Anattalakkhana

Mahasi Sayadaw
Produced by calibre 0.6.42
Preface

THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE ANATTALAKKHAṆA SUTTA

FOREWORD

In the personality of every common worldling or putthujano, moral

defilements or human passions kilesās, such as, greed which have a
tendency to attachment, are in abundance. These kilesās have a craving for
senses arising out of the six sense-doors, such as the sense of a beautiful
sight and so on. Of all these cravings while attachment occurs in respect of
all what are pleasant and agreeable, attachment to atta as a 'living entity'
or 'Self' is not only basically fundamental but also most difficult to be
discarded. It can neither be got rid of by one's own ordinary effort or
perseverence nor dispelled by others through normal strength or exertion.

Pacceka-Buddhas were capable of extirpating their own feelings of

attachment to 'Self' by means of adequate and deligent efforts with their will
power without anyone's aid. However, they have no ability to eradicate the
attachment to atta that clings others. To be able to wipe out the feeling of
attachment to atta that lies close to the heart of others, one must have the
real aptitude and knowledge to preach and convince others the essence and
noble qualities of the Four Noble Truths. Pacceka-Buddhas have no such
adequate knowledge of high intellect to teach others. That is the reason why
they are destined to become a single Pacceka-Buddha without any disciples.
A Pacceka-Buddha therefore enters Nibbāna singly. He is not omniscient and
does not preach the Dhamma to mankind.

ATTACHMENT TO ATTA WILL BE ROOTED OUT ONLY IF

THE FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS ARE FULLY UNDERSTOOD

Supreme Buddhas, the Omniscients, are endowed with better intellect than
Pacceka-Buddhas. The Supreme Buddhas truly realized the Four Noble
Truths on their own initiative. They could also preach and teach others to
understand clearly the Dhamma relating to the Four Noble Truths. That is
why they became Supreme Buddhas, the fully Enlightened Ones. Therefore,
the Lord Buddha was able to deliver to the First Sermon concerning the Four
Noble Truths to the five ascetics who were present along with all Celestial
Beings, such as, Devas and Brahmās. The sermon is the Great Discourse on
the "Setting in Motion the Wheel of Dhamma or Righteousness", popularly
known as Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta. This Grate Discourse was the first
Dhamma delivered by the Blessed One on the eve of Saturday night of the
full moon of Wāso, exactly two months after His attainment of the Superme
Enlightenment. At the close of this Great First Sermon, Ashin Kondñña, the
leader of the five ascetics first became an Ariya Sotāpana. Having reached
the stage of Sotāpana he has got rid of all sceptical doubts about the truth
of the Dhamma and of the misconception of Sakkāya "Self" or a living entity.
Nevertheless, self-pride still lingers on in his mind assuming that everything
could be achieved if done or said or imagined according to his own sweet
will. The rest four ascetics had not yet then realized the Special Dhamma
"the awakening of higher consciousness."

HEMAVATA SUTTA

The sermon on Dhammacakka Sutta came to an end in the first Watch of the
night on that Full Moon Day. In the middle Watch of that Saturday night,
Sātāgiri and hemāvata Devas accompanied by their one thousand warrior
attendants approached the Blessed One, paid their obeisance to Him and
respectfully posed ten questions. The Lord had to preach them the
Hemāvata Sutta. At the end of this sermon, the dawn of enlightenment came
upon them and they became Sotāpannas. Having achieved such an
attainment, they were able to eliminate their clinging attachment to Atta
which had beset them all throughout the whirlpool stream of past existences
(Saṃsarā).

THEY ALSO ATTAINED THE SPECIAL DHAMMA

As self-pride or personal ego still had its grip on Ashin Kondañña; and as
Ashin Vappa and the other three of the group of five Bhikkhus had not yet
even obtained the 'pure and spotless Dhamma eye', the Blessed One went
on preaching and urged them to contemplate and note on the lines of
Vipassanā Dhamma. They all eventually reached the stage of Sotāpanna
which had caused the removal of their attachment to atta after serious
meditation with diligence. Ashin Vappa gained progressive insight on the first
waning day of Waso, Ashin Bhaddiya on the second day, Shin Mahānam on
the third day and Shin Asaji on the fourth day.

THE FIFTH WANING DAY OF WĀSO

The Lord Buddha then summoned the whole group of five Bhikkhus who had
already gained Sotāpanna, and preached them His Second Sermon setting
forth the famous Anatta Doctrine. It was on Thursday, the 5th. Waning Day
of Wāso. Having heard this Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, all five Bhikkhus attained
Arahatship by virtue of which they were entirely free from human passions
including māna, self-pride. Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta as its name implies clearly
expounded the "Non-self" Anatta Doctrine as against the heretical or false
views of "Self", with full explanations in a critical way.

WITHOUT THE METHOD OF CONTEMPLATING AND NOTING

The Discourse on Anattalakkhaṇa is not a lengthy piece. For instance, in the

original book published by the Sixth Buddhist Council, it covered only one
page. In that Sutta there was no mention of method of meditation exercise
and of the manner as to how contemplation and noting should be carried on.
Preaching was done there-in only in respect of the nature of Dhamma.
Hence, to those who have not acquainted themselves with the method of
Vipassanā exercise, it would be difficult to practise according to the right
method of meditation to be able to reflect personally and appreciate the
reality of Anatta as envisaged in that Sutta. It had been possible for the five
ascetics to see the true light of the Anatta doctrine only because the sermon
was delivered by the Lord Buddha himself and because they-the listening
audience-happened to be the five ascetics of keen intellect. These five had
not only been equipped with mature experience since the time of the
preaching of the Dhammacakka Sutta but also had reached the stage of
Sotāpanna. That is the reason for their speedy attainment of Arahatship after
making progressive strides towards realization of the awakening higher
consciousness of Dhamma.

AWAKENING OF HIGHER CONSCIOUSNESS CANNOT BE ACHIEVED

WITHOUT CONTEMPLATING AND NOTING

During the life time of Lord Buddha people with great intellect who
possessed adequate and mature paramitas (perfections) just like the five
ascetics, had achieved magga-phala while listening to the sermon delivered
by the Blessed One. Of course, such an achievement was gained not without
deligently practising Vipassanā contemplation and noting. The special
Dhamma was attained only because they had been able to devote
themselves to serious meditation with deep concentration and accelerated
contemplation and noting with such a speed so that it would appear as if
they had not absorbed themselves in contemplation and noting with intent.
Only a few who had good knowledge of adequate past perfections were
capable of doing so. A good many could not possibly contemplate and note
with great speed. Despite this fact, there are some idlers who will knowingly
say: "If one understands the nature of anatta from the preaching made by
the other, it is not necessary to practise; and one could achieve magga-
phala by merely listening to preaching" with wishful thinking placing
themselves on the plane of Ariya which they aspire to reach. Such concept
having been entertained by the class of lazy-bones, the number of people
who have so become self-made Ariyas after just listening to the sermon, will
not be few. The kind of knowledge of Anatta Dhamma known by those who
by merely listening to the sermon without practising Vipassanā meditation
and doing contemplation and noting, is not a true personal realization but
mere book-knowledge only. If magga-phala ñāṇa can be realized in the
manner as stated, almost every Buddhist who knows what is Anatta
doctrine, may be considered to have become an Arahat. However, as such
people have not been found to be endowed with the real attributes of an
holy Arahat, it is obvious that they are not the real Arahats. Referring to such
improper and wrongful acts, the Venerable Mahāsī Sayādaw has given
precise and clear instructions in this great Anattalakkahaṇa Sutta to put
these people on the right path.

FULL COMPLIMENTS OF THE METHOD OF CONTEMPLATING AND

NOTING

The Anattalakkahaṇa Sutta preached by the Load Buddha being the desanā
describing the nature and characteristics of anatta does not imbibe the
method of meditation with emphasis on contemplation and noting, the
bhāvanā. This present book on Anattalakkahaṇa Sutta Dhamma however
contains the full exposition of the method of contemplating and noting, and
explains in detail how Anatta is reflected leading to the attainment of
Nibbāna through magga-phala. It has not been so preached just wishfully
without reference to the scriptural texts. Neither has it been preached
prompting others to meditate without having had any personal experience in
the practical exercise of Vipassanā. This has been expounded and preached
to the congregation after acquiring personal experience and knowledge in
meditational practice under the methodical instructions of the competent
teacher and after consultations being made referring to various relevant Pāḷi
Scriptures and Commentaries.

At the time when delivering his sermon to the listening audience, the
Venerable Sayādawpa-yagyī had fully elaborated with his deep compassion,
on the brief account of Anattalakkahaṇa Sutta preached by the Lord Buddha.
This Sutta, when produced in type-written copy, was a lengthy piece
comprising 420 pages in all because it was truthfully taken without omitting
a word or phrase from the tape recorded originally by U Thein Han, retired
Judge.U Thein Han had put up type-written copy to the Venerable
Sayādawpayagyī to seek permission for printing and publication in a book
from for the benefit of those who have not heard of this Sermon. The
Sayādawpayagyī gave his kind permission to print and publish this Sutta only
after summarising this long Sutta into a compendium having 152 pages
instead of 429 pages, lest the book should become too bulky in view of the
shortage of printing paper.

EXTREMELY PROFICIENT

Indeed, the Venerable Sayādawpayagyī is an adept in amplifying what is

concise and in shortening what is lengthy. He has not only abbreviated the
lengthy version of the Anattalakkahaṇa Sutta and the "method of vipassanā
meditation", but also the Dhammacakka Sutta Dhamma at the time of his
preaching. In doing so he is capable of making them comprehensible to all
those who might prefer to read or hear the Dhamma irrespective of whether
it is in a concise or an unabbreviated form. This serves as a boon to all
concerned.

MORE SIGNIFICANCE IS ATTACHED TO ITS NATURAL MEANING

Whenever he preaches or writes, the Venerable Sayādaw Payagyī lays more

emphasis on the essence and true meaning rather than on the principles of
grammer. Despite the fact that some Nissaya Sayādaw might have
mentioned "Bārānasiyam", as "At Benares" putting more stress on the
grammatical sense-though it may not be regarded as incorrect the Venerable
Mahāsī Sayādaw has described is as "in the neighbourhood of Benares", in as
much as Buddha had temporarily resided in Migadāvum forest near the City
of Benares (or rather in the province of Benares). And also in order to fall in
line with the factual truth without, of course, causing deviation from the
viewpoint of the grammer. In the same manner in his "Mahā Satipatthāna
Sutta New Nissaya", he had mentioned about "Kurusu" as "the Country of
Kurū".

