verse from MN 44

Question

Background: What I perceived was disenchantment, which seemed to be the cause of duhkha (a psychological pain in this case).

In M 44 Dhammadinnā says:

"Now what, lady, lies on the other side of pleasant feeling?"

"Passion lies on the other side of pleasant feeling."

"And what lies on the other side of painful feeling?"

"Resistance lies on the other side of painful feeling."

"What lies on the other side of neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?"

"Ignorance lies on the other side of neither-pleasant-nor- painful feeling." "What lies on the other side of ignorance?" 
 "Clear knowing lies on the other side of ignorance." "What lies on the other side of clear knowing?" "Release lies on the other side of clear knowing." "What lies on the other side of release?" "Unbinding lies on the other side of release."

"What lies on the other side of Unbinding?" …

The translation from suttacentral is somewhat different:

“But ma’am, what is the counterpart of pleasant feeling?”

“Painful feeling.”

“What is the counterpart of painful feeling?”

“Pleasant feeling.”

“What is the counterpart of neutral feeling?”

“Ignorance.”

“What is the counterpart of ignorance?”

“Knowledge.”

“What is the counterpart of knowledge?”

“Freedom.”

“What is the counterpart of freedom?”

“Extinguishment.”

“What is the counterpart of extinguishment?”

The same two verses seem to be saying different things. If I say, 'the counterpart of pain is resistance', that doesn't make good sense. In fact, the whole translated verse from suttacentral seems strange to my mind; the former being more intuitive, perhaps more correct. But still, what does resistance mean? Does it mean aversion?

Answer 1

Ven. Thanissaro's translation here (quoted below) reads:

"Now what, lady, lies on the other side of pleasant feeling?"

"Passion lies on the other side of pleasant feeling."

"And what lies on the other side of painful feeling?"

"Resistance lies on the other side of painful feeling."

If you read this footnote on Ven. Thanissaro's translation, it says:

This reading follows the Thai edition of the Pali canon. The PTS edition of the Pali canon gives the first two questions and answers in this exchange as follows:

"Now what, lady, lies on the other side of pleasant feeling?"
"Painful feeling lies on the other side of pleasant feeling."
"And what lies on the other side of painful feeling?"
"Pleasant feeling lies on the other side of painful feeling."

For some reason, the editors of neither edition seem to have been aware of the reading in the other edition.

Now, SuttaCentral's translation here (quoted below) by Ven. Sujato:

“But ma’am, what is the counterpart of pleasant feeling?”

“Painful feeling.”

“What is the counterpart of painful feeling?”

“Pleasant feeling.”

So, that solves it. It's because the two Pali source editions are different.

However, I could not find the Pali text associated with Ven. Thanissaro's translation.

I can find something similar here in SN 36.6:

When they’re touched by painful feeling, they resist it. (Ven. Sujato here)

As he is touched by that painful feeling, he is resistant. (Ven. Thanissaro here)

Being contacted by that same painful feeling, he harbours aversion towards it. (Ven. Bodhi here)

When touched by that painful feeling, he is aversive. (Ven. Suddhaso here)

Tassāyeva kho pana dukkhāya vedanāya phuṭṭho samāno paṭighavā hoti.

According to the Concise Pali-English Dictionary by Ven. A.P. Buddhadatta Mahathera:

paṭigha: [m.] anger; repulsion; collision.

So, it can be resistance, repulsion, aversion, that one feels towards painful feelings.

Why counterparts or opposites?

From Piya Tan's commentary on MN 44:

2.8 OPPOSITES AND CONTRASTS (PAṬIBHĀGA) [§29]. The closing question 28-34 deals with paṭibhāga, that is, the 7 key aspects [§29] and their contrary or contrasting qualities (except for the last case, nirvana). The general idea here is to present an overview of the relativity amongst feelings, knowledge and liberation, and how this leads to nirvana. If something has an opposite (in real or existential terms), it means that it is not absolute, and that its nature or conception is meaningful only because its opposite, or contrasting it with something else. But whatever can be contrasted in this way must be relative. For example, ignorance is said to be the opposite of neutral feeling because the latter is subtle and difficult to detect. Each time we ignore a neutral feeling, we reinforce our ignorance of it; we learn nothing of it. The remedy here is to review ― neutral-feeling experiences, especially after a meditation, or after any significant event in our lives, or as a daily practice, that is, to reflect on them as being impermanent.

