MN 20: More ostrich adventures with B. Sujato and B. Analayo, fraudulent translation and interpretation of vitakka in jhāna

Often consecutive suttas are grouped in such a way because they continue or expand on an important topic. MN 18, 19, 20 all say something important about first jhana, second jhana, and how thought processes, verbal processes (vitakka thoughts you think before you say them out loud), and subverbal mental processing work.

✴️MN 18 Madhupiṇḍika: honey cake:
Cakkhu + rūpe + viññāṇaṃ → phasso → vedeti (vedanā) → sañjānāti → vitakketi → papañceti
eye + forms + consciousness → contact → feel → perceive → think → proliferate
✴️MN 19 Dve-dhā-vitakka: two-sorts-of-thinking: prior to first jhana, remove all akusala thoughts and replace kusala thoughts. Second jhana is reducing the amount and intensity of kusala thoughts to allow the body to pacify/relax/passaddhi.
✴️MN 20 Vitakka-saṇṭhāna:  Thought-composition. 5 ways to remove unwanted thoughts: replace, see danger, forget, slow down, mind crush.

So why do B. Sujato and B. Analayo, in their books and articles describing how vitakka and vicara work in first jhana, pretend MN 20 and MN 18 don't exist, and only focus on MN 19?

Because they're hoping you don't study those suttas carefully and expose their ostrich maneuver. 

MN 19 is the only sutta of the three that explicitly states the four jhana standard formulas. 

MN 20, uses a code phrase to indicate that the removal of vitakka (thoughts) leads to the a-vitakka a-vicara samadhi of 2nd jhana or higher (without using the explicit term 'second jhana' to describe that samadhi). 

This refrain appears multiple times in MN 20:

(ekodi & samādhi are 2nd jhāna hallmarks)

ajjhattameva cittaṃ	internally (his) mind
santiṭṭhati sannisīdati	becomes-still, settles,
ekodi hoti samādhiyati.	Transcends-into-singularity, becomes undistractible & lucid.

Another sutta, MN 122 confirms those 4 key words (santitthati, sannisdati, ekodi, samadhi) are unequivocally describing one attempting to attain the four jhanas, or have attained them. MN 19, the sutta that MN 20 continues, is also using those 4 magic words to describe entry into first jhana. The difference between samadhi that is not yet first jhana quality, and samadhi that is, is the awaking factor of passadhi (pacification/relaxation). 

✴️MN 122 Mahā-suññata: great-emptiness: (ekodi, samādahati = do 4 jhānas) (emptiness) (doing that in 4 postures)

The formula from MN 122 containing those 4 magic words:

(ekodi, samādahati = do 4 jhānas)

♦ 188. “kathañc-ānanda, bhikkhu	And how does the monk
ajjhattameva cittaṃ	Internally {make the} mind
saṇṭhapeti sannisādeti	steadied, settled,
ekodiṃ karoti samādahati?	Singular {******}, undistractified-&-lucidified?
idhānanda, bhikkhu	There is the case where a monk—
🚫💑 vivicc’eva kāmehi …	🚫💑 Quite-withdrawn (from) sensuality, …
🌘 paṭhamaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati. …	🌘 first Jhāna (he) enters, dwells. …
🌗 dutiyaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati. …	🌗 second Jhāna (he) enters, dwells. …
🌖 tatiyaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati. …	🌖 third Jhāna (he) enters, dwells. …
👁🐘 Upekkhā-sati-pārisuddhiṃ	👁🐘 equanimous-observation-(and)-remembrance-purified,
🌕 catutthaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati	🌕 fourth Jhāna (he) enters, dwells.

So that is why B. Sujato and B. Analayo pretend MN 20 don't exist. Because MN didn't explicitly use the phrase 'second jhana' (to describe the removal of vitakka thoughts), they pretend it's just a type of other samadhi lower than first jhana quality. They never thought to ask, and hope you don't ask, "then why does MN 20 come after instead of before MN 19, if MN 20 is describing a samadhi lower than first jhana?"

In B. Sujato's translation of MN 20 he translates vitakka correctly (instead of his usual wrong 'placing the mind & keeping it connected')

(frankk comment: incidentally, adhi-citta 'higher mind' is also another code word usually equivalent to four jhanas)

Mendicants, a mendicant committed to the higher mind should focus on five foundations of meditation from time to time.“Adhi-cittam-anuyuttena, bhikkhave, bhikkhunā pañca nimittāni kālena kālaṃ manasi kātabbāni.What five?Katamāni pañca?

