Chapter One: General Aspects o fthe DIrect Path
1.1
Some thoughts on the originality of the Satipatthana sutta:
Analayo makes the point that "expositions on satipatthana are also preserved in the Chinese and Sanskrit, with intriguing occasional variations from the Pali presentations" (p.15). Looking in the footnotes it is noted that there are five additional versions in existence.
I'd like to note a couple of things. Analayo seems to intentionally avoid saying that there are different version of the sutta ITSELF, but instead notes that there are "other expositions" on the TOPIC. Just what are these "intriguing variations"? Ajahn Sujato makes that point that the main variations seem to stem from a gradual de-emphasizing of "concentration" meditation in favor of a strict "vipassana-only" approach. See Sujato's post on the topic here:
http://sujato.wordpress.com/2011/01/18/ ... ndfulness/
Analayo also holds the "refrain" part of the satipatthana sutta as centrally important. He notes in footnote 6 that the refrain is "indispensible". Sujato, on the other hand seems to treat the refrain with some disdain, calling it a "late addition". Would anyone like to add to this seeming contradiction between scholars?
1.2
Analayo makes the point that the sequence of a satipatthana's in the sutta is relevant to the way in which a natural practice unfolds. They start with the more gross and easily fixed upon aspects of the body, and procede the more fine and subtle contemplations. This isn't to say that satipatthana MUST be practiced in a certain order, only that it has a tendency to procede that way. In reality there will be some variance in the order in which your practice unfolds, and even the buddha himself continued to practice the grosser meditations after his enlightenment.
1.3
One need not spead one's meditation too thin between many satipatthana's. According to Analayo, several discourses. commentaries, and modern meditation teachers focus on a single satipatthana as a vehicle to full enlightenment. This seems to be possible a result of the habits that one forms during satipatthana practice, and how they will involuntarily carry over into other aspects of experience. It seems also to be possible to contemplate aspects from all four satipatthana's in any meditation object.
Although this is possible, Analayo recommends a balanced appoach of muttiple meditation exercises. He quotes Debes in footnote 21: "it may be possible to gain realization with one single exercise, but that one who has practised all of the them should still not realize awakening would seem to be impossible"
1.4
So if you don't want to spread yourself too thin in your practice, but still want to be balanced, how do you choose what to focus on? It appears that each satipatthana is suited to a different personality type. Analayo states that " The first two satipatthana's suit those with a more affective inclination, while the last two are recommended for those with a more cognitive orientation". These recommendations can also be applied to ones state of mind at the time, rather than ones overall personality type.
Each satipatthana is also individually more effective at dispelling a particular delusion. Contemplation of body for dispelling the delusion of beauty, feelings for the delusion of happiness in fleeting pleasures, mind for permanence, and dhammas for self.
1.5
Analayo contends that the more common translation of "ekayano" in the satipatthana sutta would place it's meaning as being a statement of dogma, that is, as satipatthana as "the only path". He presents and argument that there seems to be more evidence to translate the work as "direct" in the sense or "leading straight to the goal.
Interestingly, the commentaries don't resolve this issue, and they leave the interpretation of the word open. They leave it open to 5 possible interpretations. Why is this? Was there significant disagreement on the meaning even back then?
Analayo surveys the pali canon and it's use or lack of use to support his assertion. He also notes that using it in the sense of meaning "direct" makes more sense in context with the final passage of the satipatthana sutta, where it makes a prediciton about how fast one can become enlightened, and says that it is because it is "the direct path".
1.6
It turns out that the "Four Foundations of Mindfulness" is actually a mistranslation stemming from the commentaries. The commentaries derice sattipatthana from "patthana", which means foundation. Patthana, however, appears to be a late word that was not in use at the time of the discourses.
Analayo suggests "upatthana" as the root word, which means "placing near". Thus satipatthana would mean "attending with mindfulness" instead of "foundation of mindfulness.
It makes little difference in practice, but places less emphasis on the actual object. Analyo notes that these are more possible objects of mindfuless than those specifically listed in the satipatthana sutta.
Any thoughts/comments?