The Dhamma recalibrates your feelings and perceptions

[coconut]

He feels bodily pain, but not mental pain as a result of that bodily pain

Sure. There have over the years been lots of discussions here along the lines of the "two darts" analogy, or that the Buddha felt pain, but did not thereby suffer. That's different from your claim in the OP.

You make an inference about thīna arising from the pain, which is fine, but the word doesn't seem to appear in the suttas.

We can look at several suttas to draw an inference from.

Here the Buddha explains the difference between the lions posture and the Buddha's lying down posture..

And how does a lion lie down? The lion, king of beasts, lies down on the right side, placing one foot on top of the other, with his tail tucked between his thighs. When he wakes, he lifts his front quarters and checks his hind quarters. If he sees that any part of his body is disordered or displaced, he is displeased. But if he sees that no part of his body is disordered or displaced, he is pleased. This is called the way a lion lies down.

And how does a Realized One lie down? It’s when a Realized One, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters and remains in the first absorption … second absorption … third absorption … fourth absorption. This is called the way a Realized One lies down.

https://suttacentral.net/an4.246/en/sujato

This infers that the Buddha lies down to preserve jhanas, he doesn't lie down for no reason. When we speak of Jhanas we automatically also speak of the 5 hindrances and their absence. Thus one can infer the hindrances by inferring jhanas.

The Buddha instructs that one watches their own mind 24/7 for the 5 hindrances to prevent them from arising.

"If, on examination, a monk knows, 'I usually remain covetous, with thoughts of ill will, overcome by sloth & drowsiness, restless, uncertain, angry, with soiled thoughts, with my body aroused, lazy, or unconcentrated,' then he should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, relentlessness, mindfulness, & alertness for the abandoning of those very same evil, unskillful qualities. Just as when a person whose turban or head was on fire would put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, relentlessness, mindfulness, & alertness to put out the fire on his turban or head; in the same way, the monk should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, relentlessness, mindfulness, & alertness for the abandoning of those very same evil, unskillful qualities.

"But if, on examination, a monk knows, 'I usually remain uncovetous, without thoughts of ill will, free of sloth & drowsiness, not restless, gone beyond uncertainty, not angry, with unsoiled thoughts, with my body unaroused, with persistence aroused, & concentrated,' then his duty is to make an effort in maintaining those very same skillful qualities to a higher degree for the ending of the effluents."

And how is a bhikkhu intent on wakefulness? Here, during the day, while walking back and forth and sitting, a bhikkhu purifies his mind of obstructive qualities. In the first watch of the night, while walking back and forth and sitting, he purifies his mind of obstructive qualities. In the middle watch of the night he lies down on the right side in the lion’s posture, with one foot overlapping the other, mindful and clearly comprehending, after noting in his mind the idea of rising. After rising, in the last watch of the night, while walking back and forth and sitting, he purifies his mind of obstructive qualities. It is in this way that a bhikkhu is intent on wakefulness.

Thus the lying down posture is the last case final resort a monk resorts to prevent sloth from arising.

“Sleepiness, sloth, and yawning,
discontent, and grogginess after eating:
because of this the noble path
doesn’t shine for creatures here.”

“Sleepiness, sloth, and yawning,
discontent, and grogginess after eating:
when this is energetically fended off,
the noble path is purified.”

[coconut]

Sloth is the only hindrance Arahants have to deal with.

Arahants have hindrances to deal with???

?

They've mastered the path, so no for the most part, but the only hindrance they're vulnerable to is sloth since sloth is not a fetter, and their body still ages and gets less energetic with age, or due to past karma they may get injured, so they need to do something like lie down to prevent sloth from arising. Sloth CAN arise for them, but it usually doesn't because they know how to prevent it from arising, unlike other hindrances can never arise because those fetters have been destroyed.

[binocular]

They've mastered the path, so no for the most part, but the only hindrance they're vulnerable to is sloth since sloth is not a fetter, and their body still ages and gets less energetic with age, or due to past karma they may get injured, so they need to do something like lie down to prevent sloth from arising. Sloth CAN arise for them, but it usually doesn't because they know how to prevent it from arising, unlike other hindrances can never arise because those fetters have been destroyed.

Do you have an actual canonical reference with which you can substantiate that arhants are still subject to hindrances?

[Sam Vara]

We can look at several suttas to draw an inference from.

Here the Buddha explains the difference between the lions posture and the Buddha's lying down posture..

