AN 4.41: what's the difference between S&S and samadhi bhavana for asava destruction?

I first started a public dialogue with B. Sujato on his understanding of jhana, vitakka, vicara on his discussion forum, around 2015. On important suttas such as MN 78, MN 125, AN 4.41, AN 8.30, and many others, he deliberately declined to give an explanation on why his interpretation and translation of jhana terms contradict EBT suttas, causing fatal incoherence in the Dhamma.  In many cases he ends up contradicting himself (example below). 

Both B. Sujato and B. Analayo, when I publicly and privately asked them to comment on how their interpretation of jhana being a frozen state where thinking is not possible, did not agree with AN 4.41 gloss of 3rd jhana's sati and sampajano (as well as MN 111), used some combination of equivocation, sophistry, and mostly just burying their head in the sand and pretending the mountain of evidence doesn't exist. 

this article shows how vipassana is done with sati and sampajno in 3rd jhana, essentially samadhi bhavana for sati and sampajano is the Buddha's commentary and gloss of the same term in 3rd jhana.

AN 4.41: what's the difference between S&S and samadhi bhavana for asava destruction?

This thread from B. Sujato's forum, where he actively participates but declines to respond when I bring up the many suttas that contradict his position on jhana. (the header is a link to his forum thread, where you'll see he didn't respond).

One can only conclude after 5 years of silence in response to challenge, the ostrich burying their heads strategy they favor amounts to a tacit admission that they know their thesis is incoherent and fatally flawed. 

MN 111 and AN 4.41, B. Sujato contradicts himself on V&V

Oct '18

MN 111 (sariputta performing AN 4.41 “sato and sampajano” function during first jhana)

And he distinguished the phenomena in the first absorption one by one: placing and keeping and rapture and bliss and unification of mind; contact, feeling, perception, intention, mind, enthusiasm, decision, energy, mindfulness, equanimity, and attention.
Ye ca paṭhame jhāne dhammā vitakko ca vicāro ca pīti ca sukhañca cittekaggatā ca, phasso vedanā saññā cetanā cittaṃ chando adhimokkho vīriyaṃ sati upekkhā manasikāro—tyāssa dhammā anupadavavatthitā honti.

He knew those phenomena as they arose, as they remained, and as they went away. Tyāssa dhammā viditā uppajjanti, viditā upaṭṭhahanti, viditā abbhatthaṃ gacchanti. He understood: So evaṃ pajānāti: ‘So it seems that these phenomena, not having been, come to be; and having come to be, they flit away.’ ‘evaṃ kirame dhammā ahutvā sambhonti, hutvā paṭiventī’ti. And he meditated without attraction or repulsion for those phenomena; independent, untied, liberated, detached, his mind free of limits. So tesu dhammesu anupāyo anapāyo anissito appaṭibaddho vippamutto visaṃyutto vimariyādīkatena cetasā viharati. He understood: ‘There is an escape beyond.’ So ‘atthi uttari nissaraṇan’ti pajānāti. And by repeated practice he knew for sure that there is. Tabbahulīkārā atthitvevassa hoti. (1)

in AN 4.41, b.sujato correctly translates vitakka as “thoughts”:

And what is the way of developing immersion further that leads to mindfulness and awareness? Katamā ca, bhikkhave, samādhibhāvanā bhāvitā bahulīkatā satisampajaññāya saṃvattati? It’s when a mendicant knows feelings as they arise, as they remain, and as they go away. Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno viditā vedanā uppajjanti, viditā upaṭṭhahanti, viditā abbhatthaṃ gacchanti; They know perceptions as they arise, as they remain, and as they go away. They know thoughts as they arise, as they remain, and as they go away. viditā saññā … pe …

viditā vitakkā uppajjanti,
viditā upaṭṭhahanti,
viditā abbhatthaṃ gacchanti.

