user254: In MN 8 for example there's this:

Ṭhānaṃ kho panetaṃ, cunda, vijjati yaṃ idhekacco bhikkhu vitakkavicārānaṃ vūpasamā ajjhattaṃ sampasādanaṃ cetaso ekodibhāvaṃ avitakkaṃ avicāraṃ samādhijaṃ pītisukhaṃ dutiyaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja vihareyya.

Here's Ven Sujato's translation:

It’s possible that some mendicant, as the placing of the mind and keeping it connected are stilled, might enter and remain in the second absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of immersion, with internal clarity and confidence, and unified mind, without placing the mind and keeping it connected.

Here is Nyanaponika Thera's

It may be that after the stilling of thought conception and discursive thinking, he gains the inner tranquillity and harmony of the second absorption that is free of thought-conception and discursive thinking, born of concentration and filled with rapture and joy

And Piya Tan's

It is possible, too, Cunda, that
with the stilling of initial application and sustained application,
by gaining inner tranquillity and oneness of mind,
he attains and dwells in the 2nd dhyana,
free from initial application and sustained application,
with zest and joy born of stillness [samadhi].108


108The 2nd dhyana is known as “the noble silence” (ariya,tuṇhī,bhāva) because within it initial application and sustained application (thinking and discursion, vitakka,vicāra) cease, and with their cessation, speech cannot occur. (S
2:273); cf Kāma,bhū S 2 (S 41.6) where vitakka and vicāra are called verbal formation (vacī,saṅkhāra), the mental
factors responsible for speech (S 41.6/4:293), SD 48.7. In Ariya Pariyesanā S (M 1:161), the Buddha exhorts the
monks when assembled to “either speak on the Dharma or observe the noble silence” (ie, either talk Dharma or
meditate).


So what is it that is stilled -- and how (by what method) is it stilled -- does the doctrine say only, "first, think of something which causes joy; then secondly, rest in joy without that thinking"?
Is vitakka just "thought"? I get the impression that Buddhism classifies thought as another type of sense-object, perceived by the 6th sense i.e. by the mind -- is that right? And is a way to still thought meant to be to focus on a specific thought (perhaps an object or focus of meditation), and/or on other senses (e.g. bodily sensations)?  And isn't that just fighting fire with fire? :-)
Or is the way meant to be, perhaps, to focus on a different khandha (e.g. focus on a sensation or perception or formation of joy, instead of on any of the six sense consciousnesses)?

Piya Tan suggests (n the footnote quoted above) that it's especially the type of thought associated with speech: discursion. What about day-dreaming though, imagining sights and situations -- imagining seeing someone or being somewhere, a memory of the past, usually speechless? Night dreams seem pretty random and mostly especially visual (unrelated to speech), they just bubble up from somewhere. Is that phenomenon simply a fact, i.e. the way things are, or is that indicative of some kind of problem?
It -- i.e. undirected/involuntary imagination -- seems harmless enough, sometimes pleasant or entertaining (or a bit surprising, the endless variety of fleetings imaginings), ending, restarting, morphing, kind of empty.
In primary school, teachers complained I was moony ...

dreamy and unaware of one's surroundings, for example because one is in love.

... or dans la lune in French which means, "to be absent-minded; to be distracted".
I take it that's a bad thing, is it? Like "heedless"? It doesn't seem especially immoral -- it's not like I'm spending my time plotting to murder someone. The worst that might be said about it is perhaps that it (i.e. daydreaming or non-applied thought) is a waste of time (or of "precious human life") -- is that even so, and/or is that only the restless of ego of a type A personality:

The hypothesis describes Type A individuals as outgoing, ambitious, rigidly organized, highly status-conscious, impatient, anxious, proactive, and concerned with time management. People with Type A personalities are often high-achieving "workaholics". They push themselves with deadlines, and hate both delays and ambivalence. People with Type A personalities experience more job-related stress and less job satisfaction.

