Pali Term: Sati

[Dmytro]

The problem is that meaning is not just lexicographical, but it is in it actual usage that meanings are shaped, which can push well beyond just what the dictionary says, and that has been shown above, quite clearly and in detail, to be the case with the Pali term sati.

Thank you, Tilt.
Yes, the actual Pali usage of the term sati pushes well beyond what the dictionary says, as I have shown quite clearly and in detail in the posts:
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299#p64546
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299#p167808
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299#p167809
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299#p167810
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299#p180573
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299#p180765
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299#p180783
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299#p183130
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299&start=20#p203386
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299&start=40#p205855
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299&start=80#p214403
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299&start=80#p214481
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299&start=100#p216828
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299&start=120#p217112
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4299&start=140#p224280

As the President of the Pali Text Society, Rupert Gethin, writes:

"These ancient definitions and the Abhidhamma list of terms seem to be rather at odds with the modern clinical psychotherapeutic definition of mindfulness, and even perhaps with the more recent Buddhist definitions of mindfulness offered by way of exposition of the practice of
satipaṭṭhana."

http://www.scribd.com/doc/99110733/On-S ... ethin-2011

[tiltbillings]

As the President of the Pali Text Society, Rupert Gethin, writes:

"These ancient definitions and the Abhidhamma list of terms seem to be rather at odds with the modern clinical psychotherapeutic definition of mindfulness, and even perhaps with the more recent Buddhist definitions of mindfulness offered by way of exposition of the practice of
satipaṭṭhana."

http://www.scribd.com/doc/99110733/On-S ... ethin-2011

The problem with your Gethin quote (on page 270) is that it needs to be taken into fuller context of what he goes on to say, pointing the the actual complexity of what is involved in the term sati as it is used in the suttas and commentaries, which is a bit more than than just your Merriam-Webster "Definition of REMEMBRANCE," and that is the point. And also to the point is the question what are the other Pali terms that point what is also involved with paying attention.

[danieLion]

Hi Daniel,
Since your questions have little to do with what I said, I take them as rhetorical ones.

These questions are definitely not rhetorical, have quite a bit to do with what you said, and are focused on The Pali.

In this thread I'm not interested in the standpoints of contemporary teachers, with the exception of cases when they elaborate on the Pali texts.

Then why did you bring Reverend Tejaniya up here in this thread to support your argument first? Besides, Reverend Tejaniya is elaborating on the Pali texts in my posts here. So, what you're really saying is that you only use contemporary teacher's elaborations on the Pali texts when they support your (and Rev. T's) arguments?

So there must be some ohter reasons your way too quick to dismiss them.

[danieLion]

The words of the Buddha have been preserved to this day in the Pali Canon...,

How can you be so certain?

...and I am fortunate to read them and apply in practice.

I agree that we are fortunate to have what we have.

In such a manner, Buddha speaks to me personally.
His teaching is unbelieavably powerful when sincerely and exactly followed.

I agree that his teaching is powerful (although I'd say it's believably so), and that sincerity is important, but if they could be followed with exactitude posts like this wouldn't exist, Dhammawheel wouldn't exist, etc..., because we'd all agree on what exactly to do.

I am sharing his teaching to the best of my ability.

Which I greatly appreciate and have benefited from. However, you have not made a strong case, are behaving evasively to my valid inquiries, and dismiissing my points much too quickly.

[Dmytro]

Hi Daniel,

Thank you for your attention.
If you would like to discuss with me any questions about my personal motives, opinions, etc., please write me personal messages.

IMHO, all the personal-oriented posts, innuendos, pamphlets, proclamations, etc. are offtopic here.

What I'm interested in this thread is how Buddha defines "sati" in the Pali Canon. If you can offer substantiated opinion, please do so.
So far hardly anyone in this thread except for me has made a substantiated case for this or that meaning of "sati".
I am grateful to Piotr, Sekha and Porpoise for some remarks that have been to the point, to Tilt for helping me to explore my patience, and to you for introducing me to the depths of Western Academia labeling culture. Your "definitionalist" and "provincionalist" are certainly gems in my collection.

