Skip to main content

Common misundestandings of satipaṭṭhāna's vedana (sensations) and Dhamma (teachings that lead to nirvana)

 

Posted by4 days ago

4Foundations of mindfulness(clarification needed)

Although the explanation of 4foundations is simple, I am not sure if I understand it correctly.

  1. “Awareness of the mind in the mind”. Why is it not said just “Awareness of the mind.” ? If they are not the same thing, what would make them different?

  2. Also, “awareness of phenomena of the mind in the mind”. I need the same clarification.

  3. I also need to understand the difference between awareness of “objects of the mind(phenomena)” and awareness of “the mind” itself. Everything the mind perceives is an object. Isn’t it? So when we say “awareness of the mind” we are actually referring to its objects. So what is the difference?

Please either explain to me or introduce me a good video or book that targets my questions.

Thank you.


level 1

this short explanation with sutta references clears up many of the misconceptions on the topic:

https://lucid24.org/tped/l/lll/index.html#8.7

and this one:

https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2023/09/wagging-dhamma-kn-ud-110-bahiya-sutta.html

explains why 4th frame Dhamma is the Buddha's teaching that leads to nirvana, not "phenomena", "things", or "qualities".


User avatar
level 2

Thank you for the link. I just read few pages of it awhile ago and found its language straight forward and direct to the point. It has some wit also in some parts that i found helpful. :)

Although reading all these different translations and their interpretation  I am getting more and more confused now which is the correct one…

In previous translations that I read ,the second foundation was introduces as awareness of feelings. In your link it is awareness of sensations. It just made my whole previous understanding questionnable. Sensation and feeling are not the same in my understanding. From what I read before, I got the understanding it is talking about feelings that come to heart which can affect the mind (such as likes and dislikes, hatred, jealousy etc). Now this translation is talking about sensation which is completely different thing…

Moreover when it comes to 4th foundation, other translations say “awareness of the phenomena” or “awareness of the objects of the mind”. I understand the link you shared is saying “awareness of the dhamma” and you are saying this is the correct translation. But the funny confusing thing I encountered is that someone else also shared a link in this post which translates the 4th foundation just as exactly as “awareness of dhamma”. BUT the thing is that link says dhamma word here IS Not referring to Buddha teachings. In contrary, the one you shared is saying Dhamma word IS referring to buddha teachings…

1
User avatar
level 3

“awareness of the dhamma” and you are saying this is the correct translation

Dhamma is not a translation of the word the buddha used, "Dhamma". It's leaving it untranslated. The term 'Dhamma' is a highly ambiguous word, so the best practice is to leave it untranslated and leave it to the listener to disambiguate, just as the Buddha intended. When translators force feed their INTERPRETATION on you with their translation of the term 'dhamma' (into 'phenomena' or something else wrong), then it can have serious consequences.

There are a few cases where the term 'dhamma' of 4th satipatthana fits better with 'phenomena' rather than Dhamma [Teaching], but those are in the vast minority if you look at all the passages where tha t occur. The vast majority of the cases Dhamma [the Buddha's teaching that leads to nirvana' ] is the much better fit, and a fair number of the instances both meanings [phenomena and teaching] would work.

Which is how Bodhi and other translators can justify to themself their wrong translation.

But if you leave Dhamma untranslated as I and a few others have done, then you are blameless because you represented the Buddha with 100% accuracy and intent.

How do I know I'm right in interpreting Dhamma of 4th satipatthana Buddha's teaching that leads to nirvana? Look at the last 4 instructions of the 16 steps of breath meditation, which are explicitly said to represent the 4th frame of satipatthana. They are:

13) anicca: impermanence

14) virāga: dispassion

15) nirodha: cessation

16) patinissagga: release

The last two are a synonym for the third noble truth, cessation of suffering, nirvana.

See Dhamma cakka pavattana sutta, under 3rd noble truth:

What is cessation of suffering?

yo tassa yeva tanha ya asesa

virāga, nirodho. patinissaggo, mutti anālayo.

It's the complete dispassion, cessation, release of craving.

