Mindfulness vs Analysis of Feelings

[Digity]

In the Satipatthana Sutta it talks about being mindful of pleasant, unpleasant and neither pleasant-or-unpleasant feelings.

And how does a monk remain focused on feelings in & of themselves? There is the case where a monk, when feeling a painful feeling, discerns, 'I am feeling a painful feeling.' When feeling a pleasant feeling, he discerns, 'I am feeling a pleasant feeling.' When feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, he discerns, 'I am feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling.'

I believe I understand how to do this, but I've often found that analyzing my feelings and dealing with them in an engaged manner is often more helpful in allowing me to overcome them. For example, suppose you're in a social situation and experience a lot of anxiety. You could note the unpleasant feeling as described above, but I've often found in such a situation it was more helpful if I analyzed why I was feeling that way. If you do that you may come to the conclusion that you worry too much what other people think or need to learn to relax more so you take up yoga or whatever. The point is, the act of just noting the unpleasant feeling itself doesn't get to the underlying root of why that feeling arises in the first place. So, although I do often find it "liberating" to just note my feelings when they arise in a non-attached way I still feel that in the end we need to engage and understand these feelings to be with them in a healthy way.

Having said all that, is the approach for dealing with feelings that I've outlined in conflict with what the Buddha spoke of in the Satipatthana Sutta? Should our focus just be on noting pleasant, unpleasant and neither pleasant-or-unpleasant? Or do we need more of a Western psychological approach to deal with feelings (i.e. cognitive behavioural therapy)? Or is it a mixture of both? If it's a mixture of both then why does the Satipatthana Sutta just focus on the one approach.

[Goofaholix]

If something keeps coming up again and again then a bit of analysis as to the cause would be helpful. However too much analysis will lead you round in circles and just reinforce the idea that's all about me and my personal story and dramas.

The practice is to just observe the changing processes objectively without engaging with the story, eventually this will lead to one disengaging with the story and insight arises without the need to get bogged down in too much analysis.

[Herbie]

... but I've often found in such a situation it was more helpful if I analyzed why I was feeling that way.

The point here is that the why cannot be known and with thinking about it ("analyzing") all that happens is just a cultivation of narratives of others, narratives present in media, narratives that are popular and fashionable. And through this cultivation happens identification with speculation and thus conditioning of speculative self-image.
In contrast to these fabrications the arising can be observed and it is known whether pleasant, unpleasant or neutral.

[nmz]

deleted. reason: repeat.

[nmz]

"In this way he remains focused internally on feelings in & of themselves, or externally on feelings in & of themselves, or both internally & externally on feelings in & of themselves. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to feelings, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to feelings, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to feelings. Or his mindfulness that 'There are feelings' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on feelings in & of themselves.

I think Buddha also said what you are doing. Also in the section of five hinderance, he encourage to analyse the cause of arising and disappearing of those hinderances. I believe Maha-satipatthana sutta should be practice as a whole to understand the whole concept.

[Digity]

I think Buddha also said what you are doing. Also in the section of five hinderance, he encourage to analyse the cause of arising and disappearing of those hinderances. I believe Maha-satipatthana sutta should be practice as a whole to understand the whole concept.

Yes, I'm aware of this. I actually find this approach far more helpful then just merely noting pleasant, unpleasant, etc. When I look into the causes of the hindrances then I'm able to comprehend them and gradually they loosen their grip. My point is, it seems that liberation is rooted in wisdom and wisdom requires some degree of analysis and understanding. So, I feel like that's the approach to awakening that works best for me, but then how does the approach outlines in the Satipatthana Sutta fit into that.