I think I've read -- from non-Buddhist modern popular science -- that dreaming is the mind's attempt or mechanism for integrating recent experience with long-term memory, and/or rehearsing for (simulating) potential future events.
This kind of topic or mental activity seems quite large or time-consuming in life but I don't really know what Buddhism says about it -- whether it's good, bad, or normal, how to avoid it, how to use it properly -- I don't even know which words (of Pali, Tibetan, or other) might be used to describe the phenomena.
How about papanca for example, is that an apt description? My problem with that word is, I recognise it as pejorative (i.e. that "one should avoid that") -- but I don't know how it's prescriptive (i.e. "what one should do to stop that"). And/or is that restlessness, uddhacca?
Dreaming -- a stream of images -- seems to me an automatic process. Like a heart-beat, one might be conscious of it or not but seems to be always happening either way. Like it happens continuously, in a room inside my brain/mind -- and I can shut the door on that room, by paying attention to something else, especially to waking sense-impressions like what I'm currently seeing or hearing, or to some "intentional" or "concentrated" mental task (e.g. reading or writing, or driving, data-processing) -- but the room with its stream of bubbling dreams is always there and becomes apparent again when "sense-impressions" and "directed thought" stop, when the (little) "door" opens.

This question is more or less a continuation of the question about Mahayana doctrine about dreams and illusions
I think I understand those answers, the difference is that this time I'm hoping for answers that are are little more prescriptive and less descriptive.
I think (I hope) that I have no strong emotional reactions to dreams, I'm not aware of fighting (e.g. as described in Andrei's answer) or nightmares (as mentioned in Yeshe Tenley's answer).
It's just that I'm aware of kind of dreaming and even day dreaming, sometimes speech-based (imagining or rehearsing or repeating speech), sometimes only visually imaginative (similar to dreaming). Should I try to stop it and of so how? Replace it with something else, another mode of thought? Continuing to dream seems like getting lost in sensuality (especially the consciousness of the sixth sense) -- thinking I ought to do something else sounds like it might be "desire for becoming" or "for existence" -- so I'm not sure I understand what Buddhist doctrine is on this subject, what practice it recommends.

user-1: As to whether doctrine teaches to use thinking to overcome thinking i think there is this discourse;

Here, Ananda, a monk abides contemplating body as body[ ] — ardent, fully aware, mindful — leading away the unhappiness that comes from wanting the things of the world. And for one who is abiding contemplating body as body,[ ] a bodily object arises, or bodily distress, or mental sluggishness, that scatters his mind outward. Then the monk should direct his mind to some satisfactory image. When the mind is directed to some satisfactory image, happiness is born. From this happiness, joy is then born. With a joyful mind, the body relaxes. A relaxed body feels content, and the mind of one content becomes concentrated. He then reflects: "The purpose for which I directed my my mind has been accomplished. So now I shall withdraw [directed attention from the image]." He withdraws, and no longer thinks upon or thinks about [the image]. He understands: "I am not thinking upon or thinking about [anything]. Inwardly mindful, I am content." This is directed meditation.

I think the satisfactory image, it's probably from the word nimitta, pali is; Tenānanda, bhikkhunā kismiñcideva pasādanīye nimitte cittaṃ paṇidahitabbaṃ https://suttacentral.net/sn47.10/en/sujato

And what is undirected meditation? Not directing his mind outward, a monk understands: "My mind is not directed outward." He understands: "Not focused on before or after; free; undirected." And he understands: "I abide observing body as body — ardent, fully aware, mindful — I am content." This is undirected meditation. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn47/sn47.010.olen.html

Nimitta here is usually translated as a theme/foundation or a sign. Here is another relevant sutta passage describing eventuality analogical (according to me) to the directed development;

Take a mendicant who is focusing on some foundation of meditation that gives rise to bad, unskillful thoughts connected with desire, hate, and delusion. That mendicant should focus on some other foundation of meditation connected with the skillful.
Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno yaṃ nimittaṃ āgamma yaṃ nimittaṃ manasikaroto uppajjanti pāpakā akusalā vitakkā chandūpasaṃhitāpi dosūpasaṃhitāpi mohūpasaṃhitāpi, tena, bhikkhave, bhikkhunā tamhā nimittā aññaṃ nimittaṃ manasi kātabbaṃ kusalūpasaṃhitaṃ.
As they do so, those bad thoughts are given up and come to an end.
Tassa tamhā nimittā aññaṃ nimittaṃ manasikaroto kusalūpasaṃhitaṃ ye pāpakā akusalā vitakkā chandūpasaṃhitāpi dosūpasaṃhitāpi mohūpasaṃhitāpi te pahīyanti te abbhatthaṃ gacchanti.
Their mind becomes stilled internally; it settles, unifies, and becomes immersed in samādhi.
Tesaṃ pahānā ajjhattameva cittaṃ santiṭṭhati sannisīdati ekodi hoti samādhiyati. https://suttacentral.net/mn20/en/sujato