PREFERS TRUTH TO TRADITION

Although significance is said to have been given to nature, the Venerable

Sayādaw Payagyī is not used to describing the meaning aloof from the point
of grammer which he never fails to attach its importance. In other words, he
treats grammer as it deserves giving it the role of its own significance. More
than that paramount importance is given to the natural sense in giving
interpretation. Hence, in his interpretation of the meaning he does not
strictly follow the traditional method; and also when sitting is done, he sticks
to the truth of the meaning once he has found it accurate and then
expresses his candid opinion in writing, accordingly. This is clearly evident
from his writings and expressions given in the first Volume of the "Method of
Practising Vipassanā Meditation" in the chapter relating to "Sīla" (moral
conduct) at pages 13 to 23. In that chapter though some of the ancient texts
had stated as amounting to "repaying the debt" when referring to the use of
four main requisites needed for a monk, namely, dwelling-place (monastery),
robes, food and medicine, he had refuted the said statement as being
erroneous citing concrete examples in support. Moreover, in this
Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta Dhamma at page 10 of the Myanmar version, he had
expressed his opinion as follows:

In this regard, the teachers of the old days had explained the meaning of the
word 'Abādaya' as 'pain' in Myanmar. This explanation appears wrong from
the point of view of grammer and of its intrinsic meaning. The reason being,
the word 'Abādaya' with the syllable 'a' prefixed to it, cannot be interpreted
and spoken as 'pain'. It only conveys the meaning as 'ill-treating'. The
meaning 'injury' for the word 'ābāda' has therefore been rendered in
accordance with the Myanmar terminology currently in use. It is so
interpreted not because it has been preached as 'likely to cause pain'. As
such, the meaning referring to the word 'ābādāya' as 'pain' is regarded as
unrealistic particulary because it is not only contrary to the innate meaning
of 'bāda' which conveys the meaning of 'ill-treating', but also go out of tune
with the principles of grammer. Furthermore, the material body or the rūpa
as well as saññā, Saṅkhāra and viññāṇa, do not have the characteristic of
'pain', etc., etc.

SEEMINGLY EASY BUT DIFFICULT

The Dhamma relating to Anicca, Dukkha and Anatta is in fact, very familiar
to all Buddhists who get it by heart, and is often at the tip of their tongue.
Whenever any accident happens, such interjections are used to be casually
muttered by a person all of a sudden invoking his mindfulness of the
Dhamma. Such being the case, it might be considered as the Dhamma which
is generally known and understood. Undoubtedly, referring to this statement,
the Dhamma has been known through hearsay or book knowledge; but in
reality it is a difficult Dhamma to be truthfully grasped though seemingly
easy. Among these, the Dhamma on "Anatta" is more difficult and
profound. For this reason, the Blessed One had to face very serious
opposition from such persons as Saccaka Paribbājako (wandering religious
mendicant) and Baka Brahmā who entertained the diametrically opposite
view of Atta.

Prior to the preachings made by the Buddha, this Anatta Dhamma not being
clearly understood, was considered as closely related to Atta connected with
rūpa and nāma. As against the wrong belief in Atta in respect of rūpa and
nāma, the Lord Buddha had elucidated these two-the physical and mental
phenomena-as truly "Anatta". It is most difficult to preach this Dhamma
convincingly to show that it is "Anatta" in reality, to make these persons
realize the truth, since Atta has been firmly rooted in them throughout the
samsarā, the round of existence. If this Anatta Dhamma could be easily
known without difficulty, there would be even no need for the appearence of
a Buddha, the Enlightened One. Nor would it be required for the Buddha's
disciples like the venerable Mahāsī Sayādaw to preach and write this kind of
Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta with great pains. The relentless efforts that have to be
made to elucidate this Dhamma evidently stand witness to the quality of this
deeply profound doctrine. Even among the heretics, exceptionally few
persons really understand what is "Self" or "Atta" far less "Anatta Dhamma".
The "Thanks-Worthy" Venerable Mahāsī Sayādaw has lucidly explained the
Anatta Doctrine in this Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta to make those persons who
entertain a wrong conception of this Dhamma to be able to tread on the right
track.

SHOULD NOT UNDERESTIMATE

The believers in Paramattha who care more for Abhidhammā, the

Paramattha desanā, are generally inclined to look upon sutta-desanā with
underestimation. They generally assume it to be quite easy too. As all
Buddha's desanās or teachings were preached with Superme Wisdom after
Enlightenment, it might not be within easy comprehension by common
worldlings with ordinary knowledge. If both the nature of common usage and
Abhidhammā become involved in Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, the exponents of
Paramattha may have to give up not knowing distinguishingly the source
from which the terminology is derived wavering whether the derivation is
from Abhidhammā or from Sutta Dhamma.

Abhidhammā Desanā has stated that there is no sensation of suffering

(dukkha) and of pleasure (sukha) at the moment of seeing, hearing, and
knowing the taste, and that only the neutral sensation (upekkhā) is present.
However, according to Sutta Desanā, all sensations arising out of the six
sense-doors at the moment of seeing, hearing, etc, should be contemplated
and noted in respect of all three Vedanās, viz; whether pleasurable (sukha),
or suffering and unpleasantness (dukkha), or neutral feeling. When such a
controversial view arises, it is extremely difficult to draw a line and form an
opinion so as not to contradict the expression contained in both
Abhidhammā and Sutta, Such difficulties may arise in Sutta desanā which
the Paramattha believers hold in low estimation. This sort of difficulty has
been found to have been competently dealt with by the Venerable Mahāsī
Sayādaw Payagyī in the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta Dhamma at page 34 (of the
Myanmar version) reconciling the two divergent views without any
contradiction.
COMMON USAGE OR TERMINOLOGY IS NOT EASY

Because of the numerous display of common usages, the Sutta Desanā has
been given the name of Desanā of Common Usages, by the people of the
present day Sāsanā. To make this Desanā of Common Usage to be
understood methodically various texts of grammer have been compiled.
Considering this fact, it can be clearly known that the usage of common
terminology is not at all easy. Pakokku Aletaik sayādaw U Paññā in the
course of his explanation given in connection with the subject of grammer
while teaching the famous Tīkā, had once stated, "One can be fairly
conversant with Abhidhammā in three years time of his constant study
whereas he cannot possibly become a competent grammarian though he
may have seriously devoted himself to the study of grammatical texts for ten
years in succession." The common terminology used relating to grammer is
merely derived and adopted from the vocal sound commonly spoken by
people of different races whose languages may be quite different from one
another depending upon the places where they reside. Dialectic differences
may also occur according to times and hence, the common usages may vary
or alter as time goes on gradually. Therefore, Texts such as, Vohāra Dīpanī
have to be published.

To the extent the Vohāra or the commonly used grammatical terms is

difficult, the Vohāra desanā which is Suttam desanā is extremely difficult.
Now that over 2500 years have elapsed since the Dhamma have been
personally preached by the Buddha Himself, and it has been ages ago. As
such, in some of the expressions, the Pāḷi usages and Myanmar usages have
become different from one another in vocabulary, grammer and synthesis.
As an example, in Dighanakha Sutta called "Sabbam me nakhamati" (ma-2-
165), an expression of Pāḷi sentence as spoken by Diganakha Paribbajako to
the Lord Buddha, may be cited. This Pāḷi statement is quite different from the
common usage and the word "Sabbam" in Pāḷi, the subject, has become an
object in Myanmar language while the word 'me' has become a subject in the
grammatical sense. Despite all these differences and discrepancies, the
Venerable Mahāsī Sayādaw has been able to explain the usages in explicit
terms in this Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta Dhamma.

I HAPPENED TO RECOLLECT

It was at the time when I first arrived at Wetlet Masoyein Monastery. The
Venerable "Shwezedi" Sayādaw Payagyī was then at Wetlet town where he
had visited to deliver a sermon. While conversing with Sayādawgyī, I
happened to ask him; "Were there such a thing as uccheda, the doctrine of
extinction of existence after death, and Nibbāna, which has a special
feature; and whether these two might be construed as being the same?". To
this query the Sayādaw Payagyī replied, "Of course, there is Nibbāna has its
own quality and attributes. How could it be without any speciality?" As the
conversation had ended abruptly. I have no chance of following up with a
question as: "What is the kind of its special characteristic?" The Sayādaw
Payagyī might have forgotten this insignificant episode. However, when I was
reading through this Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, I happened to recollect the said
old-time conversation as I came upon the special explanation relating to
Uccheda, the belief that there is no future existence and Nibbāna. In this
Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta Dhamma at pages 56 of Myanmar version, clarification
has been made by the Sayādaw Payagyī elucidating the distinguishing
features between Ucchedadiṭṭhi, a wrong belief that nothing remains after
death and the existence of a being is completely annihilated, and Nibbāna
which has the peculiar characteristics quite different from Uccheda. The
believers of this false belief have erroneously thought that the annihilation of
existance and Nibbāna are the same. This concept is entirely wrong. The
two are, in fact, entirely different.

NO FUTURE EXISTENCE

There is something which ought to be known regarding Ucchedadiṭṭhi. About

the year 1333 M.E, I managed to convene a congregation for preaching
sermons on Satipatthāna Dhamma after inviting the Mahāsī
Dhammakatthikas U Samvara and U Zawtika to enable my relatives and
friends of my own native village to have the benefit of hearing the sermon. I
had arranged for delivering a sermon at Inchaung village where many of my
relatives were then residing. At this congregation, one Maung Kyi was
present among the listening audience. This man being a leader of the Red
Flag Communist Party, was a staunch believer in the doctrine of no new life
after the present life existence. It seemed that he had come over to join the
congregation sponsored by me out of sheer courtesy as he happened to be
one of my relatives. U Samvara and the other preacher had delivered their
sermons bearing in mind the mental attitude of that person. Since, the
preaching made having had some sort of bearing on him, the listening
audience comprising the village folks were apparently interested. As this
man was asked to assume the role of a stand-by supporter at the time of
delivering the Dhamma, there was no wonder that people got interested
knowing him well as a person who had held a wrong belief in "No future
existence". The next day, early in the morning, Maung Kyi appeared at the
house where I was invited for a meal offered by a donor, an alms-giver. On
the said occasion. Maung Kyi told me "Reverend Sir, I accepted the point of
Dhamma touched upon by U Samvara on the previous night, but please do
not take it amiss that I have become a convert a believer in the doctrine of
Nāma. Since you all Buddhists have believed in the next existances, you are
performing meritorious deeds with all your cravings for existence. On our
part, not having entertained such a belief, we have no craving whatsoever
for existence. We have extinguished all such clinging attachment to
existence. "Then, I was perforce to remark as "This would depend on one's
own view. According to Buddha Sāsanā, desire to cling to existence will only
cause or be rooted out when one becomes an Arahat. Without being actually
devoid of craving instincts for existence if one takes it for granted that
existence completely annihilated after demise, he will go down to Niraya, the
Nether World, in the next existence after passing away from this life
existence with this false belief of Uccheda stuck in his mind on the eve of his
death, and with this consciousness, he would die. This is exactly in
accordance with what the Lord Buddha has preached".

Although Maung Kyi had severed his ties with his "life existence", his wife not
being able to do so, started making preparations for novitiating her grown-up
children into priesthood. Plunged in his bigotry Maung Kyi then said to his
wife, "You need not do anything in my favour for my next existence. If you
prefer to perform the pabbajja mingalā (ordination) by novitiating the
children into priesthood, you may do so on your own. Only when the embryo
sāmaṇera is to be escorted to the monastery, I cannot possibly take the role
of a benefactor by carrying the big begging bowl and the fan". In retaliation
to this statement made by Maung Kyi, his wife respond "Without the
benefactor (donor), I cannot lead the would-be sāmaṇera. If you cannot act
as a donor (benefactor), I will invariably have to get another benefactor on
hire and carry on with the performance of the necessary religious rites".
Having heard this retort, Maung Kyi, the great Believer of Uccheda Doctrine
became very much perturbed and fidgety, and not being able to tolerate or
connive at the presence of a hired benefactor in his place, he was said to
have been put in a dilemma. I have heard of this incident from the lay
devotees of the village.

I am fully confident that going through this great Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta

Dhamma, will add to enhance the treasures of faith and bring about much
benefit to all reading public as had been similarly derived by them after they
had read other Dhammas preached by the illustrious Mahāsī Sayādaw
Payagyī.

