SN 17.10 how to translate and interpret the "always jhana" part of the verse?

[frank k]

https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2 ... pret.html

excerpt:
B. Bodhi seems to interpret those lines as "only WHEN they're doing jhana with perseverance" do they have subtle view and vipassana.



Also note that B. Bodhi in the previous line goes with 'appamana' (measureless mind) instead of 'appamada' (assiduity/diligence/heedfulness), even though identical verse passages in KN show appamada.



That is an important decision (appamada or appamana), and also the single word translation for it fails to capture the real meaning of appamada.

Appamada means every moment, you give the Dhamma everything you got, with the urgency of someone who might die in the next breath, or the time it takes to chew one bite of food. If you're practicing with that kind of urgency, you can't afford not to be in jhana, or partially in jhana as your current moment allows.

When you read the whole verse with appamada and samadhi not wavering, it makes the jhana all the time (sāta) the more natural interpretation IMO.



Pali experts what do you say?

[sphairos]

Interesting passage.

ven Bodhi's translation is, as usual, closer to the original.

"sukhumaṃ diṭṭhivipassakaṃ" means "(they call) the one, subtle, clearly seeing the view/clear seer of the view". Sounds very poetic and not technical.

Both appamāṇa and appamāda are possible, very hard to choose. The commentaries choose appamāṇa .

[DooDoot]

it makes the jhana all the time (sāta) the more natural interpretation IMO.

sounds ridiculous. for example, if the Buddha was always in jhana, why do suttas refer to him entering & emerging from different jhanas? the bottom line is such attempts to belittle jhana indicate never entering jhana

[frank k]

I've updated the article, to compare with KN Iti 81 which is nearly identical verse and theme for sutta.

https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2 ... pret.html

[Pulsar]

Dearest Frank K

quite a find SN 17.10

I was curious why I missed this one. But then again it is tucked away in a Samyutta kinda obscure.

• Labhasakkarasamyutta.

Apparently these two verses are common to SN and Th1011-12.
What struck me was what you pointed out in the post...

"His concentration does not vacillate.
As he dwells in the measureless state"

It would have been better translated as

His Samadhi does not vacillate,
As he dwells in the measureless state"

Concentration gives the wrong idea that it is "one pointed concentration" whereas samadhi is a dynamic state.
But then this is a general weakness in the canonical translations.
Appamana is found elsewhere when reference to jhanic state is mentioned. Think Metta sutta.
Appamada... could be error in copying or as sphairos mentions could be stretched to
mean the same.
Anyways the reason for my comment here is this is something, I was always convinced of, regarding the
jhanic state of the Arahant. It is stable. Suttas speak of Arahants getting in an out of Jhana. It is baloney.

It totally does not make sense when suttas write the "arahant goes on alms round,
comes back settles down and enters jhana" The fault is in the compilers that did not understand Jhana. Arahant's transformation is irreversible.
Of course there are many uncorrupted suttas.
Otherwise how do sharp folks find the truth in the canon?
With regards

[Ratnakar]

Dearest Frank K

quite a find SN 17.10

I was curious why I missed this one. But then again it is tucked away in a Samyutta kinda obscure.

• Labhasakkarasamyutta.

Apparently these two verses are common to SN and Th1011-12.
What struck me was what you pointed out in the post...

"His concentration does not vacillate.
As he dwells in the measureless state"

It would have been better translated as

His Samadhi does not vacillate,
As he dwells in the measureless state"

Concentration gives the wrong idea that it is "one pointed concentration" whereas samadhi is a dynamic state.
But then this is a general weakness in the canonical translations.
Appamana is found elsewhere when reference to jhanic state is mentioned. Think Metta sutta.
Appamada... could be error in copying or as sphairos mentions could be stretched to
mean the same.
Anyways the reason for my comment here is this is something, I was always convinced of, regarding the
jhanic state of the Arahant. It is stable. Suttas speak of Arahants getting in an out of Jhana. It is baloney.

It totally does not make sense when suttas write the "arahant goes on alms round,
comes back settles down and enters jhana" The fault is in the compilers that did not understand Jhana. Arahant's transformation is irreversible.
Of course there are many uncorrupted suttas.
Otherwise how do sharp folks find the truth in the canon?
With regards

I think that is concentration of metta, there is no one pointed concentration there it's like how you concentrate to not die of hitting other vehicles when you drive