Nirvana is unique. In intellectual or worldly terms, it may be understood as ― sub specie aeternitatis, that is, something eternal, universal, nothing to do with time. By its very nature — as the unconditioned (asaṅkhata) — it has no opposite or comparison. In a manner of speaking, the way out of suffering is called ― nirvana, but this is merely to inspire and move us with the fact and possibility of the way out of suffering. Since nirvana is unconditioned, it has neither an opposite nor a complement.

Answer 2

The method of the counterpart sign is an important meditation technique mentioned quite a few times in the Pali Canon.

The idea is to find the Ultimate by expanding one's focus to include the subjective counterpart (or complement) of any experience X.

For example, in this case, when there's an experience of pleasant feeling "on the objective side" what do we see as we turn our attention to the subjective side - that is, to "the experiencer" of the pleasant feeling? We see passion, it is like "passion is looking at the pleasant feeling".

(Calling it "the experiencer" or "the subject" is not technically correct, because in Buddhist phenomenology there is no experiencer nor observer of experience. Instead, each experience has a so-called counterpart sign - a reference point the experience is defined and evaluated against. But in the immediate experience of an untrained person that counterpart sign disguises itself as the subject, hence the figure of speech I use, "the experiencer", to point out what approximately I am talking about.)

Similarly, if we look at a painful feeling, and then expand our attention to look at its subject, we see resistance or aversion.

Same with an undetermined feeling and ignorance or indifference.

Now, when we further expand our focus to look at the subject ("the experiencer") of that passion, that resistance, that indifference - what do we see? We see the pure awareness aka clear knowing.

Now the trick is to find the complement of pure awareness. Here in this sutta they skip intermediate steps and declare Release to be the subject of Clear Knowing.

In other suttas this is described differently, for example see the progression of arupa jhanas. On this site I tried to explain it a few times, for example here. I suppose what we see in suttas are students' recollections of the various ways the Buddha explained this method to different audiences. As far as I know, the Buddha did not invent the technique from scratch but picked it up from one of his two main teachers.

This technique is also found in Tibetan Buddhism where it is described as recursively looking for the subject that experiences the current experience, then the subject of that attention etc. The same approach is described in great details by a contemporary philosopher and mystic Franklin Merrell-Wolff.

The exact details of this approach escape the verbal description and vary from meditator to meditator. What's important for us is to understand the main principle (expanding to include the subjective counterpart) so we can apply it in our own meditation practice and discover the Ultimate by ourselves.

Answer 3

Disclaimer: my Pali is not that great, and I rely heavily on dictionaries. A quick scan of that section in Pali from the World Tipitaka in Roman Script indicates that Bhante Sujato's translation is correct for "sukhā vedanā," while "on the other side" is probably more technically correct than "counterpoint." However, Thanissaro Bhikkhu used the Thai edition of the Canon for his translation, as noted here (though he doesn't mention if that's an edition from before or after the Sixth Council).

And to answer the question about "resistance," "aversion" is usually from Pali "dosa;" the word used in this context in the sutta (though not in that passage according to the version I have) is "paṭighānusayo" which is a compound word meaning something like "tendencies of repulsion." "Resistance" seems like a good translation of this, to avoid confusion.

That section from the Pali edition I'm reading:

“Sukhāya panāyye, vedanāya kiṁ paṭibhāgo”ti? “Sukhāya kho, āvuso visākha, vedanāya dukkhā vedanā > paṭibhāgo”ti.

“Dukkhāya pannāyye, vedanāya kiṁ paṭibhāgo”ti? “Dukkhāya kho, āvuso visākha, vedanāya sukhā vedanā paṭibhāgo”ti.

“Adukkhamasukhāya panāyye, vedanāya kiṁ > paṭibhāgo”ti? “Adukkhamasukhāya kho, āvuso visākha, vedanāya avijjā paṭibhāgo”ti.

“Avijjāya panāyye, kiṁ paṭibhāgo”ti? “Avijjāya kho, āvuso visākha, vijjā paṭibhāgo”ti.

“Vijjāya panāyye, kiṁ paṭibhāgo”ti? “Vijjāya kho, āvuso visākha, vimutti paṭibhāgo”ti.

“Vimuttiyā panāyye, kiṁ paṭibhāgo”ti? “Vimuttiyā kho, āvuso visākha, nibbānaṁ paṭibhāgo”ti.