Wetlet-Masoyein U Teiktha

(17-11-76)

TRANSLATED
BY
U Min Swe (MIN
KYAW THU)
Buddha Sāsanā
Nuggaha
Organization
Chapter 1

THE GREAT DISCOURSE ONTHE ANATTALAKKHAṆA SUTTA

FIRST PART

(Delivered on the First Waxing day of Nayone 1325 M.E.)

Reverence to that Blessed One, the Exalted One, the Supremely

Enlightened.

PREFACE

The series of lectures on the Hemāvata Sutta which followed our discourses
on the Dhammacakka Sutta came to an end on the full moon day of Kasone.
From today we will begin our discourses on the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta which
has come into its term, being the third in these quence of the Discourses
given by the Buddha. It is most essential to have a full understanding of this
Sutta as well, since it may be said that this Sutta is a compendium of the
Teachings of the Buddha.

All teachings or beliefs outside of the Buddha's Dispensation fall under the
category of beliefs in a self, Atta. They hold to the view that there is such a
thing as a soul, a living entity. They believe that this soul or living entity
actually resides in all living creatures, namely, men, Deva or animals such as
cattle, buffaloes, dogs etc.

In the midst of the world holding fast to such notions of Self or Soul the
Blessed One had declared, "Atta, soul or living entity is not a reality; it is
only a conventional nomenclature. What really exists, in ultimate sense, is a
continuous flux of material and mental processes, an impersonal
phenomena."
Thus, it is essential to understand thoroughly and comprehensively, this
doctrine of Anatta, the doctrine of Impersonality propounded by the Buddha.
The doctrine of Anatta had already been dealt with by the Buddha while
elaborating of the Four Noble Truths during the course of teaching the
Dhammacakka Sutta. At the time of teaching the Hemāvata Sutta also, this
doctrine of Anatta was expounded when the Blessed One explained that
'with the arising of six bases, (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind) there
arises a being'. The doctrine of Anatta was again brought forth clearly and
comprehensively in this Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta. Having in view, then, the
importance of this Sutta and the fact that it is its turn to receive our
attention, being the third discourse given by the Blessed One, we propose to
give our series of lectures on the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta and starting from
today.

THE INTRODUCTION TO THE SUTTA

The introduction to the Sutta was recorded by the Elders of the First Council
in the Khandā Vagga Samyutta Pāḷi Canon in these words.

Evam me sutam. Ekam samayam Bhagavā Baranasiyam viharati Isipattane

Migadāye. Tatra kho bhagavā pañcavaggiye bhikkhu āmantesi, 'Bhikkhavo'
ti. Bhadante ti te Bhikkhu Bhagavato paccassosum. Bhagavā etadavoca.- - -

"I, Ānandā, have heard thus," began the Venerable Ānandā in answer to the
questions of the Venerable Mahā Kassapa who asked him where the Sutta
was taught by whom and to whom. He continued, "At one time, the most
Exalted One was staying at the pleasance of Isipatanan, the deer sanctuary
in the township of Vārānasi."

DATE OF THE DISCOURSE

The Dhammacakka Sutta, the first sermon, was delivered in the evening of
full moon day of Wāso, 2552 years ago counted back from the Myanmar era
of 1325. At the time of the first Discourse, only one of the Group of five
Bhikkhus, namely the Venerable Kondañña attained the first stage of the
Higher Knowledge the Sotāpanna, a Stream winner. Having fully penetrated
into all aspects of the Dhamma, with firmly established confidence and
unshakeable faith in the Teaching of the Buddha, he had sought and gained
admission into the Order of the Buddha. The remaining four Bhikkhus, the
Venerable Vappa, the Venerable Bhaddiya, the Venerable Mahānam and the
Venerable Assaji had not yet become accomplished in the Higher Knowledge
of the Noble path and Fruition. The Blessed One, therefore, urged them to
engage themselves in the strenuous practice of Dhamma under his personal
guidance. They did not go out even for alms round. The Blessed One himself
also stayed in monastery constantly without going out for alms food in order
to attend to them and assist them in removing the obstacles, hindrances and
impurities that arise in the course of meditation practices. Thus instructed
and guided by the Blessed One and striving arduously and incessantly the
Venerable Vappa attained the path and Fruition and became a Stream
Winner on the first waning day of Wāso; the Venerable Bhaddhiya attained
the path and Fruition on the 2nd, the Venerable Māhānam on the 3rd and the
Venerable Assaji on the 4th respectively, and each of them became a Stream
Winner.

We had already elaborately dealt with the account of their attainments in the
concluding portions of the Dhammacakka Sutta Discourses. We had stated
there in that the four Venerable Bhikkhus were not accomplished yet to
attain the Higher Knowledge by just listening to the Discourse; they still had
to strive for it and therefore, the Blessed One required them to engage
themselves strenuously in the practice of the Dhamma. In view of this fact,
we had warned in the last portion of our Discourse on the Dhammacakka
Sutta, not to be led astray by the wrong doctrine, which asserts in a very
irresponsible manner, "that the status of Stream Winner could be attained by
just listening to the Discourse; no effort is needed for the practice of the
Vipassanā meditation."

The Commentaries say that after all the five bhikkhus had become Stream-
winners and received ordination as members of the Buddha's Order, the
Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta was taught on the 5th waning day of Wāso. Thus, "at
one time" in the introduction means the 5th waning day of Wāso, while the
Blessed One was still staying in the deer Sanctuary near the town of
Vārānasi.

"At that time, when the Blessed One was staying in the deer sanctuary in the
township of Vārānasi, the Blessed One addressed the group of five bhikkhus,
'Oh, Bhikkhus' and the group of five Bhikkhus answered, 'Revered Sir.' Then
the Blessed One taught the Dhamma which is presently to be recited."

This is the introduction given by the Venerable Ānandā in response to the

question asked by the Venerable Mahā Kassapa.

The Buddha's words: First part of the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta.

"Rūpam Bhikkhave anattā. Rupamac h'idam Bhikkhave attā abbavissa
nayidam rūpam ābaahāya samvatteya; labbh-etha ca rūpe "evam me rūpam
hotu, evam me rūpam mā ahosīti."

"Bhikkhus, Rūpa, the material body is not self; soul' nor a living entity."

People in general think themselves and others to be living entities with a

soul or self or ego in each of them. What is taken to be a soul is called Atta
in Pāḷi being derived from the Sanskrit expression Atman. This Atta is also
known as Jiva, life; thus Atta conveys the concept of life, soul or living
entity. Holding the view that there exists a soul or a living entity in man is
known as misconception on self or wrong belief in Self, Attadiṭṭhi.

Ordinary common worldling cannot be said to be free from this wrong belief
in Self. The only difference from person to person with regard to this wrong
belief lies in whether it is firmly hold and whether it is manifested so plainly
or not by each individual. In a person who has become accomplished in the
knowledge of mental and physical phenomena (rūpa, nāma), this belief in
Self may be considerably attenuated; but it cannot be said that he is
completely devoid of the notion of Self. He is still liable to misconceive that it
is the Soul or Self in him that is the thinker of his thoughts, the doer of his
actions, the speaker of his words and the feeler of the pleasant sensations.
The Vipassanā Yogī who, by taking notes of every phenomenon is,
developing keen Vipassanā insight 'that there is no self, no living entity but
mere physical and mental process' is free from that wrong notion of self, but
only for the duration of the Vipassanā practice. As soon as he ceases taking
note of rising and passing away of nāma, rūpa, the misconception of Self is
likely to return to him.

In order to remove this misconception of Self and make it clear that

there is no such thing as soul or living entity in the rūpa, nāma of one's own
body or in the rūpa nāma of other's bodies, the Blessed One began the
discourse with the pronouncement, 'Rūpam, Bhikkhave, anatta .... Material
form, Bhikkhus, is not Self, soul nor living entity.'

RŪPA WHICH IS WRONGLY CONCEIVED AS ATTA

What is Rūpa, material form which is wrongly conceived and held as Atta?
The following material qualities form the foundation for a material form. They
are the sensitive part of the eye which enables one to see objects; the
sensitive part of the ear which enables one to hear sounds; the sensitive part
of the nose which enables one to smell odoures; the sensitive part of the
tongue which enables one to sample the taste; the sensitive part of the body
to feel the touch; the material quality of base, that is, the seat of
consciousness; and the material quality of the life-principle or vital force. If
we consider carefully we can see that eye consciousness arises because of
the sensitive material quality of the eye; and with eye consciousness comes
the concept of a living entity of Atta. Similarly, it can be understood that it is
because of sensitive material qualities of the ear, nose, tongue, and body,
we have the consciousness of hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. The
material quality of base, which acts as the seat of consciousness is
responsible for thoughts and thinking, resulting in the notion of self or living
entity. The material quality of the life-principle, is the vital force which
vivifies all material bodies and preserves them from decay and
decomposition. This life principle, which is just a material quality, is wrongly
believed to be a soul, a living entity.

In the absence of the sensitive material qualities such as the sensitive part of
the eye etc., there is no such thing as soul or living entity, Consider, for
instance, a wooden figure of a man which resembles a living person in
appearance but is devoid of the sensitive material qualities of the sense
organs that can give rise to different cognitions. Consequently such a
wooden figure etc., is never mistaken for a living being with a soul or a living
entity.

There arises also no notion of a soul or a living entity with respect to the
body of a person who has just died; the reason being that there is no longer
any sensitive material qualities such as the sensitive part of the eye etc., in
that body. So long as the sensitive qualities such as the sensitive part of the
eye etc., exist, other material bodies which are their co-adjuncts and
concomitant with them are also wrongly conceived as Self, living entities.
Such material bodies are sight which is seen, sound which is heard, odour
which is smelt, and tangibility (such as Pathavi, Tejo and Vāyo) felt by the
sense of touch which also recognizes indirectly moistness and fluidity of the
element of Cohesion (āpo); and material qualities of sex responsible for
masculinity and femininity.

Material bodies such as sight, sound, odour etc., which are concomitant with
the sensitive material qualities of the eye etc are misconceived as soul or
living entities when seen, heard, smelt etc.

In short, the whole material body which is co-existing with the eye etc is
regarded to be a living entity. In common parlance, too, the whole body
which is compounded of the material qualities is spoken of as self, soul or a
living entity. The usage in the daily life of expressions such as self, or a living
entity, is not utterance of falsehood but conforming to the convention of the
world; but from the point of view of ultimate, absolute reality, all the material
substance of the whole body are not in reality self or individual or a being,
but only the aggregates or matter or material qualities. Therefore, the
Blessed One had pronounced definitely and explicitly that "although
individuals view the aggregates of material qualities as a living being, a
living entity, in reality, it is not Atta nor soul nor a living entity but merely a
physical phenomena."

But exponents of the doctrine of Self, who hold that the material substance
in their body is Self, Atta, are bound to come up with the question, 'Why is it
not Atta?' Therefore, the Blessed One had also provided an explanation why
it is not Atta, in the following manner.

REASONS SHOWING WAY RŪPA IS NOT ATTA

"Bhikkhus, if rūpa were self, Atta, the inner core of one's own body, then
rūpa would not tend to affliction or distress. And one should be able to say of
rūpa, 'Let rūpa be thus (in the best of conditions); let my body not be thus
(in the worst of conditions).' It should be possible to influence rūpa in this
manner.

HOW RŪPA INFLICTS SUFFERING

"Were rūpa the inner core of one's body, or Self, it should not cause
suffering," But actually rūpa is imposing suffering in this manner: it does not
remain youthful and vigorous; it distresses by growing old and by decaying;
it distresses by dying; Without rūpa, one would be free from afflictions of
getting grey in hairs, of fallen teeth, bent hunch back, deafness, poor eye-
sight, wrinkled skin infirmity. It is therefore, rūpa which is inflicting these
sufferings.

