1) First my apologies for my typo: 'defines' should be 'defined' (blame on 'a s d')

"What are kusala-citta events?

I will leave that to be defined by our religious leaders."

2) Second, we have semantic issues on 'ความสุข' (happiness:feeling good/content) and 'ความพึงพอใจ' (satisfaction:having a wish served). It seems, there is a strong 'correlation' between the two concepts. Children usually say they are happy when they are satisfied (eg. when given a gift they want, when their team wins a competition or when they escape punishment).

3) If we can find a 'correlation' or 'co-agent' on a (statistical) 'variable', we may use a measure on one to reflect another (eg. satisfaction count --> happiness count). But, we have 'relational issues' like transitivity (A --> B --> C ...). Does A --> C? C --> A? Does (A and B together --> C), etc.

One less visible example of correlation may be called 'influence' (as in Boss-->Worker; Teacher-->Student; and Doctor-->Patient). Asymmetrical relations like these subject 'receivers' to modify their responses to fit/learn the framework of 'senders/actors'. Thus, the responses are 'masked' (not necessarily 'biased' but 'repackaged' to fit demand). by the same token, the stimuli are 'customized' to fit receivers (according to actors' perception/assumption on receivers).

Do we not bring upon ourselves, the complication/condition of measurement?

4) Happiness as a "mind" state (from a number of configurations/conditions), in a 'spiritually' way is a religious matter -- "when I believe I am happy, I am happy", I don't need a meter to tell me that! We can 'condition'/train people to be happy in response to certain stimuli (eg. when patients receive medication, when students get a good pass, when we offer 'daana' to monks).

5) Currently, more governments are looking at 'happiness indexes' and ways to govern for greater happiness among people. (They have tried govern for economy -- they have failed.) Definitions of 'happiness' (and measure of happiness) will vary among nations (like definitions of 'human rights'). Which will we favor? The happiness defined by academics and politicians (then 'given' to people) or the happiness realized by people in their everyday life? And which is 'simple/pure'?