Dukkhanirodha wrote:All sixteen talks had been prepared in English, and then read in English by the Sayadaw
So I am afraid you are forced to admit that it happens that you are wrong
I admit that I have mistaken, in that the talks were prepared in English.
Nevertheless, the usage of the term 'mindfulness' is strongly dictated by the Western Buddhist traditions. Very few people dared to use different term for 'sati'. So the usage of the term 'mindfulness' proves very little.
and that your views are in contradiction with those of at least two of the greatest meditation teachers we have today: Pa Auk Sayadaw and SN Goenka (for the latter I can easily provide the proof).
I would appreciate if you would provide the definition of 'sati' by Ven. Pa Auk Sayadaw and S N Goenka.
I also bring under your attention that you have still not provided a satisfactory response to the contextual analysis I proposed.
This answer looks very much like an attempt to drown the fish. I provide you with a very clear context and a very clear remark and you answer with an obscure formula in Pali taken from the commentary, without proper English translation, to which you ascribe a very profound meaning.
This is no satisfactory answer and is also irrelevant, be it only because the arising of the nimitta comes after a certain amount of practice, whereas the above mentioned formula explains how to set up oneself to begin the practice.
Indeed the arising of the nimitta comes after a certain amount of practice. At first 'sati' is established on the breath through other means.
I consider my answer highly relevant and reliable, since it comes from the Theravada tradition itself. If you will provide a precise explanation of this passage from the suttas themselves, I will appreciate it.