MN 4: Clarification on the segue

[trusolo]

I didn’t sit up or stand still or walk until I had got rid of that fear and dread while lying down.
So kho ahaṁ, brāhmaṇa, neva tāva nisīdāmi na tiṭṭhāmi na caṅkamāmi, yāva nipannova taṁ bhayabheravaṁ paṭivinemi.
There are some ascetics and brahmins who perceive that it’s day when in fact it’s night, or perceive that it’s night when in fact it’s day.
Santi kho pana, brāhmaṇa, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā rattiṁyeva samānaṁ divāti sañjānanti, divāyeva samānaṁ rattīti sañjānanti.
This meditation of theirs is delusional, I say.
Idamahaṁ tesaṁ samaṇabrāhmaṇānaṁ sammohavihārasmiṁ vadāmi.

On a normal reading of this sutta as a normal conversation between the Buddha and some brahmin, I found this sudden shift in this conversation a bit strange. The Buddha is explaining how fear and dread came upon him while sitting, standing, walking, lying down, and how he continued in that posture until he had subdued that posture. Then, suddenly, he starts talking about meditation of seeing daytime as night and vice versa and calls it delusional!

Is the point here that fear and dread are equally delusional? Or is there a larger point that delusional states can arise on their own or can be deliberately cultivated but either way they are a mistake or misapprehension? Or is there some other tangential point being made here?

[ORsEnTURVi]

@trusolo

Then, suddenly, he starts talking about meditation of seeing daytime as night and vice versa and calls it delusional!

I suggest that it’s not “suddenly” as you thought.

The part about confirmation of other ascetics and brahmins practice of meditation as delusional is to prepare for the following part: how the Buddha practice of meditation is NOT delusional by the means of the jhanas (with the preparations he has completed and were mentioned in the beginning part of MN4 - while other ascetics and brahmins didn’t even completed the proper preparations yet).

@trusolo

Is the point here that fear and dread are equally delusional?

No, I don’t think so. That’s not the point.

@trusolo

Or is there a larger point that delusional states can arise on their own or can be deliberately cultivated but either way they are a mistake or misapprehension?

No, I don’t think so. That’s not the point.

@trusolo

Or is there some other tangential point being made here?

Yes. The other tangential point being made here is about the preparations for the proper meditation (jhanas) that can correctly dispel fear and dread.

[paul1]

@trusolo

I found this sudden shift in this conversation a bit strange.

There is an intention to poetically connect deluded Brahmins with, by speaking in the same breath, the spirits causing fear and trepidation. This is a strong negative allusion. Majhima Nikaya 4 is composed of two seemingly unrelated themes. 1) preliminary information on how the Buddha-to-be overcame Mara on the path to awakening, and 2) the later Buddha as a teacher and his concern with countering the doctrine of the Brahmins.

1. refers to the full moon and other phases when demons were thought to be particularly strong and active, and how the Buddha-to-be determined to overcome that fear, leading eventually to his confrontation with Mara.

[CurlyCarl]

@trusolo

1. The Buddha is explaining how fear and dread came upon him while sitting, standing, walking, lying down, and how he continued in that posture until he had subdued that posture.

2. Then, suddenly, he starts talking about meditation of seeing daytime as night and vice versa and calls it delusional!

Hi. For me, the two matters above are unrelated.

The first matter is about the overcoming of the existential fear of solitude plus fear of creatures in the forest.

The second seems to possibly be about a 'bodhisatta-type vow’, where the Buddha concludes:

And if there’s anyone of whom it may be rightly said that a being not liable to delusion has arisen in the world for the welfare and happiness of the people, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, welfare, and happiness of gods and humans, it’s of me that this should be said.

I speculate the Bodhisatta possibility of the above because the phrase of ‘night & day’ is used positively in SN 51.20, AN 4.41 and elsewhere:

And they meditate perceiving continuity:
Pacchāpuresaññī ca viharati—
as before, so after; as after, so before;
yathā pure tathā pacchā, yathā pacchā tathā pure;
as below, so above; as above, so below;
yathā adho tathā uddhaṁ, yathā uddhaṁ tathā adho;
as by day, so by night; as by night, so by day.
yathā divā tathā rattiṁ yathā rattiṁ tathā divā.

SN 51.20

It’s when a mendicant focuses on the perception of light, concentrating on the perception of day,

Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu ālokasaññaṁ manasi karoti, divāsaññaṁ adhiṭṭhāti—

regardless of whether it’s night or day.

yathā divā tathā rattiṁ, yathā rattiṁ tathā divā.

And so, with an open and unenveloped heart, they develop a mind that’s full of radiance.

Iti vivaṭena cetasā apariyonaddhena sappabhāsaṁ cittaṁ bhāveti.

AN 4.41

Lets compare SN 51.20 & AN 4.41 to MN 4:

There are some ascetics and brahmins who perceive that it’s day when in fact it’s night, or perceive that it’s night when in fact it’s day.

Santi kho pana, brāhmaṇa, eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā rattiṁyeva samānaṁ divāti sañjānanti, divāyeva samānaṁ rattīti sañjānanti.

MN 4

While, for me, the above night & day sutta comparison is not conclusive (possibly @sujato or @Dhammanando can comment here), based on AN 4.41, these meditation related to ‘night vs day’ are not the ultimate goal of the meditation, for the Buddha.

In other words, not practicing for the below is a delusion:

for the welfare and happiness of the people, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, welfare, and happiness of gods and humans

[trusolo]

Thank you @ORsEnTURVi, @paul1, and @CurlyCarl. I find all three approaches or answers are interesting and insightful. To give some context, I was translating MN 4 in a couple of Indian languages and made certain choices up to that point in the sutta. I was wondering if that was going to be consistent with the nuances that were associated with that change of tack and wanted to better understand what was going on. I am still pondering about all the replies but I usually gravitate towards simpler explanations and preparation for later portion of the sutta seems reasonable and speaking to the brahmins about and in the language they are familiar with also seems to be on point, as well as speaking as a practitioner (bodhisatta) and then as a teacher.

PS: @moderators, I understand that I have posted this in the Q and A category, but “Solution” seems a bit extreme choice to have to make. It has a mathematical feel and an unnecessary sense of certainty. While regular forum users may know to take “solution” with a pinch of salt, it may still be susceptible to being thought of as “the way” to think about something rather than “a way” or the most likely explanation. I was wondering if it was worth doing something about like calling it “favored answer” or some such label.

[Ric]

Thanks @trusolo, in these cases, when there is no unique or clear answer, I would propose to move the thread to the Discussion category.

[trusolo]

Ok, fair point @Ric. Thanks. I did that.