Hi again!
I think the interpretation in bold is implied with what the other passages says. Let’s take the vitakka example -
Then Ananda, it occurred to me" 'With the subsiding of thought and examination, let me enter and dwell in the second jhana. … Yet my mind did not launch out upon the absence of thought and become placid, settled, and liberated in it. … Then it occurred to me: 'I have not seen the danger in thoughts and have not cultivated that; I have not achieved the benefit in the absence of thought and have not pursued it…
This passage occurs before the attainment of the second jhana and the intrusion of vitakka into that attainment. Since the negation in the bolded part points to a privative sense, it strikes me that the same privative sense must have been intended for the first jhana and its relationship to the kāmā which it transcends.
This also suggests that the more natural translation for sahagata in the passage should be “accompanied by”, rather than “dealing with”. The contrast between the desire for a privative state and the affliction brought about by the intrusion of the element supposed to be left behind, points more to the incompatibility of intrusion with the attainment, rather than the intrusion being a mere difficulty. It is clear from this passage, that what is desired is the absence of a particular element, and not merely the absence of difficulties posed by that said element.