It seems ‘acting with full attention or awareness’ (sampajānakārī) is clearer within the context (e.g. SN 47.2).
2 Likes
I think the following from p. 52 of Nanamoli’s The Guide (a translation of the Netti) seems to be the section where your quote is taken from:
And the Blessed One said accordingly: [31] <Therefore, bhikkhus, abide contemplating the body as a body, ardent, aware and mindful, guiding out covetousness and grief about the world> (cf. M. iii, 83). Now ‘ardent’ [here means] the energy faculty, ‘aware’ the understanding faculty, ‘mindful’ the mindfulness faculty, and ‘guiding out covetousness and grief’ the concentration faculty. So when someone abides contemplating the body as a body the four Foundations of Mindfulness come to fulfilment through keeping in being. For what reason ? Because of the four faculties’ state of having a single characteristic.
2 Likes
Thanks. SN47.2 is nice. It does mirror suttas in other places like MN10:
“Again, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu is one who acts in full awareness when going forward and returning; who acts in full awareness when looking ahead and looking away; who acts in full awareness when flexing and extending his limbs; who acts in full awareness when wearing his robes and carrying his outer robe and bowl; who acts in full awareness when eating, drinking, consuming food, and tasting; who acts in full awareness when defecating and urinating; who acts in full awareness when walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep, waking up, talking, and keeping silent.
By itself, to me it seems a little lacking as a definition (clear comprehension of what?), though it definitely does add to the meaning.
SN47.35 (describing it as understanding of feelings/perceptions/thoughts as they arise, are present, and pass away) and AN8.9 (applying this description to the sati-sampajāno pair) are pretty informative too.
A third interesting data point is that sampajāno (and sati too) is a factor of the third jhana. I guess any understanding has to somehow take that into account too. Why it wouldn’t be a factor of the first and second jhanas too is unclear to me; perhaps the meditator is still too blissed out on piti for that factor to be very strong until then?
1 Like
Can you provide the link to download or read the content.
Better if you could understand pali since English is not much related to pali langyage.
Note: With the western origin (a culture away from Eastern Philosophy and Buddhism) English language may lack related words.
Sure, would be nice to have a bit more Pali. I’ll PM a link to you. It’s not hard to find PDF versions via google, but I suspect they may not be uploaded with the PTS’s permission.
1 Like
It is awareness (sampajana) of all bodily postures and movements, naturally including feelings, mental states in the present moment.
The text SN 47.2 on sampajana provides very practical detail, and not idealistic and systematic theory about feelings, perceptions, thoughts (as they arise, present, and pass away), and jhana.
1 Like
With clues so few and sparse on sampajano in the suttas (to the extent that the commentators had to construct a more fleshed-out definition later) I’ll take all the crumbs I can get (idealistic or systematic or otherwise 
). To me, SN47.35 seems to indicate a close association with discerning or understanding impermanence in what we are experiencing, and quotes like SN47.2 indicate an external situational awareness aspect, while the jhana link indicates an internal meditational aspect. Other than that, probably not much more can be said, because that’s about all that’s there!
1 Like
SCMatt: Did your question get answered satisfactorily for you? Perhaps I missed it, but I read all of the replies and didn’t come away with a clear and direct handling of the “protector” aspect.
The protectors the Buddha listed included energy, sati and wisdom as well as good friends and contentment.
9](SuttaCentral)Furthermore, a mendicant is mindful. They have utmost mindfulness and alertness, and can remember and recall what was said and done long ago. This too is a quality that serves as protector.
In that context, what did the Buddha mean?
Answer was already there,
Mau be just the wording of the phrase is diferent.
1 Like
It seems incorrect to say so. Awareness of all bodily postures and movements, including keeping silent, is clearly connected with mental components. In fact one needs to manage every physical behaviour in daily life for better understanding mental activity and health.
I’m not sure I understand your point about why it would be incorrect. I’m just saying the suttas seem to indicate sampajāno can be applied both internally and externally in different situations. I suppose external contexts would include all kinds of daily activities (of course, including awareness of concomitant mental factors), but it pops up also as a factor, for example, along with sati in satipatthana practice including contemplation of mind and dhammas and in jhana factors too, which seems to indicate a more purely internal mental application context too.
As regards SN47.35, a page here (Goenka-related) translates sampajāno as ‘the constant thorough understanding of impermanence’ (rather than the usual ‘clear comprehension’ or ‘clear knowing’ or ‘awareness’). That sounds a bit clunky but in it, the article is attempting to come to an understanding that reconciles/harmonizes both SN47.35 and SN47.2, which I guess is more or less what I was trying to do.
The sutta SN47.2 on sampajāno is awareness of both physical behaviours and their mental activities in daily life ( including sleeping, keeping silence …). It does not indicate only “an external situational awareness aspect”.