And how does a lion lie down? The lion, king of beasts, lies down on the right side, placing one foot on top of the other, with his tail tucked between his thighs. When he wakes, he lifts his front quarters and checks his hind quarters. If he sees that any part of his body is disordered or displaced, he is displeased. But if he sees that no part of his body is disordered or displaced, he is pleased. This is called the way a lion lies down.

And how does a Realized One lie down? It’s when a Realized One, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters and remains in the first absorption … second absorption … third absorption … fourth absorption. This is called the way a Realized One lies down.

https://suttacentral.net/an4.246/en/sujato

This infers that the Buddha lies down to preserve jhanas, he doesn't lie down for no reason. When we speak of Jhanas we automatically also speak of the 5 hindrances and their absence. Thus one can infer the hindrances by inferring jhanas.

The Buddha instructs that one watches their own mind 24/7 for the 5 hindrances to prevent them from arising.

"If, on examination, a monk knows, 'I usually remain covetous, with thoughts of ill will, overcome by sloth & drowsiness, restless, uncertain, angry, with soiled thoughts, with my body aroused, lazy, or unconcentrated,' then he should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, relentlessness, mindfulness, & alertness for the abandoning of those very same evil, unskillful qualities. Just as when a person whose turban or head was on fire would put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, relentlessness, mindfulness, & alertness to put out the fire on his turban or head; in the same way, the monk should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, relentlessness, mindfulness, & alertness for the abandoning of those very same evil, unskillful qualities.

"But if, on examination, a monk knows, 'I usually remain uncovetous, without thoughts of ill will, free of sloth & drowsiness, not restless, gone beyond uncertainty, not angry, with unsoiled thoughts, with my body unaroused, with persistence aroused, & concentrated,' then his duty is to make an effort in maintaining those very same skillful qualities to a higher degree for the ending of the effluents."

And how is a bhikkhu intent on wakefulness? Here, during the day, while walking back and forth and sitting, a bhikkhu purifies his mind of obstructive qualities. In the first watch of the night, while walking back and forth and sitting, he purifies his mind of obstructive qualities. In the middle watch of the night he lies down on the right side in the lion’s posture, with one foot overlapping the other, mindful and clearly comprehending, after noting in his mind the idea of rising. After rising, in the last watch of the night, while walking back and forth and sitting, he purifies his mind of obstructive qualities. It is in this way that a bhikkhu is intent on wakefulness.

Thus the lying down posture is the last case final resort a monk resorts to prevent sloth from arising.

“Sleepiness, sloth, and yawning,
discontent, and grogginess after eating:
because of this the noble path
doesn’t shine for creatures here.”

“Sleepiness, sloth, and yawning,
discontent, and grogginess after eating:
when this is energetically fended off,
the noble path is purified.”

Sure. But nothing about physical pain leading to sloth in the Buddha.

[coconut]

Sure. But nothing about physical pain leading to sloth in the Buddha.

Then he lies down for fun or no reason when he gets injured? Why lie down and not sit?

[binocular]

Then he lies down for fun or no reason when he gets injured? Why lie down and not sit?

For the same reason that an arahant would not eat gravel or step into dog poo despite seeing it, I suppose.

[coconut]

They've mastered the path, so no for the most part, but the only hindrance they're vulnerable to is sloth since sloth is not a fetter, and their body still ages and gets less energetic with age, or due to past karma they may get injured, so they need to do something like lie down to prevent sloth from arising. Sloth CAN arise for them, but it usually doesn't because they know how to prevent it from arising, unlike other hindrances can never arise because those fetters have been destroyed.

Do you have an actual canonical reference with which you can substantiate that arhants are still subject to hindrances?

The Buddha gets tired

Then it occurred to Mahānāma, “It’s too late to pay homage to the Buddha today. He’s tired. Tomorrow I’ll pay homage to the Buddha.” He bowed to the Buddha and respectfully circled him, keeping him on his right, then he left.

https://suttacentral.net/an3.126/en/sujato

The Buddha however never gets restless, because he has destroyed the fetter of restlessness.

[Sam Vara]

Sure. But nothing about physical pain leading to sloth in the Buddha.

Then he lies down for fun or no reason when he gets injured? Why lie down and not sit?

We're not told, are we? There's nothing about physical pain (there seem to be several Pali ways of expressing this) leading to thīna, sloth.

[coconut]

Sure. But nothing about physical pain leading to sloth in the Buddha.

Then he lies down for fun or no reason when he gets injured? Why lie down and not sit?

We're not told, are we? There's nothing about physical pain (there seem to be several Pali ways of expressing this) leading to thīna, sloth.

Well aside from him immediately lying down after incurring an injury or pain? There probably is a sutta out there that directly states it.