In regards to externally scattered this expression is explained in the excerpt below;

"And how is consciousness said not to be externally scattered & diffused? There is the case where a form is seen with the eye, and consciousness does not follow the drift of the theme of the form, is not tied to... chained to... fettered, or joined to the attraction of the theme of the form: Consciousness is said not to be externally scattered & diffused.
[...] https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.138.than.html

As to the daydreaming part, i just take note of the content and make necessary adjustments. Ie is it tied to past or future; gain, honor or fame; sensuality; delight in another world; cruelty; jealosy; lazyness; listlessness; ill-will; anger etc etc. Then you can know what perception to focus on or what it is that needs giving attention ie; inconstancy, unattractiveness in regard to food; unattractiveness in regard to body (ie graveyard contemplations); metta; compassion; sympathy; non-delight in all worlds; death etc etc
This problem doesn't really occur when training all day because one is then engaged in either prevention or removal of arisen distracting thoughts and is otherwise in some jhana [good state] or is doing some necessary work and is then mindful of their arising due to lack of development.
As to dreams, the sutta say that dreams can among other things be influenced externally and that one who develops metta well does not have evil dreams.
I myself notice that as long as i develop perceptions my dreams are either wholesome, neutral or non-occuring, that as long as i just sleep for rest.
If i wake up and due to laziness go back to sleep i will usually have disturbing dreams or nightmares.
If i train a lot i get a lot of good dreams.
So there is as far as i can tell a more or less direct correlation between dream content and the intensity of development much like there is a correlation between daydreaming and the intensity of developmemt.

user10100: When I asked bhante PaAuk Tawya Sayadaw what is VitakkaVicāra, he teach me "You should meditate Jhana". Bhante told me lik that although bhante knew I am abhidhammist for 10 years without concentration meditation (so I know the definition of VitakkaVicāra already, when asking), and bhante is the AbhidhammaPitakka Memorizer.
So, why bhante PaAuk Tawya Sayadaw didn't just answer me the description which I want to know? Why bhante told me "You should meditate Jhana?"
I ignored his answer for 2 years. This 2 years lost, although I very trust  bhante PaAuk Tawya Sayadaw, but I didn't go to sit in his monastery. I still think "I going to do it", but I didn't know how start. Then 2 years later, this is the answer after I have worked harder on sitting meditation myself this year. If you do the sitting concentration meditation, you can see 3 stats first...

Thinking of worldly objects
It's included Dhamma which not associated with the current meditation. This comes with words such as " I will do..., he should do..., I shouldn't do..., this think is...,This is Vitakka because...", etc. This appear automatically and speedy in the meditation starter because he are sitting. He can't act, so the way he do is speak with himself. And this is why the practitioner should practice VitakkaVicāra first. Vitakka is carrying a mind and mental factors to do their duty on the object. Vicāra is keeping a mind and mental factors to do their duty on the object. The practitioner can't meditate anything if VitakkaVicāra still do the past behave automatically and speedy. And this is why Vitakka (SammāSaṅkappa) is the second of the eight noble path because you can't do follow SammāDiṭṭhi, if you still Vitakka of the same, KāmaSaṅkappa ByāpādaSaṅkāpa, VihiṅsāSaṅkappa.

No meditation's object
It's sleeping either just a millisecond or a nodding. It's sleeping and no object of your current meditation.

Thinking of only one meditation's object
Vitakka is carrying a mind and mental factors to do their duty on only meditation's object. Vicāra is keeping a mind and mental factors to do their duty on only meditation's object. The practitioner may go to do some virtues, eating, sleeping, peeing, etc. but he keep to go back to his  meditation's object as fast as he can. This is why in KN.Paṭisambhidāmagga SaṭipaṭṭhānaKathā described Viharati in DN22 as "doing 4 gestures, keeping, staying, ..."  And this is why the Buddha put the Gesture Meditation Part and Sub-Gesture Meditation Part following Ānāpānassati Part in DN22. Another, This is why the Buddha used "Pajānāti" in Ānāpānassati Part  and the Gesture Meditation Part, but used "SamPajānaKārī" of DN22. And this is why the commentary commented many things which someone , although some Abhidhammist or Commentaryist who never meditate Jhana and memorized Sutta in pali, doubt "why the commentary commented like this?" (Yes, the commentary  is right, but it is too very over deep for them to know).