I'll be unlikely to reply to futher offtopic in this thread.

Best wishes, Dmytro

[Sylvester]

It would be rather remiss of me to not acknowledge Dmytro's willingness to refine the connotations of sati over the course of the discussion. Pls give him the credit due even if you view him as not being fully accommodating our personal opinions on the matter.

[tiltbillings]

It would be rather remiss of me to not acknowledge Dmytro's willingness to refine the connotations of sati over the course of the discussion. Pls give him the credit due even if you view him as not being fully accommodating our personal opinions on the matter.

There has been some appropriate shifting of position by him, but sadly it should not have come as a result of having been badgered about it. The dictionary is obviously an important tool in language study, but it is in the actual usage that meanings are derived, which is a lesson that should be learned very early on in one's language study.

[Dmytro]

It would be rather remiss of me to not acknowledge Dmytro's willingness to refine the connotations of sati over the course of the discussion. Pls give him the credit due even if you view him as not being fully accommodating our personal opinions on the matter.

Thank you, Sylvester. Unfortunately, there have been very little topical discussion, and a lot of phenomenal misunderstanding, coupled with misrepresentation of my words. Still, it seems that for some people this discussion was useful to understand the term "sati" as "remembrance" better.

It's time to continue the research the Buddha's words past the inheritance of Thomas Rhys David's dictionary, deeply embedded in modern Western Buddhism. His unfortunate mixing of 'sati' and 'sampajanna' can and should be corrected.

[tiltbillings]

Thank you, Sylvester. Unfortunately, there have been very little topical discussion, and a lot of phenomenal misunderstanding, coupled with misrepresentation of my words.

Part of the problem is of the OPs own making, which has been being less than clear in his approach here.

Still, it seems that for some people this discussion was useful to understand the term "sati" as "remembrance" better.

And this comment makes my point.

It's time to continue the research the Buddha's words past the inheritance of Thomas Rhys David's dictionary, deeply embedded in modern Western Buddhism. His unfortunate mixing of 'sati' and 'sampajanna' can and should be corrected.

The Rhys Davids' dictionary certainly is not the last word, though it was a brilliant effort. A careful textual and linguistic study of these terms and how they are used in the suttas is, indeed, important. One of the things this thread did, via Gethin, is bring out to a fuller extent of how the word sati is used, and a careful study by qualified Pali-ists of the two somewhat overlapping terms, sati and sampajanna, would, indeed, be worthwhile and welcome.

[danieLion]

What I'm interested in this thread is how Buddha defines "sati" in the Pali Canon.

Where in the Pali "Canon" do we find the Buddha proclaiming one formal definition of "sati"?

Do you believe definitions are static?

If you can offer substantiated opinion, please do so.

Please clarify the term, "substantiated opinion"?

So far hardly anyone in this thread except for me has made a substantiated case for this or that meaning of "sati".

Please clarify the term "substantiated."

I am grateful to Piotr, Sekha and Porpoise for some remarks that have been to the point, to Tilt for helping me to explore my patience, and to you for introducing me to the depths of Western Academia labeling culture. Your "definitionalist" and "provincionalist" are certainly gems in my collection.

You fancy me an Academic?
And are you saying "Eastern" Academics are unaware of these terms?
The Academy started in Ancient Greece long before the global labels "east" and "west".
Labeling is at least as old as humans.

[danieLion]

Hi Daniel,
...all the personal-oriented posts, innuendos, pamphlets, proclamations, etc. are offtopic here....

I am grateful...to you for introducing me to the depths of Western Academia labeling culture. Your "definitionalist" and "provincionalist" are certainly gems in my collection....

How is this last sentence not personally-oriented innuendo towards me? It's name-calling (itself a form of labelling) veiled in sarcasm.

[Billymac29]

Otherwise the outcome is the one I pointed to a couple of my post back. Dmytro is right (or can almost arguably be considered so) if you only take into account the textual side of things. He is wrong if you consider the effect of his statement on beginners who may take that word for the truth and get confused while trying to meditate. Many people want to acquire some knowledge of Pali in order to understand the practice better, and that will most probably confuse them.