The 4th frame of satipatthana in the 16 steps of breath meditation explicitly are describing Dhamma anu passana, the "seeing" of Dharma (not "awareness" of "phenomena").

1
User avatar
level 3

In previous translations that I read ,the second foundation was introduces as awareness of feelings. In your link it is awareness of sensations. It just made my whole previous understanding questionnable.

Always question authority. Until you're fully awakened, everything is hearsay, and we can only keep researching and updating our understanding.

The authoritative understanding of Vedana is SN 36.

https://lucid24.org/sn/sn36/index.html

OUt of the 31 suttas in that SN collection, these suttas all say anatomical body is the cause of vedanasuttas SN 36.4, SN 36.6, SN 36.7, SN 36.12, SN 36.13

3 types of vedana can arise at the 6 sense doors (eyes, ears... mind).

Pleasant, unpleasant, neutral.

Your first contact is the physical sensation, and then a mental 'feeling' interprets that sensation contacted at the sense door as either pleasant, painful, or neutral.

SN 48.37 states that

https://lucid24.org/sn/main/sn48/index.html#48.37

vedana includes both a physical and mental component.

But vedana arises from the body, so the sensation comes first.

The problem with translating vedana as 'feeling', is many people, as you've done, wrongly misunderstand it to be purely a psychological mental reaction, or pure emotion devoid of physical sensation.

vedana as 'sensation' makes more clear the physical origin.

1


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Advice to younger meditators on jhāna, sex, porn, masturbation

Someone asked: Is porn considered harmful sexual.activity? I don't have a sex life because I don't have a partner and I don't wish to engage in casual sex so I use porn to quench the biological urge to orgasm. I can't see that's it's harmful because nobody is being forced into it. The actors are all paid well and claim to enjoy it etc. The only harm I can see is that it's so accessible these days on smart devices and so children may access it but I believe that this is the parents responsibility to not allow unsupervised use of devices etc. Views? Frankk response: In another thread, you asked about pleasant sensations and jhāna.  I'm guessing you're young, so here's some important advice you won't get from suttas   if you're serious about jhāna.  (since monastics are already celibate by rule)   If you want to attain stable and higher jhānas,   celibacy and noble silence to the best of your ability are the feedstock and prerequiste to tha...

SN 48.40 Ven. Thanissaro comments on Ven. Sunyo's analysis

This was Ven. Sunyo's analysis of SN 48.40: https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2024/05/exciting-news-honest-ebt-scholars-like.html And here is Ven. Thanissaro's response to that analysis: I think there’s a better way to tackle the issue of SN 48:40 than by appealing to the oldest layers of commentarial literature. That way is to point out that SN 48:40, as we have it, doesn’t pass the test in DN 16 for determining what’s genuine Dhamma and what’s not. There the standard is, not the authority of the person who’s claiming to report the Buddha’s teachings, but whether the teachings he’s reporting are actually in accordance with the principles of the Dhamma that you know. So the simple fact that those who have passed the Buddha’s teachings down to us say that a particular passage is what the Buddha actually taught is not sufficient grounds for accepting it. In the case of the jhānas—the point at issue here— we have to take as our guide the standard formula for the jhānas, a...

1min. video: Dalai Lama kissing boy and asking him to suck his tongue

To give more context, this is a public event,  * everyone knows cameras are rolling  *  it's a room full of children * the boy's mom is standing off camera a few feet away watching all of this * the boy initiated contact, he had already had a hug with Dalai Lama earlier and then asked Dalai Lama for another hug which triggered this segment  17 min. video showing what happened before that 1 min. clip and after, with some explanation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT0qey5Ts78 16min talk from Ajahn Acalo with his thoughts on Dalai Lama kissing boy, relevance to Bhikkhu monastic code, sexual predators in religion in general, and how celibate monastics deal with sexual energy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK2m0TcUib0 The child's comments about the incident in a filmed interview later https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/world-news/2023/04/18/643eba5d46163ffc078b457c.html The child: It's a great experience It was amazing to meet His Holiness and I think it's a great ex...