I often say "I memorized and understood Vitakka for long time, but I never have an experience in understanding of Vitakka very clear like when I start the concentration meditation before." And if I found PaAuk Tawya 17 years ago, I will not lost the time like now.
Some of PaAuk masters answer me like a Tipitaka Memorizer, but some such as PaAuk Tawya Sayadaw and U. Vimala answer me only "You shoud meditate Jhāna to understand the answer" even they memorized many Sutta already because they are co-working on practice me like a real master should do.
Tell me if someone want the link to the reference in the canon.

user16297: Chris,
I've done a detailed comprehensive study of vitakka and vicara here:
http://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/vitakka/index.html
Including looking at every. single. occurrence. of those words in all the suttas here:
http://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/vitakka/all/index.html
In your OP, 2 out of the 3 references you quoted (B. Sujato and P. Tan) have wrong understanding of vitakka and vicara in the 4 jhanas (from the perspective of EBT early buddhist texts - my detailed study is loaded with evidence).
P. Tan's uses fallacious "reasoning" to explain why speech "ceases" in noble silence of second jhana. I explain the fallacy here, in this critique of B. Analayo's understanding of vitakka:
http://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/vitakka/analayo/index.html
In short, SN 36.11 states that in first jhana , "vaca nirodha" (speech ceases), and in second jhana, "vitakka vicara nirodha" (thinking ceases). This doesn't mean you can't think in second jhana, and you can't vocalize/speak in first jhana.  It means if you engage in those activities, then you've ceased those respective jhanas, not that it's "impossible to" start those activities.

user13709: Day-dreaming is associative. A sense object appears and we follow the associations wherever they lead. With first jhana, we "place the mind and keep it connected". In doing so, our intent is focused on unifying the mind with the object of meditation, and not with the endless associations. Intention involves effort and stress. It takes work to not day-dream.
The work of first jhana becomes easier the more we do it. Just like lifting a weight makes us stronger, we no longer need so much intent to relinquish day-dreaming. In particular, we are NOT pushing for the second absorption.

AN9.35:4.3: Without charging at the second absorption, as the placing of the mind and keeping it connected are stilled, they enter and remain in the second absorption.

Our intent stills itself with skilled practice. Skill reduces effort. And with the stilling of intention, we would have:

SN40.2:1.4: ‘As the placing of the mind and keeping it connected are stilled, a mendicant enters and remains in the second absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of immersion, with internal clarity and confidence, and unified mind, without placing the mind and keeping it connected.

But the focus of meditation remains. Only the "placing" and "connecting" has stilled.

