SuttaCentral
There is such an attainment where the one who enters it does not feel anything at all.’
But in equanimity or fourth jhana, referred to as imperturbable, according to MN140: the three feelings are given up. And the above attainment mentions only not feeling anything, it does not mention cessation of perception, so that’s why I think equanimity matches this description.
It’s logically by just seeing all conditioned phenomena are dukkha, only nibbāna is not dukkha.
Here’s quite long and detailed discussion on it: What is dukkha? - #99 by Vaddha
Can you quote it? I don’t find 4th jhāna in MN140. If you’re referring to this:
Painful feeling arises dependent on a contact to be experienced as painful. When they feel a painful feeling, they know: ‘I feel a painful feeling.’ They know: ‘With the cessation of that contact to be experienced as painful, the corresponding painful feeling ceases and stops.’
Neutral feeling arises dependent on a contact to be experienced as neutral. When they feel a neutral feeling, they know: ‘I feel a neutral feeling.’ They know: ‘With the cessation of that contact to be experienced as neutral, the corresponding neutral feeling ceases and stops.’
When you rub two sticks together, heat is generated and fire is produced. But when you part the sticks and lay them aside, any corresponding heat ceases and stops. In the same way, pleasant feeling arises dependent on a contact to be experienced as pleasant. …
They know: ‘With the cessation of that contact to be experienced as neutral, the corresponding neutral feeling ceases and stops.’
This is more of an insight into seeing causation, not actually contacts for all 3 feelings ceases.
See SN48.40 and SN48.36 which says that from 4th Jhāna and all 4 formless attainments, it’s neutral feelings. And only in cessation of perception and feeling, does all feelings ceases. There’s no mind in that cessation attainment. Whenever there’s mind, there’s feelings.
Correct, perception is still there as found in AN 10.6 & AN 10.7 
Immediately, after the quoted paragraph comes the following sentence mentioning pure equanimity which is present in fourth jhana (the feature of 4th jhana is pure equanimity and awareness). After this segment there is mention of boundless space etc. If this were not 4th jhana I do not think there would be mention of the other immersions following it.
There remains only equanimity, pure, bright, pliable, workable, and radiant. It’s like when a deft goldsmith or a goldsmith’s apprentice prepares a forge, fires the crucible, picks up some gold with tongs and puts it in the crucible. From time to time they fan it, from time to time they sprinkle water on it, and from time to time they just watch over it. That gold becomes pliable, workable, and radiant, not brittle, and is ready to be worked. Then the goldsmith can successfully create any kind of ornament they want, whether a bracelet, earrings, a necklace, or a golden garland. In the same way, there remains only equanimity, pure, bright, pliable, workable, and radiant.
They understand: ‘If I were to apply this equanimity, so pure and bright, to the dimension of infinite space, my mind would develop accordingly. And this equanimity of mine,
Well, I do not see such logic to be sound. It may make logical sense to you, but no matter how much logical sense it may make, that does not mean its true, it may be not true.
For example: AN1.30 mentions that citta when developed and cultivated brings much happiness.
“Mendicants, I do not see a single thing that, when it is developed and cultivated, brings such happiness as the citta. A developed and cultivated citta brings happiness.”
Or according to MN137 there is such thing as lay happiness, renunciate happiness. If we applied the logic that everything is dukha other than Nibbana there would be no lay happiness.
And in this context what are the six kinds of lay happiness? There are sights known by the eye that are likable, desirable, agreeable, pleasing, connected with the worldly pleasures of the flesh. Happiness arises when you regard it as a gain to obtain such sights, or when you recollect sights you formerly obtained that have passed, ceased, and perished. Such happiness is called lay happiness.
To keep to the definition of noble truth of suffering; not to get what one desires is suffering: if one desires a conditioned thing or if one desires even unconditioned Nibbana and does not obtain it - that is suffering (lay sadness for conditioned things, renunciate sadness due to yearning for Nibbana). The latter is actually useful for giving up lay sadness.
Isn’t it then logical to see that it is the unmet desire for X which causes suffering, not X itself?
You’re still stuck on seeing dukkha means mental suffering. I suggest you read properly the 3 types of dukkha, at least the first post there.
All conditioned phenomenon are dukkha doesn’t deny that there’s happiness, but those happiness are temporary, therefore they are dukkha due to change. Only parinibbāna is not subject to impermanence.
@am7 you are correct since in the light of Reverse Dependent Origination one can’t say ”all is dukkha”, because one form of happiness leads to a higher form av happiness:
If one would say: ”this is dukkha” one would just go back to the start: ”Suffering is a vital condition for faith & faith is a vital condition for joy”, over and over again. 
Regarding physical pain, that too is mentioned in the noble truth of suffering.
Birth is suffering, old age is suffering, illness is suffering, death is suffering; sorrow, lamentation, pain,
And according to Suttas, that is due to desire for rebirth.
In MN44, it states when a pleasant feeling persists it is sukha, when it ceases it is dukha, similarly it states that unpleasant feeling is dukha when is persists and sukha when is ceases. In other words it does not state that since at one point in time a pleasant feeling can potentially be dukha it is dukha, rather it states what it is at what time/condition.
