nathan wrote:vedana [vedanaa]: Feeling — pleasure (ease), pain (stress), or neither pleasure nor pain.
vedanā : [f.] pain; sensation.
ve : [particle of affirmation] indeed; truly; surely.
dāna : [nt.] gift; charity; alms; alms-giving.
I'm far from sure it is the same dana, not even sure about the ve can anyone help work out the etymology of this word?
sacetana (adj.), vedanā (f.), anubhavana (nt.), anukampā (nt.), dayā (nt.), parāmasana (nt.), paṭisaṃvedī (nt.), phusana (nt.), saññā (nt.)
feelingly sānukampaṃ (adv.)
nathan wrote:Can either of you or could anyone kindly explain what we would be speaking about when we speak of feelings in the many ways in which we commonly do in english? What are the correct pali words or terms and the best available accompanying english definitions for feeling as sensations and emotions?
Would any or all of this be objects of themeless concentration or related to themeless release?Dhammanando wrote:Hi Nathan,
'Sensation' is a reasonable translation of vedanā.
I think that everything that we term an 'emotion' in English would be encompassed by the saṅkhārakkhandha or the 50 cetasikas (i.e. the 52 cetasikas minus vedanā and saññā). Though I should add that not all of these cetasikas would be called emotions.
Thanks Ben. What I would like to ask Ven. Dhammanando really is the relationship of all parts of the above to:Ben wrote:Hi Nathan
I agree with Ajahn that what we commonly call 'feelings' or emotions are in fact complex combinations of mental and psycho-somatic phenomena manifesting. I don't have Ajahn's encyclopaedic knowledge of the Dhamma and Pali, but my own view is conditioned by my experience of taking vedana (sensation) as my primary object since my involvement in the Dhamma began.
I hope that puts my real question in a better perspective. Given the above as a complete description of perception of sensation and emotional/mental response.srivijaya wrote:In the Godatta Sutta SN 41.7 Buddha outlines different kinds of awareness release.
These are the immeasurable awareness-release, the nothingness awareness-release, the emptiness awareness-release and the themeless awareness-release.
He subsequently explains which factors their cultivation rests upon - briefly:
1. Immeasurable = An expansive all-pervading awareness of compassion and good will.
2. Nothingness = The monk enters & remains in the dimension of nothingness.
3. Emptiness = The monk considers this: 'This is empty of self or of anything pertaining to self.'
4. Themeless = A monk, not attending to any theme enters & remains in the themeless concentration of awareness.
Each of these are, however, declared secondary to a release called an "unprovokable awareness-release".
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
No problem at all, I joyfully appreciate all the input. It's all contributing to clarifying the roles which awareness, perception, sensation and emotion or these mental qualities or conditions play in practice for wisdom and release. I'm really appreciating the participation of everyone.Ben wrote:My apologies Nathan
I did see your subsequent question relating to the different awareness releases. I didn't attempt an answer because i am not so familiar with Ven. Thanissaro's terminology and I didn't want to cloud the issue by providing a transcript of Bhikkhu Bodhi's notes to the SN - which you probably already have. I too will await Ajahn's response with interest.
nathan wrote: Would any or all of this be objects of themeless concentration
or related to themeless release?
nathan wrote:Thank you Venerable Dhammanando. I would appreciate some added clarification. How does the development of insight wisdom relate to these forms of awareness release as well as to the unprovoked awareness release?
How do these kinds of awareness release connect to vedana and to the results of scrutinizing vedana via the progress of insight?
Is this the same kind of 'awareness of a living being as object'?
nathan wrote:Do the four immeasurable deliverances of mind (appamāṇā cetovimutti) which have living beings as their object have any relationship to the four brahmavihāra states of mind; mettā, karuṇā, muditā, and upekkhā?
Thank you Ven. Dhammanando. So in this specific as immeasurableness they are the same? Are they the same qualties otherwise in terms of upekkha,...mudita? If so then is there a developmental relationship between the limited development and the development in this specific sense? That is crux of my question.Dhammanando wrote:Hi Nathan,nathan wrote:Do the four immeasurable deliverances of mind (appamāṇā cetovimutti) which have living beings as their object have any relationship to the four brahmavihāra states of mind; mettā, karuṇā, muditā, and upekkhā?
The brahmaviharas are termed immeasurables when they are developed with an object of unlimited range, as opposed to when one specifies particular individuals or groups.
nathan wrote:So in this specific as immeasurableness they are the same? Are they the same qualties otherwise in terms of upekkha,...mudita?
If so then is there a developmental relationship between the limited development and the development in this specific sense?
Thank you Ven. Dhammanando. I've appreciated your help with making sense of a lot of these fine points. It can be hard for me to be sure sometimes if I'm understanding the implicit or even the explicit meanings of words correctly. I have come close to forming this understanding on my own but I am much more comfortable with thinking about this in this way now that you have made clear that this is in fact so. I am relieved. Having grown up outside of buddhism but not outside of religion it is a relief that many of the 'divine sentiments' which were nurtured there can be put to constructive use. I've found the brahmavihara practices have helped me with vipassana and samatha practices and in innumerable other ways in daily life. I think I will continue to need every skillful means at hand to have any hope of making good forward facing progress on the eightfold path in this life.Dhammanando wrote:nathan wrote:So in this specific as immeasurableness they are the same? Are they the same qualties otherwise in terms of upekkha,...mudita?
Yes, they are the same four dhammas, but with different objects.If so then is there a developmental relationship between the limited development and the development in this specific sense?
Yes, in samatha-bhavana the development of any brahmavihara as an immeasurable is preceded by its development with a limited range, with the range being gradually increased.