Again, because of one's rūpa, one is trouble with sore-eye, earache, tooth-
ache, back-ache, flatulence, feeling hot, cold, painful and itching; and with
diseases of blood, skin, stomach, urine or with high blood pressure etc.
These ailments arise because of rūpa through which they make their
manifestations. We suffer from hunger and thirst because of rūpa; and
because of it, we are subjected to attacks by mosquitoes, insects or
afflictions by other oppressors. Suffering in the states of miseries and woes
are also due to rūpa. In short, one suffers from all these various ailments
and afflictions because of rūpa. It is, therefore, rūpa whose function it is to
bring about distress in one's body, that is imposing and inflicting suffering on
one.

In addition, rūpa is responsible for the phenomenon of death in human

existence. When the material qualities in the body undergo deterioration and
decay, death occurs. It may, therefore, be said that rūpa inflicts suffering by
causing death.

Thus we can reflect that if rūpa were self, it would not inflict us with
sufferings of old age, disease and death. One usually causes sufferings to
others but not on oneself. Therefore, if rūpa were self, or the inner core of
the body, it should not inflict suffering on itself by bringing about old age etc.

Furthermore, even before the onset of old age, disease and death, rūpa is
constantly subjecting one to various distresses. A young person, although
free from ailments and enjoying good health, cannot remain long in any of
the body postures such as sitting, standing or walking; he has to change his
postures quite often. It is within the experience of all of us that we cannot
remain for long, as we wish, in anyone body posture. We find it difficult to
remain seated for half an hour or one hour without changing posture; or to
lie down for two or three hours. Constant changing of postures is
necessitated by feelings of hotness or tiredness in the limbs after a certain
time in one position. All these distresses arise because of rūpa; in other
words, it is rūpa that is inflicting these distresses.

Thus one may reflect that if rūpa were self, it would not impose these
sufferings on one.

(Translator's remark: The last three lines on page of the Discourse on

Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta by the Venerable Mahāsī Sayādaw and the whole of
pages 10 & 11 are left out from translation into English as the said portions
deal merely with discussion on translation of the Pāḷi word 'Ābādhāya' into
Myanmar.)

RŪPA IS NOT SUBJECT TO ONE'S WILL

Furthermore, it is stated, "If rūpa were self, the inner core, it should be
possible to say of rūpa," let my rūpa be thus (in the best of conditions), let
my rūpa not be thus (in the worst of conditions). Truly, one should be able to
exercise one's will on rūpa if it were one's self or Atta. All beings desire to
have their material body always youthful and healthy in appearance, to keep
it away from old age, illness and deterioration resulting in death. But the
material body is never obliging; it refuses to be subject to one's will. Its fresh
youthfulness fades into aged debility, its robust health declines, against
one's will, resulting in illness and disease and finally in dissolution and death.
Thus rūpa is not amenable to one's control, not manageable according to
one's wish. The Blessed One pointed out, therefore, that rūpa is not one's
Self, the inner core of one's body.

Let us briefly restate the meaning of the Pāḷi passage quoted above:
Bhikkhus, rūpa is not Self; if it were Self, it would not inflict suffering. And it
should be possible to say of rūpa, "Let rūpa be thus (in the best of
conditions), let rūpa not be thus (in the worst of conditions).

If rūpa were self, the inner core, there would be no infliction of suffering on
oneself, and it should be possible to subject it to one's will. While others may
not be amenable to one's control, it should be possible to manage oneself as
one desires. But the fact of the matter is that rūpa is not Self, not one's
inner core. Hence, it inflicts suffering on one and refuses to be controlled.
The Blessed One continued to further explain this fact.

DIRECT EVIDENCE OF HOW RŪPA IS NOT ATTA

Yasma ca kho, Bhikkhave, rūpam anttā, tasmā rūpam ābādhāya samvattati,

na ca labbhati rūpe'evam me rūpam hotu, evam me rūpam ma ahosī'ti.

"Bhikkhus, as a matter of fact, rūpa is not self; since it is not self (not inner
substance), it tends to affliction and distress. And it is not possible to say of
rūpa. 'Let it be thus (in the best of conditions), let it not be thus (in the worst
of conditions)." It is not possible to influence and manage the rūpa in this
manner.

In reality, rūpa is not self, not one's inner core. Hence, rūpa oppresses with
old age, disease etc. Furthermore, it is not amenable to one's management
and control. To reiterate: In reality rūpa is not self, not one's inner core.
Since it is not self, this rūpa tends to affliction and distress. It is not possible
to manage and control rūpa by instructing, 'Let it be thus (in the best of
conditions), let it not be thus (in the worst of conditions).
(Translator's remark: Pages 13 and the first five lines on pages 15 of the
Myanmar version are left out, not translated into English for similar reasons
as stated above.)

JIVA ATTA AND PARAMA ATTA

Believers in Atta enunciate Atta to be of two kinds: Jiva atta and Parama
atta. According to them, each individual creature, whether man, Deva, or
animal has a self, and inner soul or substance called Jiva atta. This soul or
living entity is believed to be created by God. But some believers hold that
these individual Jiva atta are small segments of Atta which have emanated
from the big Atta of the God.

Parama atta is the big Atta of the God who has created the world together
with all the creatures in it. According to some believers, this big Atta of the
God permeates the whole world, but others say it lies in the Heavenly Abode.
These ideas of small Self and big Self are, of course, all imaginary beliefs,
mere speculation.

Nobody has met or seen the God which is the embodiment of Parama atta.
Belief in creation by God is also an imaginary, speculative belief, which had
existed long before the appearance of the enlightened Buddha. This is clear
from the eulogy on Baka Brahmā.

EULOGY ON BAKA BRAHMĀ

At one time, the Blessed One went to the realm of the Brahmās for the
purpose of clearing up the wrong views held by the great Brahmā Baka. On
arrival there, the great Brahmā Baka welcomed the Blessed One to his realm
in praise of which he spoke thus: "Welcome, the Venerable Gotama; your
coming is good coming although you have taken a long time to do so. This
Brahmā land is permanent, stable, everlasting, perfect in every way. And so
no one dies or passes away from here."

For this utterance, the Blessed One rebuked the Brahmā Baka in these
words: Oh, Brahmās, how ignorant is Brahma Baka! In ignorance, he
describes his impermanent realm to be permanent and stable."
Upon this, one of the followers of Brahmā Baka said in indignant protest,
"Bhikkhu Gotama, Do not rebuke Brahmā Baka, do not rebuke him. This
Brahmā Baka is a great Brahmā, chief of the Brahmās, conqueror over all;
Invincible, he sees all; wielding power and authority over every creature;
maker of the world, creator of the whole world, the noblest person; One who
assigns to each, king, Brahmin, men, Deva, animals etc., his respective
station in this world; accomplished in attainments, the father of all the past
and future beings, "thus praising the virtues of Brahmā Baka."

In the Brahmajāla Sutta where origin of the wrong view of permanency of

certain individual was explained, the Buddha had given a similar account of
the Brahmā.

ORIGIN OF THE BELIEF IN CREATION

After the previous world has perished away, there was a time when a new
world began evolving. The first Brahma who made his appearance then
thought and believed thus: "I am a Brahmā, a great Brahmā, a conqueror
invincible by any one, who can see everything, all mighty to have every wish
fulfilled, a Lord, a maker, a creator, the noblest of all, one who assigns to
each his station. Accomplished in attainments, the father of all the past and
the future beings.

The Brahmās who had made their appearance later in the realm of the
Brahmās also thought and believed likewise. Of those Brahmās, who had
passed away from the realm of Brahmās to be reborn in the human world,
there were some who could recall their past existence in the Brahmā land.
These persons boldly announced that, "the great Brahmā created the beings
in the world. The Creator himself, the Great Brahmā, is permanent, eternal;
the creatures he has created, however, do not last permanently; they die
and pass away." These bold announcements, as their personal experience,
were believed and accepted by those who heard their teachings. The Blessed
One explained that this was how the notion that 'only the creators who first
created things are permanent, eternal,' originated.

From the Pāḷi Canon we have just quoted, one can surmise that the so-called
God who is said to have created the beings, the God who is said to be in the
Heavenly abode, could be the great Brahma who first appeared in the realm
of the Brahmās at the beginning of the world. We could also take it that the
Parama atta is the Atta of that great Brahmā. Then it becomes clear from
the Teachings of the Buddha that, 'The Parama atta of the great Brahmā is
of the same kind as Jiva atta of other beings; it is just misconceiving the
continuous flux of material and mental processes as Atta. Actually, there is
no such thing as Atta apart from the psycho-physical phenomena; it is mere
figment of imagination.'

Furthermore, the rūpa, nāma of the great Brahmā are just like the rūpa,
nāma of other beings, subject to laws of impermanence. When his life span
becomes exhausted, the great Brahmā also faces death and has to pass
away. In reality, the great Brahmā cannot have every wish of his fulfilled; he
cannot maintain the rūpas of his body according to his wish. Therefore, the
rūpa of the great Brahmā is also not Atta, his inner core, self but Anatta,
Non-self.

ATTACHMENT TO ATTA

But, in general, people hold on to the belief that there is an individual soul, a
living entity which lasts for the duration of the life span before one dies. (This
is the view held by annihilists who believe that there remains nothing after
death.) But the eternalists believe that the individual soul remains
undestroyed after death, lives on in other new bodies, never perishing.

According to the eternalists, the body of a being is made up of two parts: the
gross body and the subtle body. At the end of each existence, when death
ensues, the gross body gets destroyed but the subtle body departs from the
old body to enter into new body, then remaining eternal and never perishing.
This view of the eternalists, as described in their literature, has been
reproduced in full in the sub-commentary to the Visuddhi Magga.

We have given a detailed description of the various beliefs in Self together

with origination in order to present more clearly the concept of Anatta, no
soul, nonself. Among the general mass, who profess themselves to be
Buddhists, there are many who normally believe in the existence of a soul or
a living entity, even though they have not put down their beliefs in so many
words in the form of literature. They hold to the view that life departs, on the
death of a being, via his nose or his mouth; when conception takes place in
the womb of a mother, life enters through her nose, her mouth or piercing
through her abdomen. And from birth to death, it remains steadfastly in the
new body. All these views relate to a belief in the existence of a soul, a living
entity.

WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THE MANNER OF ATTA CLINGING

In reality, by death is meant just the cessation of psycho-physical process,
the non-arising of new rūpa and nāma, after the termination of death
consciousness at the moment of death. There is no such thing as the
departing soul or living entity. The new becoming means the arising of new
consciousness at a new site together with the physical base on which it finds
its support. Just before death-consciousness terminates at the moment of
death, it holds on to one of the objects namely Kamma, Kamma nimitta or
Gati nimitta. Conditioned thus by the objects (held on to) at the last moment
of consciousness, a new consciousness arises at a new existence. This is
called re-birth or re-linking consciousness as it forms a link between the
previous and the new existence.

When the re-linking consciousness passes away, it is followed by Bhavaṅga

consciousness, the life-continuum, which goes on continuously throughout
life as prescribed by one's previous karmic energy. When sense-objects such
as sight, sound etc appear at the sense-doors, the Bhavaṅga consciousness,
is replaced, for the respective moments, by eye consciousness ear-
consciousness, etc. The arising of new consciousness in the new existence as
conditioned by Kamma of past existence is conventionally called by
common usage, migration from the old to the new existence. But in reality,
there is no soul nor living entity which transmigrate from one existence to
another.

WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THE MANNER OF ATTA CLINGING,

CONCEPT OF ANATTA CANNOT BE GRASPED THOROUGHLY

There are people who cannot grasp the concept of non-self, Anatta, because
they do not know about the theory of Atta as explained in detail above. They
think it is Atta clinging if someone holds on to the shape and form of
objects. For instance, to recognise a tree as a tree, a stone as a stone; a
house as a house, a monastery as a monastery, is according to them,
clinging to Atta. In their view the fact of Anatta, soulessness, is clearly
grasped only when concept of shape and form is transcended and replaced
by perception of ultimate truth.

As a matter of fact, merely perceiving forms and shapes does not amount to
Atta clinging. Neither does it mean that belief in Anatta is established once
shapes and forms are no longer perceived. Recognising inanimate objects
such as tree, stone, house or monastery does not constitute a belief in
Anatta; it does not amount to self-theory clinging; it is merely holding on to a
conventional concept.
It is only when sentient beings with life and consciousness such as men,
Deva, animals etc are assumed to have a soul, a living entity, a self that it
amounts to clinging to belief in self. When one assumes oneself to be a living
soul, or others as living entitles, then one is holding the belief in Self.
Brahmā of the Immaterial realms (Arūpa) having no material body, do not
perceive themselves in the conventional shapes and forms, but the ordinary
worldling Brahmā are not free from the perverted view of self, believing as
they do, in the existence of self, a living entity. It is only when belief in
existence of Self a living entity, is discarded and one's own body and other's
body is perceived as merely psycho-physical phenomena, that knowledge of
non-self, Anatta, arises. It is essential to develop true knowledge of non-
self.

FOUR KINDS OF ATTA CLINGING

There are four kinds of Atta clinging arising out of belief in Self or soul.

(1) Sāmi atta clinging: Believing that there is, inside one's body, a living
entity, who governs and directs every wish and action. It is this living soul
which goes, stands up, sits down, sleeps, speaks whenever it wishes to.

"Sāmi atta clinging is belief in a living entity in one's body, controlling and
directing as it wishes."

The Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta was taught by the Blessed One particularly to

remove this Sāmi atta clinging. Now, as this Sutta was first taught to the
Group of five Bhikkhus who had become by then Stream Enterers, may it not
be asked whether a Stream Enterer is still encumbered with Atta clinging?

"Stream Enterer has abandoned Atta clinging, but still holds on to Conceit."

At the stage of Sotāpanna, Stream Enterer, the fetters of Personality-belief

(false view of individuality), doubts and uncertainty, and adherence to rites
and rituals have been completely eradicated. But a Stream Enterer is not yet
free from Asmi-māna, the I-conceit. To take pride in one's ability, one's
status, "I can do; I am noble," is to hold on to the I-conceit. But a Stream
Winner's conceit relates only to the genuine qualities and virtues, he actually
possesses and is not false pride based on non-existing qualities and virtues.
The Stream Enterer has, therefore, to continue on with the practice of
Vipassanā in order to remove the I-conceit clinging which is still a fetter for
him. When Vipassanā-ñāṇa is considerably developed, this I-conceit
becomes attenuated and is partially removed by the Sakadāgāmi Path. But
it is not completely abolished yet. The Anāgāmi Path further weakens it, but
this Path also could effect only partial removal. It is only the final Arahatta
magga that could completely eradicate the I-conceit. Thus it could be
regarded that the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta was taught by the Blessed One in
order to bring about total eradication of the I-conceit clinging which was still
lingering in the persons of the Group of five Bhikkhus although they had
attained the stage of Stream Enterer.

(2) Nivāsī atta clinging: Believing that there is a living entity permanently
residing in one's body.

"Nivāsī atta clinging is belief in a living entity permanently residing in one's

body. It is the common belief of people that they exist permanently as a
living being from the moment of birth to the time of death. This is the Nivāsī
atta clinging. Some hold that nothing remains after death; this is the wrong
view of annihilism. Yet others believe in the wrong view of eternalism which
holds that the living entity in the body remains undestroyed after death; it
continued to reside in a new body in a new existence. It was with a view to
remove these two wrong views together with the I-conceit clinging that the
Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta was taught by the Blessed One, that is to say, to
eradicate the I-conceit clinging which still remains fettering the Group of five
Bhikkhus and other Noble Ones; and to remove the two wrong views as well
as the I-conceit of the ordinary common worldlings.

So long as one clings to the belief that there exists permanently a living
entity or a soul, so long would one hold that one's body is amenable to one's
control as one wishes. It is understood that the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta was
delivered to remove not only the Sāmi atta clinging but also the Nivāsī atta
clinging. Once the Sāmi atta clinging is removed, other types of Atta
clinging and wrong views are simultaneously eradicated completely.

(3) Kāraka atta clinging: Believing that it is the living entity, the soul that
effects every physical, vocal and mental action.

"Kāraka atta clinging is belief in a living entity that is responsible for every
physical, vocal and mental action.
This Kāraka atta clinging is more concerned with Saṅkhārakkhandā, the
aggregate of formations. We shall deal more fully with it when we come to
the aggregate of formations.

(4) Vedaka atta clinging: Believing that all sensations whether pleasant or
unpleasant.

"Vedaka atta clinging is belief in that all sensations whether pleasant or

unpleasant are felt by the living entity, the self.

This Vedaka atta clinging is concerned with the Vendanakkhandā, the

aggregate of feelings which we will take up fully on the coming full moon day
of Nayon.

That Rūpakkhandā, the aggregate of materiality is not Self, nor a living

entity, Atta but Non-self, Anatta has been adequately expounded but it still
requires to explain how Yogīs engaged in Vipassanā meditation come to
perceive the nature of Anatta, non-self with no power being exerciseable
over it. We shall proceed with an explanation of how it comes about.

CONTEMPLATION OF NON-SELF IN THE COURSE OF VIPASSANĀ

MEDITATION

Practical methods of Vipassanā meditation have been elaborately described

and explained in many of our discourses published in numerous books. We
need not go over them in detail; we will just give a brief description of them.

Vipassanā meditation consists of contemplation on the upādānakkhandhā,

groups of grasping which manifest themselves at the moment of seeing,
hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and thinking. For the novice-Yogī,
however, it is hard to take heedful note of each and every phenomenon of
seeing, hearing, etc. Therefore they have to start their practice with only a
few of the most prominent objects of sensation. For instance, while sitting,
the Yogī can concentrate on the nature of stiffness and resistance felt in his
body and note it as 'sitting, sitting'. If the Yogī feels that it is too simple an
exercise, requiring not much effort to just keep on noting, 'sitting, sitting', he
can combine it with noting of another phenomenon namely, touching and
note as 'sitting, touching, sitting, touching.' But the movements of rise and
fall of one's abdomen will be more pronounced. Thus if one heedfully notes
'rising' as the abdomen rises, and falling, as it falls, one will come to see
distinctly the phenomena of stiffening, resisting, distending, relaxing, moving
which are happening inside his abdomen. These are the characteristics,
function and proximate cause of Vāyodhātu, the element of motion. Such
contemplation and noting is in accordance with Visuddhi Magga which states
that "the nature of nāma, rūpa should be comprehended by observing its
characteristics, functions and so on."

We have therefore instructed the beginners in the practice of Vipassanā to

start with observing the rising and falling of the abdomen. But this exercise
of noting the rising and falling alone does not comprise all that has to be
done in Vipassanā meditation. While noting the rising and falling of the
abdomen, any thought that may occur, has to be noted too. When feeling
stiff, hot, cold or painful, the Yogī has to note these sensations as they arise.
When he bends or stretches his arms or legs, these movements should also
be noted. As he rises from the sitting position, the change of posture should
be accompanied by heedful noting. While walking, every motion involved in
each step has to be noted as, 'arising, stepping forward, dropping.' If
possible, all physical activities including even the opening and shutting of
eye-lids should come under close observation. When there is nothing
particular to take note of, Yogī's attention should revert to the rising and
falling movement of the abdomen. This is then a brief description of
exercises involved in the practice of Vipassanā meditation.

While thus occupied in taking note of rising, falling, sitting, and touching as
they occur, the desire arises in the Yogī to change postures in order to
release the pain, the aches and sensation of hotness which are developing in
his bended arms and legs. The Yogī should take note of these wishes as they
arise but should remain still, without immediately yielding to the temptation
to stretch the limbs. He should put up with the discomforts as long as he can.
If the desire to stretch his arms and legs arises once again, he should first
take note of them as before without changing posture. Only when he
becomes unbearably distressed with pain and aches, he should slowly
stretch out his arms and legs, at the same time noting these actions
carefully as 'stretching, stretching.'

During each session of meditation exercise, frequent change of posture

becomes necessary due to discomforting pains and aches. With repeated
adjustments of posture, the oppressive nature of the physical body becomes
apparent. Despite his inclination to remain still, quietly seated, without
changing position for one or two hours, it becomes evident to him that he
cannot remain so, as he wishes. Then realization comes to him that Rūpa
which is constantly oppressing him, afflicting him, is not Self, or soul nor
living entity, but mere physical phenomenon that is occurring in accordance
with its own conditions. This realization is knowledge of contemplation of
Non-self.
One cannot remain very long either seated, lying down or standing. Thus
realization comes too that Rūpa never obliges one with what one wishes and
is unmanageable. Being uncontrollable, it is not Self nor inner substance, but
mere physical phenomenon that is occurring in accordance with its own
conditions. This realization, too, is knowledge of contemplation of Non-Self.

Again, being repeatedly disturbed by having to answer to the calls of nature,

while engaged in meditation in sitting or lying postures, it becomes apparent
that Rūpa is oppressive, it is unmanageable, not amenable to one's will, and
being unmanageable, it is not Self. While contemplating on the behavior of
Rūpa, its true oppressive nature becomes exposed when bodily filths such as
nasal mucus, saliva, phlegm, tears, sweat etc coze out of the body.
Cleanliness cannot be maintained as one desires because of this
uncontrollable nature of this Rūpa, which is, therefore, obviously not Self.

In addition, Rūpa oppresses by inflicting hunger, thirst old age and disease
on one. These afflictions are evident truths even to a casual observer. But
there is likelihood of the notion of Self persisting in one who observes just
casually. It is only by noting heedfully that Rūpa is exposed not to be Self
nor a living entity but mere physical phenomenon which is happening
incessantly.

These are just a few examples to indicate the Non-self nature of Rūpa. The
Yogī who is actually taking note of all the phenomena comes to experience
many more which establish the oppressive nature of Rūpa and make it clear
how it is not amenable to one's will and how it is not Self being
unmanageable.

Thus in the course of heedfully noting all the bodily actions such as rising,
falling, sitting, bending, stretching and perceiving how Rūpa afflicts one,
how it is unmanageable, ungovernable, the realization arises in him, through
personal knowledge: "Although Rūpa in my body appears to be Self, since it
oppresses me, it is not my "Self" nor my inner core; because it is not
amenable to my wish, and unmanageable, it is not Self, my inner core. I have
been all along in error to take it to my 'Self', my inner substance. It is really
not Self being unmanageable and not subject to my will." This is the true
knowledge of contemplating on Non-self.

We have fairly completely dealt with how the nature Non-self is perceived in
Rūpa. We will terminate our discourse today by recapitulating the
summarised translation of the Pāḷi Text and repeating the Mnemonics on
Atta clinging.

