MN 118 appears to only contemplate on pleasant feelings in the 2nd tetrad.
This idea about āall possible feelingsā appears to be heavily influenced by MN 10.
What about āfeelings-meditator?ā
The difference between vedana & kaya is ākayaā is naturally plural, namely, meaning āgroupā
or ācollectionā, even though this āgroupā is often spoken of as singular, namely, āthe groupā.
Again, this appears heavily influenced by MN 10.
MN 118 appears to only contemplate on the pleasant feelings that naturally & inevitably arise from calming the breathing, namely, rapture (piti) & happiness (sukkha).
While MN 118 appears to be the more authentic sutta, I think a definitive translation must match both MN 118 & MN 10.
In other words, it is probably OK to use a different translation for practical purposes for MN 10 and MN 118, respectively, however we probably should avoid getting dogmatic about what the translation most truly is.
If that was so, would not the Pali be similar to stage 3, namely, āsabbavedaĀnÄpaį¹iĀsaį¹ĀvedÄ«ā?
Again, MN 10 & MN 118 are vastly different suttas despite each sutta sharing the common phrases that are the subject of this topic.
You seem to be imputing MN 10 onto MN 118, which is obviously dhammically inappropriate.
The Pali is āsabbaĀkÄĀyapaį¹iĀsaį¹ĀvedÄ«ā. āSabbaā, according to its predominate use, means āallā rather than āoneā (ekka) or āwholeā (kevala). Therefore, āsabbaĀkÄĀyapaį¹iĀsaį¹ĀvedÄ«ā appears to refer to experiencing all of the different ākayaā (such as nama, rupa & breath kaya) at the same time within the ākayaā (āgroupā; ācollectionā) & how they interrelate or intercondition eachother.
Please keep in mind Buddhist practise is about understanding suffering & its cessation therefore training (sikkhati) in meditation should probably require more than just observing objects. It should probably ideally observe how such objects contribute to suffering & peace.
SN 12.2 appears to explain ādeathā (āmaranaā) occurs to āa beingā (āsattaā) therefore it seems doubtful the breath ādiesā. In Pali, the word for the breath passing appears to be āatthaį¹
gamoā (in AN 4.41) or āvayaĀdhamĀmÄĀnuĀpassÄ«ā (in MN 10) rather than āmaranaā. It seems DN 11 argues the air-element does not cease without remainder.
Again, this view here appear to be heavily influenced by MN 10, for which doubts about its authenticity have been posted elsewhere. While I do not doubt MN 10 is a very useful for helping to develop mindfulness in respect to different aspects of the body & experience, when it comes to developing the Noble Path, including jhana, the field of meditation is much more limited or narrow, as described in MN 118.
OK. As requested.