Ajahn Brahm and the time machine: DN 21 B. Sujato's erroneous translation of vitakka & vicara explained.

V&V💭: vitakka & vicāra

Vitakka 💭 = directed thought.
Vicāra 🕵️ = the evaluation of that very same directed thought, not a separate train of thought.
V&V isn't a wild excursion of jumping from one random thought to another random, disconnected thought.
Vicāra explores, inspects, discriminates, evaluates, ponders, scrutinizes, discerns, considers the very same thought initially fixed upon by vitakka.
Vitakka decides on a topic, then gives it to vicara to analyze it further.

⛔ Wrong translations for V&V💭

✅ ☸EBT V&V💭: vitakka & vicāra = directed-thought & evaluation

⛔ Vism. Redefinition V&V💭: applied-thought & sustained-thought (b.nanamoli)
⛔ Vism. Redefinition V&V💭: initial-application & sustained-application (u thittila)
⛔ B.Sujato mistranslation of V&V💭: placing-the-mind & keeping-it-connected
⛔ B.Anālayo mistranslation of V&V💭: [directed] awareness and [sustained] contemplation

DN 21 B. Sujato pali + english

Here is my version of DN 21 based off B. Sujato, but corrected for V&V.

DN 21 source of desire and thought, and relation to somanassa, domanassa, upekkha

 source of desire

“Chando pana, mārisa, kiṃnidāno kiṃsamudayo kiṃjātiko kiṃpabhavo;	“But what is the source of desire?”
kismiṃ sati chando hoti;
kismiṃ asati chando na hotī”ti?
“Chando kho, devānaminda, vitakkanidāno vitakkasamudayo vitakkajātiko vitakkapabhavo;	“Thought is the source of desire.”
vitakke sati chando hoti;
vitakke asati chando na hotī”ti.

source of thought

“vitakko pana, mārisa, kiṃnidāno kiṃsamudayo kiṃjātiko kiṃpabhavo;	“But what is the source of thought?”
kismiṃ sati vitakko hoti;
kismiṃ asati vitakko na hotī”ti?
“vitakko kho, devānaminda, papañcasaññāsaṅkhānidāno papañcasaññāsaṅkhāsamudayo papañcasaññāsaṅkhājātiko papañcasaññāsaṅkhāpabhavo;	“Concepts of identity that emerge from the proliferation of perceptions are the source of thoughts.”
papañcasaññāsaṅkhāya sati vitakko hoti;
papañcasaññāsaṅkhāya asati vitakko na hotī”ti.

 two kind of somanassa/happiness

…	…
Somanassampāhaṃ, devānaminda, duvidhena vadāmi sevitabbampi, asevitabbampīti iti kho panetaṃ vuttaṃ, kiñcetaṃ paṭicca vuttaṃ?	Why did I say that there are two kinds of happiness?
Tattha yaṃ jaññā somanassaṃ	Take a happiness of which you know:
‘imaṃ kho me somanassaṃ sevato akusalā dhammā abhivaḍḍhanti, kusalā dhammā parihāyantī’ti, evarūpaṃ somanassaṃ na sevitabbaṃ.	‘When I cultivate this kind of happiness, unskillful qualities grow, and skillful qualities decline.’ You should not cultivate that kind of happiness.
Tattha yaṃ jaññā somanassaṃ	Take a happiness of which you know:
‘imaṃ kho me somanassaṃ sevato akusalā dhammā parihāyanti, kusalā dhammā abhivaḍḍhantī’ti, evarūpaṃ somanassaṃ sevitabbaṃ.	‘When I cultivate this kind of happiness, unskillful qualities decline, and skillful qualities grow.’ You should cultivate that kind of happiness.
Tattha yañce savitakkaṃ savicāraṃ, yañce avitakkaṃ avicāraṃ, ye avitakke avicāre, te paṇītatare.	And that which is free of directing-thought and evalulating-said-thoughts is better than that which still involves directing-thought and evalulating-said-thoughts.
Somanassampāhaṃ, devānaminda, duvidhena vadāmi sevitabbampi, asevitabbampīti.	That’s why I said there are two kinds of happiness.
Iti yaṃ taṃ vuttaṃ, idametaṃ paṭicca vuttaṃ.

two kinds of domanassa/sadness

Domanassampāhaṃ, devānaminda, duvidhena vadāmi sevitabbampi, asevitabbampīti iti kho panetaṃ vuttaṃ, kiñcetaṃ paṭicca vuttaṃ?	Why did I say that there are two kinds of sadness?
Tattha yaṃ jaññā domanassaṃ	Take a sadness of which you know:
‘imaṃ kho me domanassaṃ sevato akusalā dhammā abhivaḍḍhanti, kusalā dhammā parihāyantī’ti, evarūpaṃ domanassaṃ na sevitabbaṃ.	‘When I cultivate this kind of sadness, unskillful qualities grow, and skillful qualities decline.’ You should not cultivate that kind of sadness.
Tattha yaṃ jaññā domanassaṃ	Take a sadness of which you know:
‘imaṃ kho me domanassaṃ sevato akusalā dhammā parihāyanti, kusalā dhammā abhivaḍḍhantī’ti, evarūpaṃ domanassaṃ sevitabbaṃ.	‘When I cultivate this kind of sadness, unskillful qualities decline, and skillful qualities grow.’ You should cultivate that kind of sadness.
Tattha yañce savitakkaṃ savicāraṃ, yañce avitakkaṃ avicāraṃ, ye avitakke avicāre, te paṇītatare.	And that which is free of directing-thought and evalulating-said-thoughts is better than that which still involves directing-thought and evalulating-said-thoughts.
Domanassampāhaṃ, devānaminda, duvidhena vadāmi sevitabbampi, asevitabbampīti	That’s why I said there are two kinds of sadness.
iti yaṃ taṃ vuttaṃ, idametaṃ paṭicca vuttaṃ.