All one has to do is take the textual side, as has been shown above. The texts, as has been shown, contrary to Dmytro's rigid claim, do show an expansion of the meaning of sati beyond just mere memory. This is something that the brilliant scholar, Ven Analayo has argued for convincingly in his excellent book, SATIPATTHANA and well as Rupert Gethin in various source have been quoted above.

I agree with Tilt,
from one of my teachers on the word "patisatimatta";

"The word 'patisatimatta' appears in the satipatthana sutta... 'pati' means specific and 'matta' means mere. "

and we know "mere" means "bare" in english.. So we see "sati" starting to be used within bare awareness ... here it is the reminding oneself of the bare specifics of experience.

with metta

[daverupa]

from one of my teachers on the word "patisatimatta";

"The word 'patisatimatta' appears in the satipatthana sutta... 'pati' means specific and 'matta' means mere. "

and we know "mere" means "bare" in english.. So we see "sati" starting to be used within bare awareness ... here it is the reminding oneself of the bare specifics of experience.

with metta

Using Google-fu, based on this, I located the following:

The word 'patisatimatta' appears in the satipatthana sutta... 'pati' means specific and 'matta' means mere. Sati is more than just bare awareness, it is exact one-to-one recognition of the object as it is. I think I talked about this at the end of the following talk: http://yuttadhammo.sirimangalo.org/less ... -practice/

And, following the link,

“sati” would therefore be better translated as “recognition”, and this is how it has been referred to throughout this chapter. “sati”, in the context of the bojjhaṅgas is the deliberate and sustained recognition that allows one to see the objects of experience as they truly are.

...

Simply recognizing that we are walking requires no meditative training whatsoever.

To “fully comprehend” (pajānāti), one must cultivate the mental quality of “sati” or fortified recognition (thīra-saññā) by reminding oneself of the essential nature of the experience, as in “walking”. Reminding oneself in this way of what one already recognizes is equivalent to arresting the mind’s natural progression into projection, judgement, clinging, seeking, building up, and finally suffering.

[Billymac29]

from one of my teachers on the word "patisatimatta";

"The word 'patisatimatta' appears in the satipatthana sutta... 'pati' means specific and 'matta' means mere. "

and we know "mere" means "bare" in english.. So we see "sati" starting to be used within bare awareness ... here it is the reminding oneself of the bare specifics of experience.

with metta

Using Google-fu, based on this, I located the following:

The word 'patisatimatta' appears in the satipatthana sutta... 'pati' means specific and 'matta' means mere. Sati is more than just bare awareness, it is exact one-to-one recognition of the object as it is. I think I talked about this at the end of the following talk: http://yuttadhammo.sirimangalo.org/less ... -practice/

And, following the link,

“sati” would therefore be better translated as “recognition”, and this is how it has been referred to throughout this chapter. “sati”, in the context of the bojjhaṅgas is the deliberate and sustained recognition that allows one to see the objects of experience as they truly are.

...

Simply recognizing that we are walking requires no meditative training whatsoever.

To “fully comprehend” (pajānāti), one must cultivate the mental quality of “sati” or fortified recognition (thīra-saññā) by reminding oneself of the essential nature of the experience, as in “walking”. Reminding oneself in this way of what one already recognizes is equivalent to arresting the mind’s natural progression into projection, judgement, clinging, seeking, building up, and finally suffering.

here's another good section:

"Another way of understanding this activity of fortifying one’s recognition is as a (label), a traditional meditative tool that has been used for millennia by meditators both Buddhist and non. A (label) is used to focus the mind on an object, arresting the mind’s natural inclination to jump from object to object. It is traditionally used to focus on a conceptual object, something a meditator conjures up in the mind – a picture or a spiritual object like a god or angel.

(Labeling) can, however, be used in much the same way in order to fix the mind on a real object as well, be it a physical sensation, a feeling, a thought, or an emotion. This is one way of understanding the word “sati” in the context of the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta; it is the use of a (label) to stabilize and fortify one’s bare recognition of an experience for what it is, allowing one to see clearly without prejudice or projection and thus remove any misapprehensions based on delusion or ignorance.