And here is a sutta about physical labour resulting in sloth.

“There is the case where a monk has some work to do. The thought occurs to him: ‘I will have to do this work. But when I have done this work, my body will be tired. Why don’t I lie down?’ So he lies down. He doesn’t make an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the first grounds for laziness.

https://suttacentral.net/an8.80/en/thanissaro

So again, the only reason to lie down is if you're tired, the Buddha would sit after being injured, but he doesn't, he lies down.

[coconut]

Then he lies down for fun or no reason when he gets injured? Why lie down and not sit?

For the same reason that an arahant would not eat gravel or step into dog poo despite seeing it, I suppose.

You sure about that? Arahants can sleep in charnel grounds with rotting corpses and not be bothered, I'm sure they wouldn't be bothered by feces either since they have no aversion.

“Mendicants, there are these five kinds of people who dwell in a charnel ground. What five? A person may dwell in a charnel ground because of stupidity … bad desires … madness … because it is praised by the Buddhas … or for the sake of having few wishes … These are the five kinds of people who dwell in a charnel ground.”

[Sam Vara]

Then he lies down for fun or no reason when he gets injured? Why lie down and not sit?

We're not told, are we? There's nothing about physical pain (there seem to be several Pali ways of expressing this) leading to thīna, sloth.

Well aside from him immediately lying down after incurring an injury or pain? There probably is a sutta out there that directly states it.

There might be, but the point is that you have to provide it. My view is that the Buddha is unlikely to have suffered from sloth - thīna - because he instructed people that it could be done away with permanently, and, as one who had completed the task, he wasn't asking anyone to do what he himself had not done.

Santaṃ vā ajjhattaṃ thinamiddhaṃ ‘atthi me ajjhattaṃ thinamiddhan’ti pajānāti, asantaṃ vā ajjhattaṃ thinamiddhaṃ ‘natthi me ajjhattaṃ thinamiddhan’ti pajānāti, yathā ca anuppannassa thinamiddhassa uppādo
hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca uppannassa thinamiddhassa pahānaṃ hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca pahīnassa thinamiddhassa āyatiṃ anuppādo hoti tañca pajānāti.

When they have dullness and drowsiness in them, they understand: ‘I have dullness and drowsiness in me.’ When they don’t have dullness and drowsiness in them, they understand: ‘I don’t have dullness and drowsiness in me.’ They understand how dullness and drowsiness arise; how, when they’ve already arisen, they’re given up; and how, once they’re given up, they don’t arise again in the future.

And here is a sutta about physical labour resulting in sloth.

No, it's not. It's about physical labour resulting in tiredness - kilanta - rather than sloth. The former happens to everyone, presumably, but the latter does not appear to happen to the Buddha.

[coconut]

We're not told, are we? There's nothing about physical pain (there seem to be several Pali ways of expressing this) leading to thīna, sloth.

Well aside from him immediately lying down after incurring an injury or pain? There probably is a sutta out there that directly states it.

There might be, but the point is that you have to provide it. My view is that the Buddha is unlikely to have suffered from sloth - thīna - because he instructed people that it could be done away with permanently, and, as one who had completed the task, he wasn't asking anyone to do what he himself had not done.

Santaṃ vā ajjhattaṃ thinamiddhaṃ ‘atthi me ajjhattaṃ thinamiddhan’ti pajānāti, asantaṃ vā ajjhattaṃ thinamiddhaṃ ‘natthi me ajjhattaṃ thinamiddhan’ti pajānāti, yathā ca anuppannassa thinamiddhassa uppādo
hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca uppannassa thinamiddhassa pahānaṃ hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca pahīnassa thinamiddhassa āyatiṃ anuppādo hoti tañca pajānāti.

When they have dullness and drowsiness in them, they understand: ‘I have dullness and drowsiness in me.’ When they don’t have dullness and drowsiness in them, they understand: ‘I don’t have dullness and drowsiness in me.’ They understand how dullness and drowsiness arise; how, when they’ve already arisen, they’re given up; and how, once they’re given up, they don’t arise again in the future.

And here is a sutta about physical labour resulting in sloth.

No, it's not. It's about physical labour resulting in tiredness - kilanta - rather than sloth. The former happens to everyone, presumably, but the latter does not appear to happen to the Buddha.

Let me ask you this. The Buddha has to enter first jhana, that means there are times when he is not in first jhana. Why is he not in first jhana then? What hindrance is keeping him out of first jhana?