THE SUMMARISED TRANSLATION OF THE PĀḶI TEXT

"Bhikkhus, Rūpa is not Self (inner substance). Were Rūpa Self, it would not
tend to affliction. And it should be possible to say of Rūpa: 'Let my body be
thus (in the best of conditions); let my body not be thus (in the worst of
conditions)."

In reality, Rūpa is not Self. And because it is not self, it tends to affliction.
Furthermore, it is not possible to say of Rūpa, 'Let my body be thus (in the
best of conditions); let my body not be thus (in the worst of conditions).

MNEMONICS ON ATTA CLINGING

1. Sāmi atta clinging is belief in a living entity in one's body, controlling and
directing as it wishes.

2. Nivāsī atta clinging is belief in a living entity permanently residing in

one's body.

3. Kāraka atta clinging is belief in a living entity that is responsible for every
physical, vocal and mental action.

4. Vedaka atta clinging is belief in that all sensations whether pleasant or

unpleasant are felt by the living entity, the Self.

By virtue of having given respectful attention to this discourse on

Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, may you all, by noting the phenomena of Nāma and
Rūpa which is happening in the body, perceive unerringly and assuredly, the
nature of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness together with unsubstantiality
and thereby attain and realize soon, the Nibbāna, by means of the path and
Fruition as you wish.
Sādhu! Sādhu! Sādhu!

End of the First Part of the Discourse

on

The Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta

Chapter 2
FEELING OR SENSATION IS NOT ATTA

THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE ANATTALAKKHAṆA SUTTA

SECOND PART

(Delivered on the Full moon day of Nayone 1325 M.E)

We began our discourses on Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta on the eighth waxing day

of Nayone. We had fully explained then that Rūpa, body, is just aggregate
of materiality, is not self but non-self. We will deal today with
Vedanakkhandhā, the aggregate of sensations to show how it is also not self.
People in general like to meet with pleasant objects and enjoy pleasurable
sensations; they dislike unpleasurable sensations. With regard to both the
pleasant and unpleasant sensations, they assume that "I feel the sensation; I
feel pleasant; I feel unpleasant. But in reality, the feeling of sensation is not
self, not soul but mere unsubstantiality, Anatta. The Blessed One had
explained this true fact as follows:

FEELING OR SENSATION IS NOT ATTA

"Vedanā Bhikkhave anatta, vendanā ca h'idam Bhikkhave atta abhavissa

nayidam vedanā ābādhāya samvattayya labbhetha ca vedanāya evam me
vedanā hotu evam me vedanā mā ahositi. Yasmā cca kho Bhikkhave vedanā
anattā tasmā vedanā abadhayā samvattati na ca labbhati vedanāya evam
me vedanā hotu evam me vedanā mā ahosīti."

"Bhikkhus, vedanā, feeling is not self."

There are three categories of feeling.

1. Sukkha vedanā .... .... pleasurable feeling.

2. Dukkha vedanā .... .... unpleasurable feeling.

3. Upekkhā vedanā .... .... equanimous, neutral, feeling, neither pleasurable

nor painful.

The equanimous, neutral feeling is generally not prominent. the pleasurable

feeling and unpleasurable feelings only are commonly known and talked
about.

It is such a pleasure to feel the touch of a cool breeze or cold water when the
weather is scorching hot; it is very comforting to be wrapped up to warm,
woolen blankets during a cold spell; one feels so easeful after one has
stretched the limbs or changed positions to relieve the tired stiff limbs. All
these comfortable feelings felt through contact with pleasant objects are as
Sukha vedanā pleasurable feelings, which the sentient beings assume to be
self; "I feel pleasant, I feel comfortable." Therefore they go in pursuit of such
pleasurable sensations.

Sufferings that arise on coming into contact with unpleasant objects, feeling
hot, tired in the limbs, discomforts due to intense cold, itchiness etc are
classified as Dukkha vedanā, unpleasurable sensations, which is also
assumed by sentient beings to be self: "I feel painful, I feel hot, I feel itchy, I
feel unpleasant." Therefore, they try to avoid contact with these unpleasant
objects as much as possible. But when overtaken by disease that afflicts the
body, they have to suffer the pain unavoidably.

What we have just described relate to the pleasurable and unpleasurable

feelings with respect to the physical body. In addition we have to consider
the feelings that arise in relation to states of mind. Thoughts on pleasant
objects give rise to happiness and gladness, Sukha vedanā; while thinking
about things and affairs which develop dejection, despondency, defeatism,
sadness, grief, timidity and so on, give rise to unhappiness, Dukkha vedanā.
Dwelling on ordinary everyday affairs gives rise to neutral, equanimous
feeling, Upekkhā vedanā.
These are three kinds of feelings that are related to thoughts or
imaginations. Whilst in such various states of mind, the sentient being
assumes these feelings also to be Self: "I am feeling glad, happy; I am
despondent, unhappy; I am not feeling happy, not unhappy, I am just
equanimous."

When pleasant objects are seen, heard, smelt or tasted pleasurable feelings
arise in them. These are also regarded as self: "I feel good I feel happy."
Therefore they go after the good things of life, visiting places of
entertainments etc, in order to enjoy good sights, good sounds; they use
fragrant flowers and perfumes to enjoy pleasant aroma; they go to any
length and trouble to satisfy their gustatory demands.

When unpleasant objects are seen, heard, smelt or tasted, unpleasant

feelings arise in them. These are also assumed to be Self; They try,
therefore, to have nothing to do with unpleasant objects.

The ordinary every day scene which one sees, hears. Indifferent sense
objects, excite neither a feeling of pleasure nor feeling of unpleasantness.
This is neutral equanimous feeling which is also assumed to be self. People
are never content with this medial condition of neither pleasantness nor
unpleasantness. They strive hard, therefore, to attain the state of
pleasantness to enjoy pleasurable feelings.

DISCUSSION ON VARIANCE BETWEEN ABHIDHAMMĀ AND SUTTANTAS

According to Teachings in Abhidhammā, there is neither feeling of pleasant

nor feeling of unpleasantness at the moment of seeing. hearing, smelling,
tasting, but just equanimous feeling, indifference. But in the Suttantas are
discourses, which describe how all these Vedanās, Sukkha, Dukkha and
Upekkhā arise at all the sense doors. There are discourses exhorting to
contemplate on these feelings at the moment of seeing, hearing so as to
comprehend their true nature. The Mahā Tīkā of Visuddhi Magga (p.36, vol.
II) has explained how sukkha, dukkha and upekkhāvedanās become evident
at the moment of seeing, hearing etc in these words.

"Although it is said that eye consciousness is accompanied by equanimity,

the resultant effect of unwholesome act is in the nature of suffering. The
resultant effect of unwholesome act cannot be pleasant. Likewise, although
it is stated that resultant effect of a wholesome feeling, pleasantness. All
moral acts bear good, pleasant fruits.
This explanation in the sub-commentary is most appropriate and can be
verified through practical experience. When a beautiful object is sighted, the
feeling of wholesomeness and pleasantness is evident even as the object is
being seen. When a terrifying, repulsive, hateful object is sighted the feeling
of horror, aversion is quite evident too even while seeing the objects. These
experiences are more pronounced in the case of hearing than in the case of
seeing. A sweet, pleasant sound produces a sweet, pleasant effect; a terrible
loud din inflicts unbearable pain on the hearer. The resultant effect is distinct
still in smelling. A pleasant sensation arises in the nose as soon as a fragrant
aroma is smelt, whereas a foul putrid smell at once sets up nausea resulting
in head-ache and other ills. A whiff of poisonous odour may even cause
death. The most pronounced effect may be experienced in the act of eating.
While a tasty, delicious dish produces a delightful sensation on the tongue,
the bitter taste of some medicinal pills is very unpleasant and disagreeable.
A poisonous substance will cause intense suffering and may result even in
death.

Thus although it is stated that eye-consciousness etc is accompanied by

indifference, the immoral resultant equanimity which experiences
disagreeable objects is in the nature of painful suffering; and the moral
resultant equanimity which experiences agreeable objects has the nature of
pleasant happiness. "These comments of the sub-commentary are most
appropriate. We find therefore the Suttas mention that all three types of
Vendanās are excited at the moment of seeing etc. Alternatively, as it is
possible for all the three to arise at the moment of javana, impulsion,
during the eye avenue thought process (cakkhudvāra vīthi). The Sutta
mention all the types of vedanās to be excited when seeing etc.

VEDANĀ MISCONCEIVED AS ATTA

Therefore, enjoyment of various sense-objects, pleasant or unpleasant, every

time they are seen, heard, touched or become known, constitutes vedanā.
When an agreeable sensation is felt, there arises the clinging of self. "I feel
pleasant." When the sensation is disagreeable, there arises the clinging of
self, "I don't feel pleasant;" or, previously I have felt pleasant, but now I feel
unpleasant, "When the feeling is one of indifference, self is quite pronounced
too as "I feel neither pleasant nor unpleasant. I feel indifferent." This is Atta
clinging with respect to vedanā, feeling, known as vedakā atta-believing
that it is self or soul who enjoys the pleasant or unpleasant feelings.

Vedakā atta is belief that it is self or atta who enjoys the pleasant or
unpleasant feelings.
This is how every ordinary worldling clings onto the notion of self. In Indian
literature, vedanā is described as Self, Atta or having the attributes of a Self
or Atta. In Myanmar, this notion does not seem to be so firmly held to be
inscribed in writing. But all the same, there is the clinging to the belief that,
on happy occassions, "It is I who enjoys pleasant things; when faced with
difficult circumstances, "It is I who suffers." The reason for such beliefs lies in
the fact that inanimate objects such as stones or sticks do not feel the heat
when coming into contact with it; they do not feel cold when touched with a
cold body. They feel neither happy nor sad under pleasant or unpleasant
circumstances. The animate objects, the sentient beings, on the other hand,
suffer or rejoice according to pleasant or unpleasant circumstances. It is
assumed, therefore, that sentient beings must be endowed with an
animating spirit, a living entity. It is this living entity which enjoys on
moments of pleasure or suffers on occasions of distress.

In reality, vedanā, feeling is not self, a living entity but only a phenomenon
that arises and vanishes as conditioned by circumstances. Therefore, the
Buddha declared first and foremost the truth which must be firmly held:
"Bhikkhus, vedanā, feeling is not Self," and he continued to explain the
reason why vedanā is not self.

WHY VEDANĀ IS NOT SELF

"Bhikkhus, if vedanā were self, the inner substance of the body, then
vedanā would not tend to afflict or distress. And one should be able to say of
vedanā, "Let vedanā be thus (always pleasant); let vedanā not be thus
(always unpleasant). It should be possible to influence vedanā in this
manner as one wishes.

True, if vedanā were self, it should not cause distress to oneself, because it
is not in the nature of things to afflict oneself, and it should be possible to
mange vedanā as one wishes. These should all obtain and follow from the
supposition "if vedanā were self." Furthermore, if vedanā did not tend to
afflict, and if our feelings were always pleasant, as we desire and never
unpleasant, then we should regard vedanā to be truly self.

This hypothetical statement 'if vedanā were self' is a form of instruction to

pause and consider whether it afflicts one or not, whether vedanā can be
managed to be always pleasant as one desires. On careful examination, it
will become very evident that vedanā is almost always afflicting us and that
it arises, not following one's wish but in accordance with its own conditioning
circumstances.