Once we cultivate sati, our minds will naturally incline towards observing the nature of phenomena; just as how a person who sees a tiger also sees its stripes, observation of the characteristics of every object of one’s experience is unavoidable for one who observes the experience objectively in this way. Through the cultivation of sati, one will be forced to see clearly the true nature of everything one clings to, as well as the result of such clinging. One will see that the objects of experience are universally impermanent, unsatisfying, and uncontrollable; one will see that clinging to such entities is akin to banging one’s head off of a wall – painful and utterly without purpose. This introspection-based knowledge is called “dhamma-vicaya”, and it is the second of the factors of enlightenment we are trying to cultivate as a means of destroying the taints"

may all be well

[Dmytro]

According to the Abhidhamma, sati arises based on fortified recognition (thīra-saññā). Whereas ordinary recognition (saññā) is not enough to keep the mind in objective awareness, once we fortify or reaffirm this recognition, not letting the mind move beyond simple awareness of the object for what it is, our minds will penetrate the nature of the object to the core, dispelling all doubt as to its essential nature as something worth clinging to or not.

“sati” would therefore be better translated as “recognition”

Seems like this is taken from Visuddhimagga 464. Full quote, in translation by Ven. Nyanamoli:

141. (x) By its means they remember (saranti), or it itself remembers, or it is just mere remembering (saraṇa), thus it is minfulness (sati). It has the characteristic of not wobbling. Its function is not to forget. It is manifested as guarding, or it is manifested as the state of confronting an objective field. Its proximate cause is strong preception (thirasaññā), or its proximate cause is the foundations of mindfulness concerned with the body, and so on (see M. Sutta 10). It should be regarded, however, as like a pillar because is firmly founded, or as like a door-keeper because it guards the eye-door, and so on.

465. Saranti tāya, sayaṃ vā sarati saraṇamattameva vā esāti sati. Sā apilāpanalakkhaṇā, asammosarasā, ārakkhapaccupaṭṭhānā, visayābhimukhabhāvapaccupaṭṭhānā vā, thirasaññāpadaṭṭhānā, kāyādisatipaṭṭhānapadaṭṭhānā vā. Ārammaṇe daḷhapatiṭṭhitattā pana esikā viya, cakkhudvārādirakkhaṇato dovāriko viya ca daṭṭhabbā.

The Visuddhimagga-Mahatika 229 straightforwardly connects the "thirasaññā", with the sati being established on nimitta (representation). ( Nimittaṃ ṭhapetabbanti satiyā tattha tattha sukhappavattanatthaṃ thiratarasañjānanaṃ pavattetabbaṃ. Thirasaññāpadaṭṭhānā hi sati. ) So this word has nothing to do with "simple awareness of the object".

[Billymac29]

According to the Abhidhamma, sati arises based on fortified recognition (thīra-saññā). Whereas ordinary recognition (saññā) is not enough to keep the mind in objective awareness, once we fortify or reaffirm this recognition, not letting the mind move beyond simple awareness of the object for what it is, our minds will penetrate the nature of the object to the core, dispelling all doubt as to its essential nature as something worth clinging to or not.

“sati” would therefore be better translated as “recognition”

Here's the whole paragraph that you left out

“sati” would therefore be better translated as “recognition”, and this is how it has been referred to throughout this chapter. “sati”, in the context of the bojjhaṅgas is the deliberate and sustained recognition that allows one to see the objects of experience as they truly are.

Seems like this is taken from Visuddhimagga 464.

Bhante stated his sources pretty clearly. If it was he would have said so.. Bhante usually sources the Visuddhimagga when he uses it.

[Billymac29]

141. (x) By its means they remember (saranti), or it itself remembers, or it is just mere remembering (saraṇa), thus it is minfulness (sati). It has the characteristic of not wobbling. Its function is not to forget. It is manifested as guarding, or it is manifested as the state of confronting an objective field. Its proximate cause is strong preception (thirasaññā), or its proximate cause is the foundations of mindfulness concerned with the body, and so on (see M. Sutta 10). It should be regarded, however, as like a pillar because is firmly founded, or as like a door-keeper because it guards the eye-door, and so on.

