A Dhamma discussion based on the question (condensed and paraphrased)…
‘Bhante, thank you for giving me the chance to clarify my thoughts in writing—it’s something I rarely do.
When I refer to “‘the form (of the Satipatthanas) practiced’ today,” I mean the common methods most meditators now use, such as watching the breath for extended periods. I believe these approaches often address only the surface of suffering by temporarily “shutting down” the citta, rather than helping one truly understand and tame it through precepts and virtue first. As a result, some may mistakenly believe they are practicing properly even while engaging in unwholesome behavior, as long as they continue meditating.
Today, the Satipaṭṭhānas are often treated as a rigid method—like watching breath or thoughts—with the idea that this alone will bring freedom. While those with a developed citta might benefit from such techniques, I believe Satipaṭṭhāna is more appropriate at a later stage, once the mind is tamed enough to discern its own tendencies. At that point, the practice becomes a tool for deep reflection and dispassion.
This view is supported by the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta, particularly the section that states: “(…) He lives contemplating origination factors in the body, or he lives contemplating dissolution factors in the body, or he lives…” and “The body exists,” to the extent necessary just for knowledge and mindfulness, and he lives detached, and clings to nothing in the world.”
Other passages in the sutta also support this interpretation: “And further, monks, a monk reflects on this very body enveloped by the skin and full of manifold impurity,” and similar observations of elements, decay, and mental phenomena, all done “just for knowledge and mindfulness, and he lives detached, and clings to nothing in the world.”
My main concern is that without a clear understanding of one’s citta and the roots of wholesome and unwholesome states, Satipaṭṭhāna may be practiced through ignorance. That’s why I believe the Buddha likely reserved these teachings for those already somewhat developed.
What do you think—does this seem correct to you?’