This is the way of developing immersion further that leads to mindfulness and awareness. Ayaṃ, bhikkhave, samādhibhāvanā bhāvitā bahulīkatā satisampajaññāya saṃvattati.

conclusion

B. Sujato needs to translate V&V consistently for those 2 passages because it’s the same activity.

That MN 111 is early abhidhamma, and not on B. Sujato’s “authentic” EBT list is beside the point. S&S (sato and sampajano) is active while in all 4 jhanas, and all 7 perception samadhi attainments. Plenty of EBT passages support this, such as AN 9.36, so MN 111 is authentic on this point, in accordance to the Dhamma.

Replies to some comments on the post:

Re: AN 4.41 and MN 111 How B. Sujato, B. Analayo, and Ajahn Brahm understand vitakka and vicara in those suttas.

• Edit
• Delete
• Report
• Quote

Post by frank k » Thu May 28, 2020 4:37 am

I don't mind so much translators who translate vitakka correctly but misinterpret the meaning. Because they got that part of the job correct, and it's an extremely important part, that vitakka should be translated with the same word all the way through in the EBT, while in jhana or outside of it. If they got that part correct, then people who rely on their translations have the possibility of practicing jhana correctly.

But with how U Thitthila back translated earlier canonical Abhidhamma with late Theravada anachronistic understanding of vitakka, that's a heinous crime, and B. Sujato following his lead by rewriting MN 117 and MN 43 into his own Abhidhamma to redefine vitakka and vicara, that's even a worse crime because he's supposed to be basing his translation on EBT. Instead of honoring EBT, he's rewriting EBT according to his own misunderstanding of it.

mikenz66 wrote: ↑

Thu May 28, 2020 3:07 am

sentinel wrote: ↑

Thu May 28, 2020 12:27 am

This probably need to view it from both angle . One is belonging to yours from the point of practice . One is belonging to frank . If frank is correct in his understanding , standing firm to inform other there is something incoherence (frank's word) in sujato translation ....

I'm not sure if the translation is the root of the problem. Others use the English that Frank approves of, but interpret the passage the same way as Bhikkhu Sujato (and the Theravada Commentaries).

Of course, it's an important point. If Frank (and others who agree with his interpretation of jhana) is correct then jhana is much easier than suggested by the Theravada tradition, and practitioners may be unnecessarily frustrated. On the other hand, if Frank (and the others who agree with him) are not correct, then they may be overestimating their attainments.



Mike

mikenz66 wrote: ↑

Thu May 28, 2020 3:07 am

...If Frank (and others who agree with his interpretation of jhana) is correct then jhana is much easier than suggested by the Theravada tradition, and practitioners may be unnecessarily frustrated. On the other hand, if Frank (and the others who agree with him) are not correct, then they may be overestimating their attainments.
...

I would not characterize it that way.
A low quality of first jhana, let's say first jhana for a few seconds, according to the suttas is not that hard. That is according to the exact words of the EBT in pali text and other sources.
The ability to suspend the 5 hindrances for a significant length of time, let's say one hour for example, that is a craft that one has to work on all the time, not just in sitting meditation, no matter if one understands jhana according to the EBT, or follows late Theravada's redefinition of jhana or Ajahn Brahm's redefined jabrama jhana.

Suspending the 5 hindrances for an hour, on demand, that's quite an achievement, a superhuman feat, and if first jhana is to be characterized as difficult, that is the main difficulty.
So in that department, authentic EBT jhana and corrupted redefined jhanas are equally difficult to obtain.

VRJ (vism. redefined jhana) and jabrama jhana adds a further requirement for 'first jhana' that is not in the EBT. That one enter a formless attainment where one can not hear sounds, feel mosquito bites, mind is divorced from 5 sense faculties.

So basically, VRJ is asking for a further skill that typically in the EBT is not expected of someone who can't do fourth jhana.
This is like requiring high school graduates applying for first year freshman status, to have a Phd before they can qualify for the 1st year of bachelors program. Totally insane and uncalled for.

Read the EBT, see for yourself and trust in the words of the Buddha, not the later words of revisionists with an agenda adding a whole new set of requirements not in the original scripture.