465. Saranti tāya, sayaṃ vā sarati saraṇamattameva vā esāti sati. Sā apilāpanalakkhaṇā, asammosarasā, ārakkhapaccupaṭṭhānā, visayābhimukhabhāvapaccupaṭṭhānā vā, thirasaññāpadaṭṭhānā, kāyādisatipaṭṭhānapadaṭṭhānā vā. Ārammaṇe daḷhapatiṭṭhitattā pana esikā viya, cakkhudvārādirakkhaṇato dovāriko viya ca daṭṭhabbā.

The Visuddhimagga-Mahatika 229 straightforwardly connects the "thirasaññā", with the sati being established on nimitta (representation). ( Nimittaṃ ṭhapetabbanti satiyā tattha tattha sukhappavattanatthaṃ thiratarasañjānanaṃ pavattetabbaṃ. Thirasaññāpadaṭṭhānā hi sati. ) So this word has nothing to do with "simple awareness of the object".

what word??? this has nothing to do with what I posted.

[danieLion]

In the context of the bodhipakkhiyādhammā (Wings to Awakening/Aids to Enlightenment), sati functions as (following Reverend Thanissaro's renderings) a "frame of reference" (paṭṭhāna), a "faculty" (indrīya), a "strength" (bala), a "factor of awakening" (sambojjhaṅga), and as a factor of the Noble Eightfold Path (ariya-magga). Furthermore, if we tally each of the thirty-seven qualities that comprise the bodhipakkhiyādhammā by appearance per one of the Seven Sets of the bodhipakkhiyādhammā we find that next to samadhi (which gets the most "hits" at eight) sati gets seven "hits", tying it with "persistence" (viriya) for the second most "hits."

This not only shows the broadness and depth of the uses, meanings and "definitions" of sati, but also the importance of sati in virtually every aspect of practice.

And the importance of precisely defining sati is further diminished significantly by the fact "right view" (sammā-diṭṭhi) only gets one "hit" in the bodhipakkhiyādhammā.

[Dmytro]

The Visuddhimagga-Mahatika 229 straightforwardly connects the "thirasaññā", with the sati being established on nimitta (representation). ( Nimittaṃ ṭhapetabbanti satiyā tattha tattha sukhappavattanatthaṃ thiratarasañjānanaṃ pavattetabbaṃ. Thirasaññāpadaṭṭhānā hi sati. ) So this word has nothing to do with "simple awareness of the object".

what word??? this has nothing to do with what I posted.

"thirasaññā" from:

According to the Abhidhamma, sati arises based on fortified recognition (thīra-saññā). Whereas ordinary recognition (saññā) is not enough to keep the mind in objective awareness, once we fortify or reaffirm this recognition, not letting the mind move beyond simple awareness of the object for what it is, our minds will penetrate the nature of the object to the core, dispelling all doubt as to its essential nature as something worth clinging to or not.

http://yuttadhammo.sirimangalo.org/less ... -practice/

In relation with Anapanasati, the Commentary notes:

Pakatiassāsapakatipassāse nissāya uppannanimittampi assāsapassāsāti nāmaṃ labhati. Upaṭṭhānaṃ satīti taṃ ārammaṇaṃ upecca tiṭṭhatīti sati upaṭṭhānaṃ nāma.

'Sati upaṭṭhāna' means that 'sati', having approached, stays on that basis of concentration (ārammaṇa) (i.e. the perceptual image (nimitta) which has arisen due to natural in-and-out-breath).

Patisambhidamagga-Atthakatha 2.509

Establishment of 'sati' on the 'nimitta' of concentration is related to the corresponding stabilization of recognition (saññā).

A picture to illustrate the red kasina practice, the change of recognition (saññā) due to remembrance of red colour representation (nimitta):

[porpoise]

Here's the whole paragraph that you left out

“sati” would therefore be better translated as “recognition”, and this is how it has been referred to throughout this chapter. “sati”, in the context of the bojjhaṅgas is the deliberate and sustained recognition that allows one to see the objects of experience as they truly are.

Sati as "recognition" is an interesting take, but isn't that the function of sanna ( perception )?