Hi Mat, I didn’t know how to respond to your comment because I’m not sure how you understand V&V in first jhana . Ven. Nanamoli’s translation of “applied thought” and “sustained thought” is vague enough it can support a proper interpretation of V&V in first jhana according to a straightforward EBT interpretation. But how it’s used in Vism., it’s clear for VRJ (vism. redefined jhana) V&V gets redefined as applied and sustained attention on a white light nimitta or kasina patibhaga nimitta where no “thinking + evaluation” is possible. “thinking and evaluation” happens in new samadhi created called access concentration.
(Visuddhi-magga definition of of vitakka and vicara), nanamoli trans.
“[As for] applied thought, hitting upon is what is meant. It has the characteristic of directing the mind onto an object. It is manifested as the leading of the mind onto an object. [As for] sustained thought, continued sustainment is what is meant. It has the characteristic of continued pressure on the object. It is manifested as keeping consciousness anchored on that object.”—the Vism, IV
Translating from the agamas STED first jhana formula V&V, Ven. Analayo translated V&V as
with initial and sustained application of the mind,
From sanskrit, Arthaviniścayasūtram 1st jhana STED, Ven. Anandajoti has
having thinking, reflection,
B.bodhi in MN, followed THOX commentary in STED 1st jhana: (MN 119)
which is accompanied by applied and sustained thought,
MN was Bodhi’s first book translated. After that, in SN and AN, he changed over, explaining he didn’t agree with the THOX and felt V&V is:
SN 45.8, AN 5.28 : which is accompanied by thought and examination
Dr. Chu strongly disagrees with Ven. Analayo’s translation of the chinese of V&V. His 1st jhana STED choice of words:
有覺、有觀，Yǒu jué, yǒu guān,
with coarse-thinking (and) with subtle-thinking,
(A note on vitakka and vicāra)
Ven. Anālayo translated jue and guan as “directed awareness and sustained contemplation,” but that’s a translation based on an extrapolation of the literal reading of some archaic characters (in non-Buddhist Chinese contexts, they mean “realize” and “observe,” respectively). The Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra and the Yogacarabhumi (texts that are traditionally used as dictionaries), among others, explain that jue and guan should be understood as “coarse thinking” and “subtle thinking,” respectively.
The point of showing all these different translations is that
- even with a poor translation of V&V, if the reader has the correct understanding of V&V in first jhana the word choices can still be vague and abstract enough for the translation to work. And the converse is true as well.
- we can only come a reasonable conclusion if we objectively examine all the relevant passages and see which interpretations are coherent.