254: <p>In <a href="https://suttacentral.net/mn8/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">MN 8</a> for example there's this:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>Ṭhānaṃ kho panetaṃ, cunda, vijjati yaṃ idhekacco bhikkhu <strong>vitakkavicārānaṃ</strong> vūpasamā ajjhattaṃ sampasādanaṃ cetaso ekodibhāvaṃ avitakkaṃ avicāraṃ samādhijaṃ pītisukhaṃ dutiyaṃ jhānaṃ upasampajja vihareyya.</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Here's Ven Sujato's translation:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It’s possible that some mendicant, as <strong>the placing of the mind and keeping it connected</strong> are stilled, might enter and remain in the second absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of immersion, with internal clarity and confidence, and unified mind, without placing the mind and keeping it connected.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Here is <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.008.nypo.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Nyanaponika Thera's</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>It may be that after the stilling of <strong>thought conception and discursive thinking</strong>, he gains the inner tranquillity and harmony of the second absorption that is free of thought-conception and discursive thinking, born of concentration and filled with rapture and joy</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And <a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/51.8-Sallekha-S-m8-piya.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Piya Tan's</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>It is possible, too, Cunda, that
with the stilling of <strong>initial application and sustained application</strong>,
by gaining inner tranquillity and oneness of mind,
he attains and dwells in the 2nd dhyana,
free from initial application and sustained application,
with zest and joy born of stillness [samadhi].<sup>108</sup></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><sup>108</sup><sub>The 2nd dhyana is known as “the noble silence” (ariya,tuṇhī,bhāva) because within it initial application and sustained application (thinking and discursion, vitakka,vicāra) cease, and with their cessation, speech cannot occur. (S
2:273); cf Kāma,bhū S 2 (S 41.6) where vitakka and vicāra are called verbal formation (vacī,saṅkhāra), the mental
factors responsible for speech (S 41.6/4:293), SD 48.7. In Ariya Pariyesanā S (M 1:161), the Buddha exhorts the
monks when assembled to “either speak on the Dharma or observe the noble silence” (ie, either talk Dharma or
meditate).</sub></p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<p>So what is it that is stilled -- and how (by what method) is it stilled -- does the doctrine say only, &quot;first, think of something which causes joy; then secondly, rest in joy without that thinking&quot;?</p>
<p>Is <em>vitakka</em> just &quot;thought&quot;? I get the impression that Buddhism classifies thought as another type of sense-object, perceived by the 6th sense i.e. by the mind -- is that right? And is a way to still thought meant to be to focus on a specific thought (perhaps an object or focus of meditation), and/or on other senses (e.g. bodily sensations)?  And isn't that just fighting fire with fire? :-)</p>
<p>Or is the way meant to be, perhaps, to focus on a different <em>khandha</em> (e.g. focus on a <em>sensation</em> or <em>perception</em> or <em>formation</em> of joy, instead of on any of the six <em>sense consciousnesses</em>)?</p>
<hr />
<p>Piya Tan suggests (n the footnote quoted above) that it's especially the type of thought associated with speech: discursion. What about day-dreaming though, imagining sights and situations -- imagining seeing someone or being somewhere, a memory of the past, usually speechless? Night dreams seem pretty random and mostly especially visual (unrelated to speech), they just bubble up from somewhere. Is that phenomenon simply a fact, i.e. the way things are, or is that indicative of some kind of problem?</p>
<p>It -- i.e. undirected/involuntary imagination -- seems harmless enough, sometimes pleasant or entertaining (or a bit surprising, the endless variety of fleetings imaginings), ending, restarting, morphing, kind of empty.</p>
<p>In primary school, teachers complained I was <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=define%3Amoony" rel="nofollow noreferrer">moony</a> ...</p>
<blockquote>
<p>dreamy and unaware of one's surroundings, for example because one is in love.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>... or <a href="https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%C3%AAtre_dans_la_lune" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>dans la lune</em></a> in French which means, &quot;to be absent-minded; to be distracted&quot;.</p>
