auto wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 3:33 pm..frank k wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 3:10 pmNothing to do with chosen word of translation. You didn't read the link I referred you to.
I won't continue discussion with you if you keep referring to B. sujato's heinously wrong translations of the 4 jhanas to make your points. You don't have to use my translation, you can use any of the other professional translators that translate the 4 jhanas correctly. Thanissaro, B. Bodhi, Rupert Gethin the President of Pali Text Society, are good ones to rely on, who translate according to EBT.
http://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/v ... ndex.html
is unchanged and same regardless to the changings of the themes around it. You could ask where the XX ceases to exists and then write this,Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu vivicceva kāmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi savitakkaṃ savicāraṃ vivekajaṃ pītisukhaṃ paṭhamaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati,
now if i miss the point then say again what is it what makes you to think sn 48.40 is corrupt.Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu vivicceva kāmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi savitakkaṃ savicāraṃ vivekajaṃ pītisukhaṃ paṭhamaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati,
in your interpretations of the sukha is bodily. But that is not what defines the indriya in 3rd jhana, indriya is defined by the 'upekkhako satimā sukhavihārī’ti..and it is mental.
sukha , and all 3 vedana originate from bodily, unless specified otherwise. Under 5 vedana scheme, sukha unqualified in some contexts could mean either somanassa indriya (mental happiness) or sukha indriya (physical happiness). But since in STED 4th jhana formula, the buddha refers explicitly to all 5 vedana indriya, and in STED 3rd jhana, which I"ve highlighted the key words here so no one can miss it,
https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2 ... -2-2.html
He explicitly qualifies 3rd jhana sukha as "sukham ca kayena" (pleasure experienced with the body). I referred you earlier to 3 other credible translators of the EBT, and not just them, even B. Analayo translates kaya there as "bodily". It's not just my translation, it's unanimous among credible EBT translators.
And you still didn't read the article (not written by me) that compares SN 48.40 to its agama parallels. My corrected version of pali SN 48.40, you'll see matches exactly or very closely to one of the other schools, mula sarvastivada I think. I hadn't read that article in a long time, didn't read it or consult it when I made my corrections to SN 48.40, I just went by pali EBT standard pericopes.
corrected pali SN 48.40 here
https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2 ... pali.html