Reply To: Validity of current interpretation of Satipatthana Sutta

#51407
pathfinder
Participant

Lal: As we have discussed, there are many such “dual use” words.

I agree, but how do we know that this is a case of dual use? Just because it has a deeper meaning, does not necessarily mean that it is as intended by the sutta.

  • Another reason why I am skeptical about this other meaning is because I am unable to find other suttas with that same, deeper meaning of paccupaṭṭhitā. They do not have the element of paticca samuppada within.
  • Additionally, for a word to make sense, it should be able to tie in with the rest of the ideas in that sentence, eg for ‘Atthi vedanā’ti  panassa sati paccupaṭṭhitā hoti, the idea of sati paccupaṭṭhitā should be able to tie in with the rest of the sentence, which i struggle to find a way to do so using the deeper meaning. I would be glad if you could show how you can translate that sentence.

From this I also have another reflection, which is “how do we know that we are not overcomplicating things by adding deeper meanings to the sutta, making it much deeper than it is intended to be?”

One possibility would be to look at the context of the sutta. If it is towards a lay person who came across the Buddha for the first time, it is unlikely that the Buddha would use complicated concepts and words to speak to that lay person. In this sutta, it seems to be spoken to bhikkhus, so it is possible for deeper meanings to be conveyed since we can assume that they should have the background knowledge. However we must be cautious that they may not have abhidhamma knowledge too. I have also raised the above 2 points for consideration.