1 Like
OK, thanks, I get your point now. I didn’t intend to mean what you ended up interpreting those words to mean, e.g. I didn’t say “only”, meant “external” and “internal” in relative not absolute terms, and aspects of a thing aren’t generally mutually exclusive. Anyway, language is imprecise and my words were probably unclear, so sorry for any confusion!
what do you mean by, this.
That, relatively speaking, daily life mindfulness is more external in application (always involving the outside world to some extent) and mindfulness in meditation is usually more internal (can even be purely internal with no reference at all to the external world). Not “absolute” in the sense of there being a hard absolute boundary between the two in which never the twain shall meet (or that mind is ignored).
Daily life mindfulness indicated in SN47.2 is, in practice, not “more external in application”. It is awareness of both physical behaviours and their mental activities (such as feelings, mental states) in daily life. One cannot be awareness of mental activities without bodily postures and movements (including sleeping, keeping silence). Daily life mindfulness indicated in SN47.2 is mindfulness meditation.
Sure, as you say, daily mindfulness meditation is as described in SN47.2. However, the point of mine you quoted wasn’t meant as a point on mindfulness meditation per se. I meant “more external in application” of sampajāno, which was what I thought we were talking about (a bit of a side discussion to the main point of the thread), and sampajāno is also described as present in the more internal context of higher jhanas or sitting satipatthana meditation. When I’ve been referring to more internal or external application contexts, I’ve been specifically meaning sampajāno (if that hasn’t been clear).
It seems not unreasonable to me to say that, for example, third jhana is a more internal context for sampajāno than daily life mindfulness meditation. That has really been my only point in terms of this internal/external distinction.
I know what you meant. But, sampajāno is in fact not “more external in application”; e.g. the mentioned SN47.2 on sampajāno, which is awareness of both physical behaviours and their mental activities in daily life.
“… the more internal context of higher jhanas”? Which sutta (s) you refer to? It is certainly not found in SN47.2
As for “sitting satipatthana meditation”, it is also awareness of both bodily in- and out-breathing and mental activities (such as feelings, mental states), according to SN54.1 on ānāpānasati.
Third jhana is for sampajāno? Which sutta states that?
Do you also mean sampajāno is not about daily life mindfulness meditation?
OK, good. I know that, at least now, we are no longer getting our wires crossed.
No, it’s not an either-or situation. Just because I say something can also occur somewhere else doesn’t mean I’m saying it can’t occur in the original place.
I suppose there’s room for different interpretations there. It seems reasonable to me to say sitting satipatthana meditation is a more internal sampajāno context than daily life. It’s not just anapanasati either. Reference to sampajāno crops up in the satipatthana suttas too, e.g. in MN10 (here Sujato is translating sampajāno as aware, which I think is how he usually does it):
What four? It’s when a mendicant meditates by observing an aspect of the body—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. They meditate observing an aspect of feelings—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. They meditate observing an aspect of the mind—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. They meditate observing an aspect of principles—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world
Katame cattāro?
Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu kāye kāyānupassī viharati ātāpī sampajāno satimā, vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassaṃ;
vedanāsu vedanānupassī viharati ātāpī sampajāno satimā, vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassaṃ;
citte cittānupassī viharati ātāpī sampajāno satimā, vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassaṃ;
dhammesu dhammānupassī viharati ātāpī sampajāno satimā, vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassaṃ.
I suppose one could argue the toss to some extent on satipatthana meditation. Regarding your questions about jhana:
“… the more internal context of higher jhanas”? Which sutta (s) you refer to? It is certainly not found in SN47.2
…
Third jhana is for sampajāno? Which sutta states that?
It’s in the standard jhana pericope:
With the fading away as well of rapture, he dwells equanimous and, mindful and clearly comprehending, he experiences happiness with the body; he enters and dwells in the third jhana of which the noble ones declare: ‘He is equanimous, mindful, one who dwells happily.’
Pītiyā ca virāgā upekkhako ca viharati sato ca sampajāno sukhañca kāyena paṭisaṃvedeti, yaṃ taṃ ariyā ācikkhanti: ‘upekkhako satimā sukhavihārī’ti tatiyaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja viharati.
That occurs literally all over the place (SN53.1 is one example) with over hundred examples of the same wording in various places. Sampajāno crops up as a factor of specifically the third jhana in this.
I think I have got some kind of point here at least (even if you won’t concede elsewhere). Referring to third jhana as a more internal sampajāno context than daily life is surely reasonable?
1 Like
The content for the third jhana does not mean that the third jhana is sampajāno. E.g. the text also says " sato ca sampajāno ", which are sato and sampajāno, and also other contents shown in the text for the third jhana.
Not sure what is your reason here?