“What are these three feelings?”
“Anything felt physically or mentally as pleasant or enjoyable. This is pleasant feeling. Anything felt physically or mentally as painful or unpleasant. This is painful feeling. Anything felt physically or mentally as neither pleasurable nor painful. This is neutral feeling.”
“What is pleasant and what is painful regarding each of the three feelings?”
“Pleasant feeling is pleasant when it remains and painful when it perishes. Painful feeling is painful when it remains and pleasant when it perishes. Neutral feeling is pleasant in the presence of knowledge, and painful in the presence of ignorance.”
Birth , aging , sicknesses , death and including all the side effect of physical aspect and mental aspect involves in that processes are all dukkha . Therefore , it is going through the wheel or whole process of birth and death repeatedly unstoppable that is the dukkha meant . The causes to the cycles of birth and death are ignorance and craving .
@am7 That is why I have have always stated the following on this forum:
The inhabitants themselves haven’t experienced impermanence (but eventually will).
But during the entire duration prior to death in such a realm there is/was no pain, suffering, sorrow and no indications of impermanence, it is the end that makes it dukkha not the actual experience itself.
AN 4.123
The lifespan of the gods of Brahma’s Host is one eon. An ordinary person stays there until the lifespan of those gods is spent, then they go to hell or the animal realm or the ghost realm. But a disciple of the Buddha stays there until the lifespan of those gods is spent, then they’re extinguished in that very life. This is the difference between a learned noble disciple and an unlearned ordinary person, that is, when there is a place of rebirth.
The lifespan of the gods of streaming radiance is two eons. An ordinary person stays there until the lifespan of those gods is spent, then they go to hell or the animal realm or the ghost realm. But a disciple of the Buddha stays there until the lifespan of those gods is spent, then they’re extinguished in that very life. This is the difference between a learned noble disciple and an unlearned ordinary person, that is, when there is a place of rebirth.
The lifespan of the gods replete with glory is four eons. An ordinary person stays there until the lifespan of those gods is spent, then they go to hell or the animal realm or the ghost realm. But a disciple of the Buddha stays there until the lifespan of those gods is spent, then they’re extinguished in that very life. This is the difference between a learned noble disciple and an unlearned ordinary person, that is, when there is a place of rebirth.
The lifespan of the gods of abundant fruit is five hundred eons. An ordinary person stays there until the lifespan of those gods is spent, then they go to hell or the animal realm or the ghost realm. But a disciple of the Buddha stays there until the lifespan of those gods is spent, then they’re extinguished in that very life. This is the difference between a learned noble disciple and an unlearned ordinary person, that is, when there is a place of rebirth.
Now if the brahmaviharas and these realms where truly dukkha no disciple of the Buddha would stay there until the lifespan of those gods is spent, and then extinguish.
Yes, from this perspective:
328
“Just as, mendicants, even a tiny bit of fecal matter still stinks, so too I don’t approve of even a tiny bit of continued existence, not even as long as a finger-snap.”
329–332
“Just as even a tiny bit of urine, or spit, or pus, or blood still stinks, so too I don’t approve of even a tiny bit of continued existence, not even as long as a finger-snap.”
Dukkha has many meanings, and it’s context dependent. See DPD:
adj. uncomfortable; unpleasant [√dukkh + a] ✓
adj. painful [√dukkh + a] ✓
nt. (+loc) discomfort; suffering; unease; unpleasantness; something unsatisfactory; trouble; a bummer; stress [√dukkh + a] ✓
nt. pain; physical discomfort
Again, please don’t get stuck with dukkha as mental suffering only. Anything which is subject to change is unsatisfactory.
What do you think, mendicants? Is form permanent or impermanent?”
“Impermanent, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Suffering, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
“No, sir.”
“Is feeling permanent or impermanent?” …
“Is perception permanent or impermanent?” …
“Are choices permanent or impermanent?” …
“Is consciousness permanent or impermanent?”
“Impermanent, sir.”
“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Suffering, sir.”
sn22.59
Yes I know very well of that quote! 
Yet please take the following into consideration:
DN 16 Mahāparinibbānasutta: An Obvious Hint:
For a second time … And for a third time, the Buddha said to Ānanda: “Ānanda, Vesālī is lovely. And the Udena, Gotamaka, Seven Maidens, Many Sons, Sārandada, and Cāpāla Tree-shrines are all lovely. **Whoever has developed and cultivated the four bases of psychic power—made them a vehicle and a basis, kept them up, consolidated them, and properly implemented them—may, if they wish, live for the proper lifespan or what’s left of it. The Realized One has developed and cultivated the four bases of psychic power, made them a vehicle and a basis, kept them up, consolidated them, and properly implemented them. If he wished, the Realized One could live for the proper lifespan or what’s left of it.”
But Ānanda didn’t get it, even though the Buddha dropped such an obvious hint, such a clear sign. He didn’t beg the Buddha: “Sir, may the Blessed One please remain for the eon! May the Holy One please remain for the eon! That would be for the welfare and happiness of the people, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, welfare, and happiness of gods and humans.” For his mind was as if possessed by Māra.