Our audience here will find it within their personal experiences that vedanā
afflicts them now and often; that they can never have their wish fulfilled to
be always enjoying good sights, good sounds, good smells, good foods, soft
touch etc. They will have discovered that unpleasant vedanās outweigh
pleasant ones. That one cannot have vedanā as one wishes is because
vedanā is not self nor one's inner substance. The Blessed One continued to
explain why vedanā is not self:

Direct evidence of how vedanā is not Self.

"Bhikkhus, as a matter of fact, vedanā is not self. Since vedanā is not self, it
tends to affliction. And it is not possible to say of vedanā, 'Let vedanā be
thus (always pleasant); let vedanā not be thus (always unpleasant).

In reality, vedanā is not self. Hence it oppresses by painful feelings and

mental distresses. And it is not amenable to one's control, being unable to
keep it always pleasant and never unpleasant. So the Blessed One had
explained that vedanā is not self, inner substance, because it ends to afflict;
vedanā is not Self since it cannot be managed as one wishes.

Although it is evident that vedanā is oppressive, and ungovernable, there

are some people with strong attachment to wrong belief in Self and intense
craving, taṇhā, who trusting in pleasurable sensations, cling to vedanā as
Self and take delight in it. Careful consideration, however, will reveal that
moments of joy and happiness are few compared to occasions of suffering
and distress.

HOW VEDANĀ INFLICTS SUFFERING

There has to be constant accommodations and adjusting to conditions to

maintain ourselves comfortably. One suffers discomforts of feeling stiff,
cramped, hot and of aching when confined to one position for long, unless
one makes necessary adjustments in body postures to relieve the pains. The
oppressive nature of vedanā is quite evident even if we consider only the
case of the eye which needs constant accommodation by frequent winking
and occassional blinking. Without these adjustments, tiredness in the eye
will become unbearable. Other organs of the body also need similar
accommodations. Even with constant adjustments, vedanā under certain
circumstances, is likely to inflict severe pains and suffering which may lead
to serious ailment and illness resulting even in death. Many have been
incidents where the afflicted person, unable to bear the oppressions of
vedanā any longer, have sought the termination of their own lives by
committing suicide.

The physical pains and suffering just described are not inflicted entirely by
vedanā; rūpa also contributes its share of oppressions, being the original
source of troubles. In the previous discourses on sufferings caused by rūpas
we have described different types of feelings, which may be regarded as
afflictions brought about by vedanā also.

Mental distresses and suffering on the other hand are afflictions caused
solely by vedanā without the aid of rūpa. On the death of one's near and
dear ones, parents, husbands and wives, sons and daughters, vedanā inflicts
sorrow, grief, lamentations on the bereaved ones. Likewise, there is intense
mental suffering, which may even result in death, on loss of wealth and
property too. Frustration and discontent owing to one's failure to solve life's
problems, separation form one's associates and friends, unfulfilled hopes and
desires are other forms of oppressions inflicted by vedanā.

Even Sukha vedanā, the pleasurable sensations which are very comforting
by giving happiness while they last, prove to be a source of distress later on.
When they disappear after their momentary manifestation, one is left with a
wistful memory and yearning for them. One has, therefore, to be constantly
endeavouring in order to maintain the pleasant happy state. Thus people go
in pursuit of pleasant states even risking their lives. If they happen to use
illegal and immoral means in such pursuits, retribution is bound to overtake
them either in this life time or in the states of woe. Thus apparently pleasant
sensations, Sukha vedanā, also inflict pain and distress.

Upekkhā vedanā, equanimous feeling, like sukha vedanā, affords comfort

and happiness. And like sukha vedanā, it requires constant effort to
maintain its state, which of course entails cumbersome trouble and burden.
Both sukha vedanā and upekkhā vedanā are not enduring being of fleeting
nature, they require constant labour for their continuous arising. Such
activities which invlove continuous striving, constitute saṅkhāra dukkha,
suffering due to formations. This is just a brief indication of the oppressive
nature of all the three vedanās, sukha, dukkha and upekkhā.

If there were no vedanā, feeling there would be no experiencing of pain or

pleasure either physically or mentally. There would be freedom from
suffering. Take for instance a log, a post, a stone or a lump of earth. Having
no feeling they do not suffer in any way. Even when subjected to hacking,
beating, crushing, burning, they remain unaffected. The continuum of
nāma, rūpa which are associated with vedanā is, however, afflicted with
suffering in many ways. Thus it is plain that vedanā is not self, the inner
substance.

VEDANĀ IS UNMANAGEABLE

Vedanā is unmanageable and not amenable to one's will. Just consider the
fact that we cannot manage things as we wish so that we may see and hear
only what is pleasant; taste and smell only, what is delicious and sweet. Even
when with great effort and labour, we select and pick out only what is most
desirable to see, hear taste or smell, these objects are not enduring. We can
enjoy them only for a short while before they vanish. Thus we cannot
manage as we wish and maintain a state in which pleasant and desirable
things will not disappear but remain permanently.

When pleasant objects of sight etc vanish, they are replaced by undesirable
objects of sight etc which, of course, causes suffering. It has been stated
earlier that unpleasant sounds are more oppressive than unpleasant sight;
undesirable smell is worst than undesirable sound and undesirable taste is
far worse still. Further, toxic substances when taken internally may cause
even death. The worst of all is the unpleasant sense of touch. When pricked
by thorns, injured by a fall, wounded by weapons, scorched by fire, afflicted
by disease, the suffering which ensues is always very painful; it may be so
intense as to cause clamorous outbursts of wailing, resulting even in death.
These are instances of unpleasant vedanā which cannot be commended not
to happen. That which is unmanageable is surely not self. Vedanā is thus
not self and it is not proper to cling to it believing it to be self, one's inner
substance.

What we have so far described relate only to vedanās experienced in the

human world. The vedanās of the four nether worlds are far more
excruciating. Animals such as cattles, buffaloes, poultry, pigs etc., have to
face tormenting troubles almost all the time with no one to assist them or
guard them against these afflictions. The petas have to suffer more than the
animals but the denizens of hell, the Niraya states suffer the most. We
cannot afford to remain smug with the thought these four nether worlds
have nothing to do with us. Until and unless we have attained the stage of
the Noble Ones, the Ariyās there is always the possibility that we may have
to face the sufferings in the lower worlds. Thus as vedanā tends to affliction
in every existence, it cannot be regarded as self or inner core of individual
being of each existence. And it is not possible to manage as one wishes so
that unpleasant vedanās should not arise; undesirable vedanās arise
inevitably of their own accord. Mental distresses which we do not wish to
arise; make their appearance all the same; which all go to prove the
uncontrollable nature of vedanā. Each being has to contend with vedanās
which cannot be managed as one wishes, and hence cannot be self or one's
own inner substance.

To reiterate:

"Bhikkhus, vedanā is not Self (not one's inner substance); If vedanā were
self, then vedanā would not tend to afflict or distress. And it should be
possible to say of vedanā, "Let vedanā be thus (always pleasant); let
vedanā not be Thus (always unpleasant).

In reality vedanā is not Self, one's inner substance. Therefore it tends to

afflict or distress. And it is not possible to say of vedanā "Let vedanā be
thus (always pleasant); Let vedanā not be thus (always unpleasant).

As stated in this Canonical text the vedanā which is felt in one's own body
tends to affliction and is not amenable to control. Hence it is very clear that
vedanā is not self, not one's own inner substance. Nevertheless, ordinary
common worldling clings to the belief. "It is I who suffers after experiencing
happiness; it is I who enjoys as circumstances favour, after going through
distresses." Clinging to belief in self is not easy to be eradicated completely.
This wrong belief in self with respect to vedanā is abandoned only through
personal realization of the true nature of vedanā; this realization can be
brought about by contemplation on vedanā; in accordance with
Satipatthāna Vipassanā practice, otherwise Middle Way, as instructed by the
Blessed One. We will now deal with how this atta clinging can be discarded
by contemplation on vedanā.

A brief description of Vipassanā meditation has been given in the first part of
these discourses. The Yogī who keeps not of rising, falling, sitting etc., as
described therein will come to notice in time uncomfortable sensations of
pain, stiffness, hotness etc arising in him. He has to concentrate on these
various feeling as they arise by noting 'pain, pain, stiffness, stiffness, hot
hot,' etc., During the initial period when samādhi concentration is not yet
strong, these distressing sensations may get more and more intensified. But
the Yogī has to put up with the pains and discomforts as long as possible and
keeps on noting the various sensations as they arise. As his concentration
gets strengthened, the discomforting pains will gradually loss their intensity
and begin to perish away. With very deep concentration they will vanish as if
removed by hand even while they are being noted. These vedanās may
never come back again to trouble the Yogī.
We see examples of such cessation of vedanās, when the Venerable Mahā
Kassapa and others found themselves, after listening to the discourse on
Bojjaṅga Sutta, relieved of aliments which had afflicted them. But prior to
advent of strong concentration the Yogī will find the painful sensation in one
place disappear only to rise in another form of distressing feeling at another
site. When this new sensation is heedfully noted, it vanishes away to be in
turn replaced by another form of sensation in yet another place. When the
distressing vedanās have been observed for a considerable time to be
repeatedly appearing and vanishing in this way, personal realization comes
to the Yogī that "vedanā is always oppressive. Unpleasant vedanās cannot
be managed not to arise; it is uncontrollable. Pleasant as well as unpleasant
vedanās are not self, not one's inner substance. It is non-self." This is the
true knowledge of contemplation on non-self.

The Yogī who has observed the vanishing of vedanās in the course of
contemplation recalls the oppressive nature of vedanā while it lasted; he
knows that vedanā has disappeared not because of his wishing nor in
obedience to his command to do so, but as a result of necessary conditions
brought about by concentrated mental power. It is truly ungovernable. Thus
the Yogī realizes that vedanā, whether pleasant or painful is a natural
process, arising of its own accord; it is not self nor inner substance but just
Anatta, Non-self. Furthermore, the incessant arising and vanishing of
vedanā as it is being noted also establish the fact that vedanā has the nature
of Non-self.

When the Yogī reaches the stage of udayabbaya ñāṇa, knowledge of the
rising and falling of compounded things, he notices that his meditational
practice of taking note of phenomena is being accomplished with ease and
comfort (unaccompanied) by pain or suffering; this is manifestation of a
specially pleasant vedanā, which cannot be maintained for long, however
much he wishes for it. When his concentration wanes and becomes
weakened, the very pleasant vedanā vanishes and may not arise again in
spite of his yearning for it. Then it dawns upon him that vedanā is not
subjected to one's will and is ungovernable. Hence it is not self, the inner
substance. The Yogī then realizes through personal experience the non-self
nature of vedanā.

He also vividly sees the non-self nature of vedanā because of its dissolution
on each occasion of noting. In the initial stages of meditation the Yogī suffers
from physical pain of stiffness, itching, or feeling hot. Occassionally, he
suffers also mental distresses of disappointment, dejection, fear or
repugnance. He should keep on noting these unpleasant vedanās. He will
come to know that while these unpleasant vedanās are manifesting
themselves, pleasant, good sensations do not arise.
On some occasions, however, the Yogī experiences in the course of
meditation very pleasant sensation both physical and mental, arising in him.
For instance, when he think of happy incidents, happening feelings are
evolved. He should keep on noting their pleasant vedanās as they arise. He
will come to know then that while pleasant vedanās are manifesting
themselves, unpleasant bad sensations do not arise.