<p>I take it that's a bad thing, is it? Like &quot;heedless&quot;? It doesn't seem especially immoral -- it's not like I'm spending my time plotting to murder someone. The worst that might be said about it is perhaps that it (i.e. daydreaming or non-applied thought) is a waste of time (or of &quot;precious human life&quot;) -- is that even so, and/or is that only the restless of ego of a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_A_and_Type_B_personality_theory#Type_A" rel="nofollow noreferrer">type A personality</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The hypothesis describes Type A individuals as outgoing, ambitious, rigidly organized, highly status-conscious, impatient, anxious, proactive, and concerned with time management. People with Type A personalities are often high-achieving &quot;workaholics&quot;. They push themselves with deadlines, and hate both delays and ambivalence. People with Type A personalities experience more job-related stress and less job satisfaction.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I think I've read -- from non-Buddhist modern popular science -- that dreaming is the mind's attempt or mechanism for integrating recent experience with long-term memory, and/or rehearsing for (simulating) potential future events.</p>
<p>This kind of topic or mental activity seems quite large or time-consuming in life but I don't really know what Buddhism says about it -- whether it's good, bad, or normal, how to avoid it, how to use it properly -- I don't even know which words (of Pali, Tibetan, or other) might be used to describe the phenomena.</p>
<p>How about <em>papanca</em> for example, is that an apt description? My problem with that word is, I recognise it as pejorative (i.e. that &quot;one should avoid that&quot;) -- but I don't know how it's <em>prescriptive</em> (i.e. &quot;what one should do to stop that&quot;). And/or is that restlessness, <em>uddhacca</em>?</p>
<p>Dreaming -- a stream of images -- seems to me an automatic process. Like a heart-beat, one might be conscious of it or not but seems to be always happening either way. Like it happens continuously, in a room inside my brain/mind -- and I can shut the door on that room, by paying attention to something else, especially to waking sense-impressions like what I'm currently seeing or hearing, or to some &quot;intentional&quot; or &quot;concentrated&quot; mental task (e.g. reading or writing, or driving, data-processing) -- but the room with its stream of bubbling dreams is always there and becomes apparent again when &quot;sense-impressions&quot; and &quot;directed thought&quot; stop, when the (little) &quot;door&quot; opens.</p>
<hr />
<p>This question is more or less a continuation of the question about <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/29003/254">Mahayana doctrine about dreams and illusions</a></p>
<p>I think I understand those answers, the difference is that this time I'm hoping for answers that are are little more prescriptive and less descriptive.</p>
<p>I think (I hope) that I have no strong emotional reactions to dreams, I'm not aware of fighting (e.g. as described in Andrei's answer) or nightmares (as mentioned in Yeshe Tenley's answer).</p>
<p>It's just that I'm aware of kind of dreaming and even day dreaming, sometimes speech-based (imagining or rehearsing or repeating speech), sometimes only visually imaginative (similar to dreaming). Should I try to stop it and of so how? Replace it with something else, another mode of thought? Continuing to dream seems like getting lost in sensuality (especially the consciousness of the sixth sense) -- thinking I ought to do something else sounds like it might be &quot;desire for becoming&quot; or &quot;for existence&quot; -- so I'm not sure I understand what Buddhist doctrine is on this subject, what practice it recommends.</p>
 -1: <p>As to whether doctrine teaches to use thinking to overcome thinking i think there is this discourse;</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Here, Ananda, a monk abides contemplating body as body[ ] — ardent, fully aware, mindful — leading away the unhappiness that comes from wanting the things of the world. And for one who is abiding contemplating body as body,[ ] a bodily object arises, or bodily distress, or mental sluggishness, that scatters his mind outward. Then the monk should direct his mind to some satisfactory image. When the mind is directed to some satisfactory image, happiness is born. From this happiness, joy is then born. With a joyful mind, the body relaxes. A relaxed body feels content, and the mind of one content becomes concentrated. He then reflects: <strong>&quot;The purpose for which I directed my my mind has been accomplished. So now I shall withdraw [directed attention from the image].&quot;</strong> He withdraws, and no longer thinks upon or thinks about [the image]. He understands: &quot;I am not thinking upon or thinking about [anything]. Inwardly mindful, I am content.&quot; This is directed meditation.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I think the satisfactory image, it's probably from the word nimitta, pali is; Tenānanda, bhikkhunā kismiñcideva pasādanīye nimitte cittaṃ paṇidahitabbaṃ <a href="https://suttacentral.net/sn47.10/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://suttacentral.net/sn47.10/en/sujato</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>And what is undirected meditation? Not directing his mind outward, a monk understands: &quot;My mind is not directed outward.&quot; He understands: &quot;Not focused on before or after; free; undirected.&quot; And he understands: &quot;I abide observing body as body — ardent, fully aware, mindful — I am content.&quot; This is undirected meditation. <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn47/sn47.010.olen.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn47/sn47.010.olen.html</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Nimitta here is usually translated as a theme/foundation or a sign. Here is another relevant sutta passage describing eventuality analogical (according to me) to the directed development;</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Take a mendicant who is focusing on some foundation of meditation that gives rise to bad, unskillful thoughts connected with desire, hate, and delusion. That mendicant should focus on some other foundation of meditation connected with the skillful.