Venerable Ānanda said to the Buddha, “Sir, may the Blessed One please remain for the eon! May the Holy One please remain for the eon! That would be for the welfare and happiness of the people, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, welfare, and happiness of gods and humans.”
“Enough now, Ānanda. Do not beg the Realized One. Now is not the time to beg the Realized One.”
For a second time … For a third time, Ānanda said to the Buddha, “Sir, may the Blessed One please remain for the eon! May the Holy One please remain for the eon! That would be for the welfare and happiness of the people, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, welfare, and happiness of gods and humans.”
“Ānanda, do you have faith in the Realized One’s awakening?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Then why do you keep pressing me up to the third time?”
“Sir, I have heard and learned this in the presence of the Buddha: ‘Whoever has developed and cultivated the four bases of psychic power—made them a vehicle and a basis, kept them up, consolidated them, and properly implemented them—may, if they wish, live for the proper lifespan or what’s left of it. The Realized One has developed and cultivated the four bases of psychic power, made them a vehicle and a basis, kept them up, consolidated them, and properly implemented them. If he wished, the Realized One could live for the proper lifespan or what’s left of it.’”
“Do you have faith, Ānanda?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Therefore, Ānanda, the misdeed is yours alone, the mistake is yours alone. For even though the Realized One dropped such an obvious hint, such a clear sign, you didn’t beg me to remain for the eon, or what’s left of it. If you had begged me, I would have refused you twice, but consented on the third time. Therefore, Ānanda, the misdeed is yours alone, the mistake is yours alone.
It seems rupa loka has sorrow , when they get irritated and annoyed or even instinctive aversion which categorized as dukkha feeling .
- Teaching the Path to Brahmā
The Buddha said this:
“It’s when a Realized One arises in the world, perfected, a fully awakened Buddha … That’s how a mendicant is accomplished in ethics. … Seeing that the hindrances have been given up in them, joy springs up. Being joyful, rapture springs up. When the mind is full of rapture, the body becomes tranquil. When the body is tranquil, they feel bliss. And when blissful, the mind becomes immersed.
They meditate spreading a heart full of love to one direction, and to the second, and to the third, and to the fourth. In the same way above, below, across, everywhere, all around, they spread a heart full of love to the whole world—abundant, expansive, limitless, free of enmity and ill will.
Furthermore, a mendicant meditates spreading a heart full of compassion …
They meditate spreading a heart full of rejoicing …
They meditate spreading a heart full of equanimity to one direction, and to the second, and to the third, and to the fourth. In the same way above, below, across, everywhere, all around, they spread a heart full of equanimity to the whole world—abundant, expansive, limitless,
The Buddha would had willingly take on more physical suffering from remaining in saṁsāra longer out of compassion for others.
I agree that certain states like deep Jhānas (and thus the Brahma realms) are basically freed from mental suffering, temporarily. But they are still characterised as dukkha due to change and conditionality, meaning not the ultimate happiness, although also described as the happiness of nibbāna. Just because they are temporary and require effort to maintain, even if the effort was done in a previous life.
It is kind of like:
From this, it would be a false assumption to assert that “We should get shackled because getting unshackled is good.”, that’s kind of missing the point.
The reason getting unshackled is good is because being shackled is bad.
Once free from shackles, there’s no more shackles and so no more condition to be getting unshackled.
@Dogen But however we look at it, this doesn’t mean that the brahmaviharas are dukkha.
Rupa Loka has no sorrow, pain or anything like that and these realms corresponds with the brahmaviharas.
A disciple of the Buddha (if they wish to) stays there until the lifespan of those gods is spent, then they’re extinguished in that very life.
Just look at Reverse Dependent Origination:
If one would say: ”this is dukkha” one would just go back to the start: ”Suffering is a vital condition for faith & faith is a vital condition for joy”, over and over again.
If one instead, in Reverse Dependent Origination, concludes rebirth is dukkha one has to understand this:
So it is while immersed in samādhi that buddhists understand this: ‘Transmigration has no known beginning. No first point is found of sentient beings roaming and transmigrating, shrouded by ignorance and fettered by craving.
When a noble disciple has tried again and again, recollected again and again, entered immersion again and again, and understood with wisdom again and again, they will be confident of this: ‘I have previously heard of these things. But now I have direct meditative experience of them, and see them with penetrating wisdom.’
This understanding is obviously taking place with a heart full of love, compassion, rejoicing & equanimity to one direction, and to the second, and to the third, and to the fourth. In the same way above, below, across, everywhere, all around, they spread a heart full of equanimity to the whole world—abundant, expansive, limitless, free of enmity and ill will.
So how, with all these things I’ve mentioned from the suttas, can the brahmaviharas be considered dukkha when it is in fact these that actually facilitate the following understandning:
???
”But now I have direct meditative experience of them, and see them with penetrating wisdom.’”
Haha but this in the very beginning when no other beings are there