[Sam Vara]

Let me ask you this. The Buddha has to enter first jhana, that means there are times when he is not in first jhana. Why is he not in first jhana then? What hindrance is keeping him out of first jhana?

That looks like a false premise at the outset. Does the Buddha "have to enter first jhāna?" I can't remember any source saying that. What happens if he doesn't? Will the dhamma-devas come and arrest him? Maybe he has other things to do, like eating, teaching, walking between villages, and washing his feet.

On a more general level, I engaged with this because of your interesting assertion that Buddhas and arahants don't see things in terms of pleasure and pain, and that seeing things as pleasurable or painful is a sign of ignorance. As I said, on DW we've had several discussions along these lines, and I was wondering if there was anything new to be said.

When I pointed out that the Buddha apparently felt and acted upon pain, you said two things. One is that he did indeed feel bodily pain, but not mental. OK, I've heard that before. So he did feel pain, then.

The other is that the Buddha had the hindrance of sloth which is caused by the pain. Binocular expressed surprise that the Buddha and arahants would have a hindrance. We both asked you to prove it by means of textual sources. You reiterated that they did have sloth, but the only source you provided for me had no mention of the hindrance of sloth in it. Tiredness is different from a hindrance.

Now you are asking me to say why, if the Buddha has to enter first jhāna, he is not in first jhāna. Well, you need to prove that he has to be, and then prove why; from the suttas, please. Otherwise it seems to be nothing more than an interesting speculation with nothing in the text to back it up. A bit like claiming you know what childhood illnesses Hamlet had, when there is nothing in Shakespeare's text that refers to his medical history.

[DooDoot]

The average untrained wordling has 3 feelings pleasure, painful and neutral. These feelings are not based on wisdom but ignorance.

Take for example spicy food. One person finds spice pleasurable, another finds it painful. Thus painful and pleasurable are subjective, and subjectivity is rooted in identity view.....

Sounds wrong....

The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming: This, friend Visakha, is the origination of self-identification described by the Blessed One.

MN 44

There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form (feeling, perception, fabrications &/or consciousness) to be the self. That assumption is a fabrication. Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that.

SN 22.81

"Who, O Lord, feels?"

"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say that 'he feels.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who feels?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of feeling?' And to that the correct reply is: 'sense-impression is the condition of feeling; and feeling is the condition of craving.'"

SN 12.12

[DooDoot]

Some suttas:

The wise one, learned, does not feel
The pleasant and painful mental feeling.
This is the great difference between
The wise one and the worldling.

https://suttacentral.net/sn36.6/en/bodhi

"Herein, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: 'In the seen will be merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely what is cognized.' In this way you should train yourself, Bahiya.

"When, Bahiya, for you in the seen is merely what is seen... in the cognized is merely what is cognized, then, Bahiya, you will not be 'with that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'with that,' then, Bahiya, you will not be 'in that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'in that,' then, Bahiya, you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two. Just this is the end of suffering."

“Take an uneducated ordinary person who has not seen the noble ones, and is neither skilled nor trained in the teaching of the noble ones. They’ve not seen good persons, and are neither skilled nor trained in the teaching of the good persons. They perceive earth as earth. But then they identify with earth, they identify regarding earth, they identify as earth, they identify that ‘earth is mine’, they take pleasure (abhinandati) in earth. Why is that? Because they haven’t completely understood it, I say.

They perceive water as water. But then they identify with water … Why is that? Because they haven’t completely understood it, I say.

They perceive fire as fire. But then they identify with fire … Why is that? Because they haven’t completely understood it, I say.

They perceive air as air. But then they identify with air … Why is that? Because they haven’t completely understood it, I say.

"Develop the meditation in tune with water. For when you are developing the meditation in tune with water, agreeable & disagreeable sensory impressions that have arisen will not stay in charge of your mind. Just as when people wash what is clean or unclean in water — feces, urine, saliva, pus, or blood — the water is not horrified, humiliated, or disgusted by it; in the same way, when you are developing the meditation in tune with water, agreeable & disagreeable sensory impressions that have arisen will not stay in charge of your mind.

Hi. None of the quotes above appear to support your ideas.

1. SN 36.6 is referring to two types feelings yet you appear to have misquoted it.

2. Bahiya Sutta does not appear to exclude feelings because feelings are objects "cognised".

3. MN 1 definitely does not refer to feelings. The word "abhinandati" means "delight". Per SN 56.11 & MN 38, delight is related to craving & attachment.

4. MN 62 refers to not allowing feelings to persistently control (pariyādāya ṭhassanti) the mind. It does not refer to having no feelings.