,	He experiences pleasure with the [physical] body.
yaṃ taṃ ariyā ācikkhanti —	The Noble Ones praise this [stage of jhāna in particular because they expect this to be the normal state of the average monk in all postures at all times]:
‘upekkhako satimā sukha-vihārī’ti	"He lives happily with pleasure, Equanimously observing and remembering [to engage in relevant ☸Dharma]."
🌖 tatiyaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati.	he attains and lives in third jhāna.

The sutta Ven. Sunyo probably conflated and confused with AN 2.70:

2.68 - AN 2.68

68	68
“Dvemāni, bhikkhave, sukhāni.	“There are, monks, these two kinds of happiness.
Katamāni dve?	What two?
Sāmisañca sukhaṃ nirāmisañca sukhaṃ.	Carnal happiness and spiritual happiness.
Imāni kho, bhikkhave, dve sukhāni.	These are the two kinds of happiness.
Etadaggaṃ, bhikkhave, imesaṃ dvinnaṃ sukhānaṃ yadidaṃ nirāmisaṃ sukhan”ti.	The better of these two kinds of happiness is spiritual happiness.”

That's not saying mental happiness is better than physical happiness.

It's using code phrases (defined in SN 36.31).

What AN 2.68 actually says, is the pleasure of the first 3 jhānas (by definition nirāmisā sukha)

are better than the coarse pleasures based on the 5 cords of sensual pleasure, the carnal pleasures of a worldling.

Besides, you don't have to be a disembodied samādhi to experience mental pleasure.

You eat chocolate cake, there's a physical component, and a mental component.

Someone can read a best selling novel, totally mentally immersed in the book,

in the imaginary thought world created in their own mind.

Their pleasure is purely mental, they've forgotten about the 5 senses of the body that are functional, but not being paid any attention.

This is the same kind of fallacious reasoning the Ajahn Brahm school uses to redefine kāmehi of the first jhāna formula to mean "objects of the 5 senses", rather than desire of sensual pleasure from the 5 senses.

Even if we grant them their redefinition,

being secluded from 5 bodily senses doesn't mean you have to be in a disembodied samādhi.

You can be secluded by going into an empty room and locking the door. 

Similarly, even if you want to wrongly interpret nirā-misā literally as non-physical, pure mental  pleasure,

it does not mean you have to be in a disembodied samādhi in order to that.