TMingyur wrote:
Well, let's see what B. Analayo has to say about this:
The noun Sati is related to the verb sarati, to remember. Sati in the sense of memory occurs on several occasions in the discourses and also in the standard definition given in the Abhidamma and the commentaries. This remembrance aspect of sati is personified by the Buddha's disciple most eminent in sati, Ananda, who is credited with the almost incredible feat of recalling all the discourses spoken by the Buddha. Chapter III.2, page 46
This shall suffice for the moment.
While the aspect of remembrance of sati is a general consensus and that I wholeheartedly agree with, equating sati with memory purely in the common sense (that I call memory of sanna) is Ven Analayo's own opinion, that I disagree with.
The Buddha explained about sati in satipathanna in such a clear way, He listed all the objects of sati, no where he mentioned something that can be close to " remembering the contents of what someone has said", and it is also obvious that He was talking about sati of what is occuring at this very moment, no where he said to remember what has happened in the past.
Here is an harsardous example, because they abound:
"When the mind is restricted, he discerns that the mind is restricted. When the mind is scattered, he discerns that the mind is scattered. When the mind is enlarged, he discerns that the mind is enlarged. When the mind is not enlarged, he discerns that the mind is not enlarged. When the mind is surpassed, he discerns that the mind is surpassed. When the mind is unsurpassed, he discerns that the mind is unsurpassed. When the mind is concentrated, he discerns that the mind is concentrated. When the mind is not concentrated, he discerns that the mind is not concentrated. When the mind is released, he discerns that the mind is released. When the mind is not released, he discerns that the mind is not released."
And here is where sanna is the object of sati, making a clear line between the two:
"Perception of forms... Perception of sounds... Perception of smells... Perception of tastes... Perception of tactile sensations... Perception of ideas..."
It is precisely this distinction between sanna and sati that the former keeps us in samsara while the later gets us out of there. Sanna remembers things that are useful for life but when we take them to be inherently true reality, we are damned to suffer. Sati remembers what should be remembered, meaning the working of the five khandas, which leads to the understanding of their true nature.
At the beginning, their difference is so subtle that it is not easy to distinguish the two, only when sanna becomes the object of sati that it becomes clear.
We can remark that the order of the objects of sati mentioned in the sutta goes from grosser to subtler, I think it also reflects the gradual increase in strength of sati: at the beginning, a lot of concepts are involved : "I", "walking", "sitting"... and towards the end, only basic elements are mentioned, finally culminating in the Four Noble Truth and the Eight Noble fold Paths, Nibbana.
Regards,