Take a mendicant who is focusing on some foundation of meditation that gives rise to bad, unskillful thoughts connected with desire, hate, and delusion. That mendicant should focus on some other foundation of meditation connected with the skillful.Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno yaṃ nimittaṃ āgamma yaṃ nimittaṃ manasikaroto uppajjanti pāpakā akusalā vitakkā chandūpasaṃhitāpi dosūpasaṃhitāpi mohūpasaṃhitāpi, tena, bhikkhave, bhikkhunā tamhā nimittā aññaṃ nimittaṃ manasi kātabbaṃ kusalūpasaṃhitaṃ.As they do so, those bad thoughts are given up and come to an end.Tassa tamhā nimittā aññaṃ nimittaṃ manasikaroto kusalūpasaṃhitaṃ ye pāpakā akusalā vitakkā chandūpasaṃhitāpi dosūpasaṃhitāpi mohūpasaṃhitāpi te pahīyanti te abbhatthaṃ gacchanti.

In B. Analayo's EBMS (early buddhist meditation studies) book, like B. Sujato, he also conspicuously avoids analyzing MN 20, for the same reason. Because if he were to translate vitakka correctly  in MN 20, he'd have to explain why it's different from MN 19 with his wrong interpretation of vitakka even though those two suttas are talking about first and second jhana.

So by burying their heads in the sand, they pretend not to see this contradiction, and hope you will join them. If the lack of public condemnation of their wrong translation and interpretation is an indication, they've been proven correct so far. It's up to you to get informed, put pressure on them to defend their position or change their English translation and interpretation to the correct one. 

Related:

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

 

My response to article comments:

post replyMN 20: More ostrich adventures with B. Sujato and B. Analayo, fraudulent translation and interpretation of vitakka in jhāna

from optimistically_eyed via /r/Buddhism sent 23 hours ago

So why do B. Sujato and B. Analayo, in their books and articles describing how vitakka and vicara work in first jhana, pretend MN 20 and MN 18 don't exist, and only focus on MN 19?

Because they're hoping you don't study those suttas carefully and expose their ostrich maneuver.

Can you please share your credentials? I’d enjoy knowing who you are before taking seriously your outright insulting of two well-respected monastics.

• Context
• Full Comments (2)
• Report
• Block User
• Mark Unread
• Reply

lucid24-frankk[S] 1 point just now 

How about you rely on your common sense and basic level of intelligence? I've detailed my thesis in excruciating detail, lining up the pali next to the English, laid out the logic and reasoning clearly. If you can find a flaw in the reasoning and wish to discuss, I'll be happy to do so. That's real credential. Monks who bury their head in the sand and refuse to address legitimate challenges to their thesis only have PhD (piled higher and deeper) as their credential. I'm not the only one who has asked them to defend their position, publicly or privately. The only response we ever get is crickets chirping and some chicken feathers floating in the wind.

level 1

TLCD96

5 points·22 hours ago·edited 21 hours ago

Hi Frank. Are you saying that the removal of distracting thoughts has no place outside of transitioning from 1st jhana? Why would 1st jhana have any unskillful thoughts that need to be abandoned?

Edit: I'm also wondering if maybe they didn't mention MN 20 just because they wanted to focus on MN 19 (i.e. it doesn't seem very insidious)? Of course it seems that MN 20 might have application in Jhana, but it also seems that despite the pali terms, MN 19 has an approach to meditation that seems more logically targeted to the development of Jhana; some of methods for removing distracting thought don't seem applicable at deeper states of concentration, but this is coming from a person who hasn't much experience with Jhana, if any at all

level 2

lucid24-frankk

1 point·1 minute ago

Of course it seems that MN 20 might have application in Jhana

See the part of my article with the MN 122 passage. When those 4 magic words are used (in MN 122 and MN 19 and MN 20), it means we're talking about 4 jhanas, and not a lesser quality of samadhi. The way it's used in MN 20, it's saying that if one successfully removed vitakka, then one is in the 4 jhanas. Unequivocally. If vicara has been removed as well (MN 20 doesn't mention vicara), then one is definitely in second jhana. MN 19, is basically using method 1 of those 5 methods in MN 20. It's absolutely a continuation of that sutta. MN 19 is telling you how to remove akusala thoughts and replace them with kusala thoughts, then attenuating them and pacifying the body to successfully enter first jhana. MN 20 then gives 4 more methods to remove vitakka, and upon successfully accomplishing that, describing the state of 2nd jhana or higher. (AN 8.63 describes the case of vitakka removed with vicara remaining).

Hi Frank. Are you saying that the removal of distracting thoughts has no place outside of transitioning from 1st jhana?

No, I'm not saying that MN 20 is only talking about trying to enter jhana. Of course the method is general enough to apply in any situation.

Why would 1st jhana have any unskillful thoughts that need to be abandoned?

learner's jhāna, impure jhāna, is still called "jhāna":

especially see sutta AN 9.41

http://lucid24.org/an/an09/an09-0041/index.html