<em>Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno yaṃ nimittaṃ āgamma yaṃ nimittaṃ manasikaroto uppajjanti pāpakā akusalā vitakkā chandūpasaṃhitāpi dosūpasaṃhitāpi mohūpasaṃhitāpi, tena, bhikkhave, bhikkhunā tamhā nimittā aññaṃ nimittaṃ manasi kātabbaṃ kusalūpasaṃhitaṃ.</em>
As they do so, those bad thoughts are given up and come to an end.
<em>Tassa tamhā nimittā aññaṃ nimittaṃ manasikaroto kusalūpasaṃhitaṃ ye pāpakā akusalā vitakkā chandūpasaṃhitāpi dosūpasaṃhitāpi mohūpasaṃhitāpi te pahīyanti te abbhatthaṃ gacchanti.</em>
Their mind becomes stilled internally; it settles, unifies, and becomes immersed in samādhi.
Tesaṃ pahānā ajjhattameva cittaṃ santiṭṭhati sannisīdati ekodi hoti samādhiyati. <a href="https://suttacentral.net/mn20/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://suttacentral.net/mn20/en/sujato</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>In regards to externally scattered this expression is explained in the excerpt below;</p>
<blockquote>
<p>&quot;And how is consciousness said not to be externally scattered &amp; diffused? There is the case where a form is seen with the eye, and consciousness does not follow the drift of the theme of the form, is not tied to... chained to... fettered, or joined to the attraction of the theme of the form: Consciousness is said not to be externally scattered &amp; diffused.
[...] <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.138.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.138.than.html</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>As to the daydreaming part, i just take note of the content and make necessary adjustments. Ie is it tied to past or future; gain, honor or fame; sensuality; delight in another world; cruelty; jealosy; lazyness; listlessness; ill-will; anger etc etc. Then you can know what perception to focus on or what it is that needs giving attention ie; inconstancy, unattractiveness in regard to food; unattractiveness in regard to body (ie graveyard contemplations); metta; compassion; sympathy; non-delight in all worlds; death etc etc</p>
<p>This problem doesn't really occur when training all day because one is then engaged in either prevention or removal of arisen distracting thoughts and is otherwise in some jhana [good state] or is doing some necessary work and is then mindful of their arising due to lack of development.</p>
<p>As to dreams, the sutta say that dreams can among other things be influenced externally and that one who develops metta well does not have evil dreams.</p>
<p>I myself notice that as long as i develop perceptions my dreams are either wholesome, neutral or non-occuring, that as long as i just sleep for rest.</p>
<p>If i wake up and due to laziness go back to sleep i will usually have disturbing dreams or nightmares.</p>
<p>If i train a lot i get a lot of good dreams.</p>
<p>So there is as far as i can tell a more or less direct correlation between dream content and the intensity of development much like there is a correlation between daydreaming and the intensity of developmemt.</p>
 10100: <p>When I asked bhante PaAuk Tawya Sayadaw what is VitakkaVicāra, he teach me &quot;You should meditate Jhana&quot;. Bhante told me lik that although bhante knew I am abhidhammist for 10 years without concentration meditation (so I know the definition of VitakkaVicāra already, when asking), and bhante is the AbhidhammaPitakka Memorizer.</p>
<p><strong>So, why bhante PaAuk Tawya Sayadaw didn't just answer me the description which I want to know? Why bhante told me &quot;You should meditate Jhana?&quot;</strong></p>
<p>I ignored his answer for 2 years. This 2 years lost, although I very trust  bhante PaAuk Tawya Sayadaw, but I didn't go to sit in his monastery. I still think &quot;I going to do it&quot;, but I didn't know how start. Then 2 years later, this is the answer after I have worked harder on sitting meditation myself this year. If you do the sitting concentration meditation, you can see 3 stats first...</p>
<ol>
<li><p><strong>Thinking of worldly objects</strong></p>
<p>It's included Dhamma which not associated with the current meditation. <strong>This comes with words such as &quot; I will do..., he should do..., I shouldn't do..., this think is...,This is Vitakka because...&quot;, etc.</strong> This appear automatically and speedy in the meditation starter because he are sitting. He can't act, so the way he do is speak with himself. And this is why the practitioner should practice VitakkaVicāra first. Vitakka is carrying a mind and mental factors to do their duty on the object. Vicāra is keeping a mind and mental factors to do their duty on the object. The practitioner can't meditate anything if VitakkaVicāra still do the past behave automatically and speedy. And this is why Vitakka (SammāSaṅkappa) is the second of the eight noble path because you can't do follow SammāDiṭṭhi, if you still Vitakka of the same, KāmaSaṅkappa ByāpādaSaṅkāpa, VihiṅsāSaṅkappa.</p>