DN 21 two kinds of upekkha/equanimity

Upekkhampāhaṃ, devānaminda, duvidhena vadāmi sevitabbampi, asevitabbampīti iti kho panetaṃ vuttaṃ, kiñcetaṃ paṭicca vuttaṃ?	Why did I say that there are two kinds of equanimity?
Tattha yaṃ jaññā upekkhaṃ	Take an equanimity of which you know:
‘imaṃ kho me upekkhaṃ sevato akusalā dhammā abhivaḍḍhanti, kusalā dhammā parihāyantī’ti, evarūpā upekkhā na sevitabbā.	‘When I cultivate this kind of equanimity, unskillful qualities grow, and skillful qualities decline.’ You should not cultivate that kind of equanimity.
Tattha yaṃ jaññā upekkhaṃ	Take an equanimity of which you know:
‘imaṃ kho me upekkhaṃ sevato akusalā dhammā parihāyanti, kusalā dhammā abhivaḍḍhantī’ti, evarūpā upekkhā sevitabbā.	‘When I cultivate this kind of equanimity, unskillful qualities decline, and skillful qualities grow.’ You should cultivate that kind of equanimity.
Tattha yañce savitakkaṃ savicāraṃ, yañce avitakkaṃ avicāraṃ, ye avitakke avicāre, te paṇītatare.	And that which is free of directing-thought and evalulating-said-thoughts is better than that which still involves directing-thought and evalulating-said-thoughts.
Upekkhampāhaṃ, devānaminda, duvidhena vadāmi sevitabbampi, asevitabbampīti	That’s why I said there are two kinds of equanimity.

Where does B. Sujato go wrong?

Even though there's no mention of four jhanas in that section of the sutta, B. Sujato correctly recognizes that the vitakka and vicara is referring to a jhana context. That is why he uses his translation of "placing the mind and keeping it connected", instead of his "thinking and considering" for contexts outside of four jhanas.

How do we know this is jhana context?
Somanassa, Domanassa, upekkha, are 3 of the 5 vedana-indriya scheme from SN 48.37 . 

How do we know B. Sujato is wrong?
1. If you read his translation of that passage, it's incoherent. It sounds like it's saying being a dead person or comatose person is much preferable to being alive, because only then would you not be "placing the mind and keeping it connected." 

Ajahn Brahm and the time machine

For that Jhana instruction to work, you would need Ajahn Brahm and B. Sujato to go in a time machine, and go back to the Buddha's time and explain to each monk as they hear that instruction, "placing the mind and keeping it connected means the same thing as the VRJ (visuddhimagga redefinition of jhana) that doesn't happen for at least another 1000 years, so we're here to enlighten you and point out the Buddha wasn't being clear and and a special definition for vitakka only in first jhana."

how else do we know B. Sujato is wrong?

The rest of that passage in DN 21 ends with this:

Evaṃ paṭipanno kho, devānaminda, bhikkhu papañcasaññāsaṅkhānirodhasāruppagāminiṃ paṭipadaṃ paṭipanno hotī”ti.	That’s how a mendicant appropriately practices for the cessation of concepts of identity that emerge from the proliferation of perceptions.”
Itthaṃ bhagavā sakkassa devānamindassa pañhaṃ puṭṭho byākāsi.	Such was the Buddha’s answer to Sakka.
Attamano sakko devānamindo bhagavato bhāsitaṃ abhinandi anumodi:	Delighted, Sakka approved and agreed with what the Buddha said, saying:
“evametaṃ, bhagavā, evametaṃ, sugata.	“That’s so true, Blessed One! That’s so true, Holy One!
Tiṇṇā mettha kaṅkhā vigatā kathaṅkathā bhagavato pañhaveyyākaraṇaṃ sutvā”ti.	Hearing the Buddha’s answer, I’ve gone beyond doubt and got rid of indecision.”

As well as the section right before the 'somanassa' section, the 'source of thought' is the sanna/perceptions of desire. 

So when we're talking about perceptions, thoughts, and proliferation, there's a clear hierarchy, as explained in

MN 18:

Cakkhu + rūpe + viññāṇaṃ → phasso → vedeti (vedanā) → sañjānāti → vitakketi → papañceti	eye + forms + consciousness → contact → feel → perceive → think → proliferate

(1. Dependent origination of proliferation sequence)

(6aya. Eye base 👁)

Cakkhuñc-āvuso, paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cakkhu-viññāṇaṃ,	Eye consciousness arises dependent on the eye and sights.
tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso,	The meeting of the three is contact.
phassa-paccayā vedanā,	Contact is a condition for feeling.
yaṃ vedeti taṃ sañjānāti,	What you feel, you perceive.
yaṃ sañjānāti taṃ vitakketi,	What you perceive, you think about.
yaṃ vitakketi taṃ papañceti,	What you think about, you proliferate.
yaṃ papañceti tato-nidānaṃ	What you proliferate about is the source
purisaṃ papañca-saññā-saṅkhā samudācaranti	from which a person is beset by concepts of identity that emerge from the proliferation of perceptions.
atīt-ānāgata-paccuppannesu cakkhu-viññeyyesu rūpesu.	This occurs with respect to sights known by the eye in the past, future, and present.

(same pattern for remaining 6aya. 👁 👂 👃 👅 👆 💭)

For vitakka to be the imaginary "placing the mind" that B. sujato proposes, it can't be the same vitakka as the one sandwiched between perceptions/sanna and papanca/proliferation. It would need to be a lower level mental activity preceding perception/sanna.