</li>
<li><p><strong>No meditation's object</strong></p>
<p>It's sleeping either just a millisecond or a nodding. It's sleeping and no object of your current meditation.</p>
</li>
<li><p><strong>Thinking of only one meditation's object</strong></p>
<p>Vitakka is carrying a mind and mental factors to do their duty on only meditation's object. Vicāra is keeping a mind and mental factors to do their duty on only meditation's object. The practitioner may go to do some virtues, eating, sleeping, peeing, etc. but he keep to go back to his  meditation's object as fast as he can. This is why in KN.Paṭisambhidāmagga SaṭipaṭṭhānaKathā described Viharati in DN22 as &quot;doing 4 gestures, keeping, staying, ...&quot;  And this is why the Buddha put the Gesture Meditation Part and Sub-Gesture Meditation Part following Ānāpānassati Part in DN22. Another, This is why the Buddha used &quot;<strong>Pajānā</strong>ti&quot; in Ānāpānassati Part  and the Gesture Meditation Part, but used &quot;Sam<strong>Pajāna</strong>Kārī&quot; of DN22. And this is why the commentary commented many things which someone , although some Abhidhammist or Commentaryist who never meditate Jhana and memorized Sutta in pali, doubt &quot;why the commentary commented like this?&quot; (Yes, the commentary  is right, but it is too very over deep for them to know).</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>I often say &quot;I memorized and understood Vitakka for long time, but I never have an experience in understanding of Vitakka very clear like when I start the concentration meditation before.&quot; <strong>And if I found PaAuk Tawya 17 years ago, I will not lost the time like now.</strong></p>
<p>Some of PaAuk masters answer me like a Tipitaka Memorizer, but some such as PaAuk Tawya Sayadaw and U. Vimala answer me only &quot;You shoud meditate Jhāna to understand the answer&quot; even they memorized many Sutta already because they are co-working on practice me like a real master should do.</p>
<p>Tell me if someone want the link to the reference in the canon.</p>
 16297: <p>Chris,
I've done a detailed comprehensive study of vitakka and vicara here:
<a href="http://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/vitakka/index.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/vitakka/index.html</a></p>
<p>Including looking at every. single. occurrence. of those words in all the suttas here:
<a href="http://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/vitakka/all/index.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/vitakka/all/index.html</a></p>
<p>In your OP, 2 out of the 3 references you quoted (B. Sujato and P. Tan) have wrong understanding of vitakka and vicara in the 4 jhanas (from the perspective of EBT early buddhist texts - my detailed study is loaded with evidence).</p>
<p>P. Tan's uses fallacious &quot;reasoning&quot; to explain why speech &quot;ceases&quot; in noble silence of second jhana. I explain the fallacy here, in this critique of B. Analayo's understanding of vitakka:
<a href="http://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/vitakka/analayo/index.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/vitakka/analayo/index.html</a>
In short, SN 36.11 states that in first jhana , &quot;vaca nirodha&quot; (speech ceases), and in second jhana, &quot;vitakka vicara nirodha&quot; (thinking ceases). This doesn't mean you can't think in second jhana, and you can't vocalize/speak in first jhana.  It means if you engage in those activities, then you've ceased those respective jhanas, not that it's &quot;impossible to&quot; start those activities.</p>
 13709: <p>Day-dreaming is associative. A sense object appears and we follow the associations wherever they lead. With first jhana, we &quot;place the mind and keep it connected&quot;. In doing so, our intent is focused on unifying the mind with the object of meditation, and not with the endless associations. Intention involves effort and stress. It takes work to not day-dream.</p>
<p>The work of first jhana becomes easier the more we do it. Just like lifting a weight makes us stronger, we no longer need so much intent to relinquish day-dreaming. In particular, we are NOT pushing for the second absorption.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://suttacentral.net/an9.35/en/sujato#an9.35:4.3" rel="nofollow noreferrer">AN9.35:4.3</a>: Without charging at the second absorption, as the placing of the mind and keeping it connected are stilled, they enter and remain in the second absorption.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Our intent stills itself with skilled practice. Skill reduces effort. And with the stilling of intention, we would have:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://suttacentral.net/sn40.2/en/sujato#sn40.2:1.4" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SN40.2:1.4</a>: ‘As the placing of the mind and keeping it connected are stilled, a mendicant enters and remains in the second absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of immersion, with internal clarity and confidence, and unified mind, without placing the mind and keeping it connected.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But the focus of meditation remains. Only the &quot;placing&quot; and &quot;connecting&quot; has stilled.</p>