On the whole, however, the Yogī is mostly engaged in noting the origination
and dissolution of ordinary physical and mental processes such as the rise
and fall of abdomen which excite neither painful nor pleasurable sensations.
The Yogī notes these occasions when neutral feeling only is evident. He
knows therefore, that when the equanimous feeling arises, both painful
feeling and pleasurable feelings are absent. With this personal knowledge,
comes the realization that vedanā is that which makes a momentary
appearance, only to vanish away soon; hence it is transitory, and is not self,
not ego which is to be regarded as permanent.

Here at this juncture we would like to include Dighanakha Sutta in our

discourse as it affords good illustration of how such realization comes about.
We must, however, first begin with an account of how the Venerable
Sāriputta, who was chiefly concerned with Dighanakha Sutta, attained to
higher knowledge.

THE VENERABLE SĀRIPUTTRĀ'S SEARCH FOR DHAMMA AND

HOW HE ATTAINED TO HIGHER KNOWLEDGE

Two young men Upatissa and Kolita who were later to become known as the
Venerable Sāriputtrā and Venerable Moggalāna respectively became
wandering ascetics under the great teacher Sañjaya, with a view to seek the
Unageing, the undecaying and the Undying. They learnt all that had to be
taught then by the great Sañjaya in a few day's time and came to realize
that there was no substance in his teaching. Consequently the two of them
left the great teacher Sañjaya and roamed about the entire Middle country in
further search of Truth.

Finding it no where, they made their way back to the city of Rājagaha. It was
in that city that the wanderer Upatissa came upon the Venerable Assaji, the
youngest member of the Group of Five Bhikkhus, while he was going on the
arms-round. Upatissa followed him closely to where he would eat his meal
after the round. Upatissa prepared the seat for him and offered him drinking-
water out of his water bottle. When the meal was over, Upatissa asked of the
Venerable Assaji who his teacher was and what was his Master's teaching.
The Venerable replied that his teacher was the Perfectly Enlightened One,
the Buddha. As to the Teaching since he had just come to the Buddha's
Dispensation, he knows only a little of it. Upatissa, then said, "Please tell me
whatever little you know of the Teaching. I shall expand upon it myself."

Thereupon, the Venerable Assaji told the wanderer Upatissa the short
summary of the Buddha's Teaching:

"Ye dhammā hetuppabhavā, tesam hetum tathāgato āha.

Te sañca yo nirodho, evam vādi Mahāsamano."

"There are these Dhammas (dukkha saccā) which have arisen because of
certain causes (samudaya saccā). Our Master the Perfect One has told about
these causes. And there is this state (Nibbāna) where all these Dhamma and
their causes come to cessation. The Perfect One has told of this cessation
too. This is the Teaching of our Master, the Blessed Noble Samaṇa."

This is then the short account of the teaching given by the Venerable Assaji.
Quite brief. "There are resultants to a certain cause. Our Master had taught
about these causes." But this condensed teaching was sufficient for the
wanderer Upattissa to see the light of Dhamma and attain the knowledge of
the first path and Fruition. He became a Stream Winner, a Sotāpana. Very
speedy achievement, we must say. We find the present Yogīs showing no
remarkable progress after meditation for a whole day and night. Only after
seven days of hard work, they begin to get a glimpse of the physical and
mental processes and the nature of impermanent, unsatisfactoriness and
insubstantiality. Most of the Yogīs take about a month and a half to reach the
stage when may be believed to have attained the knowledge of the First
Path and Fruition. It may be two and half months to three months before
some of them may be believed to have made similar attainments. Quite a
long time, is it not?

The speedy achievement of the wanderer Upatissa may be attributed to the

fact that he had already put in effort at meditation up to the stage proximate
to the Path and Fruition throughout his previous existences. Since the time of
these past existences, he had been in a position to achieve the knowledge of
the Path and Fruition but for the vow he had taken to become a chief
Disciple of a Buddha. In this last existence (when his vow of achieving the
status of a chief Disciple would be fulfilled), propelled by the momentum of
Vipassanā practices of his previous existences, he made a speedy passage
through the sequence of vipassanā ñāṇas to attain the knowledge of the
First Path and Fruition. Although the teaching imparted by the Venerable
Assaji was brief, it contained the illuminating message for development of
vipassanā ñāṇa.

Prior to hearing the teachings of the Buddha, it was generally held that "each
individual being has living entity, an inner substance, a self, which is
everlasting, permanent. This living entity is not that which has just arisen
depending on causes; it has been in permanent existence, embodiment of
eternity." The message given by the Venerable Assaji was to the effect that
there was no such permanent entity as Atta; there was only the truth of
suffering otherwise known as nāma, rūpa being the resultants of working of
taṇhā, craving and clinging otherwise called the truth of origin of suffering.
These resultant effects of the samudaya saccā are none other than the
nāma, rūpa of one's own person which are involved in acts of seeing, hearing
etc.

The wanderer Upatissa who would later become the Venerable Sāriputta
realized at once that "there was only the process of incessant arising and
perishing of nāma, rūpa which have been manifesting themselves in every
act of knowing, touching, seeing, hearing, since the time of birth. They have
arisen as a result of craving for and clinging to one's own life and existence.
"It should be regarded that the wanderer Upatissa developed vipassanā
ñāṇa by taking note of phenomena of change even as he was receiving the
message from the Venerable Assaji and in consequence attained the
knowledge of the Path and Fruition in an instant.

Having become a Stream Winner, the wanderer Upatissa enquired of the

Venerable Assaji where the Blessed One was residing then. When the
Venerable Assaji departed, Upatissa informed him that he would be coming
to where the Buddha was. He then went back to his friend the wanderer
Kolita. Who, noticing his composed features and clear countenance asked
him, "Well, friend, is it possible that you have found the Deathless?" The
wanderer Upatissa admitted that he had indeed found the Deathless and
recounted to his friend what had happened. In doing so, he quoted the verse
recited for him by the Venerable Assaji. As a consequence, the wanderer
Kolita also became a Stream Winner instantly having achieved the
knowledge of the First Path and Fruition.

The two of them then decided to go to the Blessed One. But first they went
to the great teacher Sañcaya and invited him to come along with them to the
Blessed One. The wanderer Sañcaya declined their invitation and told them,
"You go along. I have no wish to come. From being a big storage tank (pot), I
can't be like a small pot for carrying water, becoming a disciple to others."
The two friends reminded the wanderer Sañcaya, 'The Blessed One being a
truly enlightened One, people will go to him instead.' Upon this, the
wanderer Sañcaya replied, "Have no worry on that account. There are more
fools in this than the wise. The wise will go to the Samaṇa Gotama. The fools,
who form the majority, will come to me. You go along as you wish."

Nowadays, there are many impostors and bogus religious teachers who hold
such view as that of this wanderer Sañcaya. People should take great care
with regard to such teachers.

Then the wanderers Upatissa and Kolita went with two hundred and fifty
wanderers, who were their followers, to Blessed One. After listening to the
discourse given by the Blessed One, the two hundred and fifty followers
became Arahats. The two leading wanderers together with the two hundred
and fifty followers who had attained Arahatship requested for admission to
the Order. The Blessed One gave them the 'Ehi bhikkhu' ordination by
saying, 'Come, Bhikkhu etc.' From that time the wanderer Upatissa became
known as the Elder Sāriputta, and the wanderer Kolita, the Elder Mahā
Moggalāna.

Having been thus ordained, they continued on with practice of meditation.

The Elder Moggalāna attained Arahatship within seven days of ordination.
The Elder Sāriputta was however still being engaged, up to the full moon day
of Tabodwe, in Vipassanā meditation, employing the Anupadā Dhamma
method of meditation (reviewing and analysing with insight all levels of
consciousness step by step.)

On that full moon day of Tabodwe, the wanderer Dighanakkha, who stayed
behind with the teacher Sañcaya thought thus: 'My uncle Upatissa, when he
went to see other religious teachers, always came back soon. On this visit to
Samaṇa Gotama, however, he had been gone for about a fortnight. And
there is no news from him. What if I followed him to find out if there is any
substance (In Buddha Gotama's Teaching). He, therefore, went to where the
Venerable Sāriputta was to make his enquiries about the Teaching of the
Blessed One.

DIGHANAKHA SUTTA

On that day, at that time the Blessed One was staying in the Sūkarakhata
Cave in the Gijjhakuta Mountains. The Venerable Sāriputta was standing
behind the Blessed One gently waving a fan. The wanderer Dighanakha
approached the Blessed One and after exchanging greetings said; "My
theory and view is this, Master Gotama, "I have no liking for any." What he
meant by this statement was that he did not like any belief; in other words,
in the belief that a new existence arise after passing away from the present
one. But since he said he had no liking for any (belief), it amounted to
declaring that he did not like his own belief (annihilationism) too. Therefore
the Blessed One asked of him, "Have you no liking too for this view of yours
'I have no liking for any!'"

To this, the wanderer Dighanakha gave an ambiguous reply, 'Even if I had a

liking for this view of mine, it would be all the same.' This is in keeping with
the practice of those who, holding on to wrong views, equivocate when they
realize that what they believe in or what they have said, is wrong.

In order to bring out the view held by the wanderer the Blessed One said,
"The belief in eternalism (sassata) is close to craving close to fetter, to
relishing, to accepting, to holding tight and clinging. The belief in
annihilationism is close to non craving, to non-fetter, to non-relishing, non-
accepting and non-holding tight, to non-clinging." Upon this the wanderer
Dighanakha remarked, 'Master Gotama commends my view; Master Gotama
commends my view.'

The Blessed One, of course, was merely explaining the true virtues and faults
of the views of the eternalists and annihilationists. The eternalists abhor and
avoid (akusala) unmeritorious acts so that they do not have to face the evil
consequences in coming existences. They engage themselves in wholesome
deeds, but they relish and take delight in pleasures which would promote
further rounds of existence. And the Commentary says, it is very hard to
abandon the eternalist view which holds that "Atta, the living entity is
indestructible; it remains stable eternally." Therefore, even those who
professedly have embraced Buddhism find it difficult to accept that "there is
no self, no living entity; there is only a continuous process of nāma, rūpa.
For Arahats, having eradicated completely, the clinging taṇhā, there is no
fresh arising of rūpa and nāma in a view existence after (the event of)
Parinibbāna. The continuous process of nāma and rūpa comes to a
complete cessation. "Such people would like to believe that after
Parinibbāna, the Arahats continue to exist in special forms of rūpa and
nāma.

The Commentary has this to say on the subject: The eternalists know that
there is present life and an after-life. They know there is resultant good or
bad effects consequent on good or bad deeds. They engage themselves in
meritorious actions. They flinch from doing bad deeds. But they relish and
take delight in pleasures which could give rise to fresh existences. Even
when they get to the presence of the Blessed One or his disciples, they find
it hard to abandon their belief immediately. So it may be said of the
eternality belief that although its faults are not grave, it is hard to be
discarded.
"On the other hand, annihilationists do not know that there is passage to the
human world from other existances and there is after-life. They do not know
there is resultant good or bad effect consequent on good or bad deeds. They
do not engage themselves in meritorious actions. There is no fear for them
to do bad deeds. They do not relish and take delight in pleasure which could
give rise to fresh existences (because they do not believe in after-life). But
when they get to the presence of the Blessed One or his disciples they can
abandon their belief immediately. Thus with regard to the annihilationists
belief, it may be said, that its faults are grave but it is easy to be discarded.

The wanderer Dighanakha could not grasp the motive behind the statement
of the Blessed One. He assumed that the Blessed One was commending him
for his view that there is nothing after death. Hence his remark, "Master
Gotama commends my view; Master Gotama recommends my view." In
order to enable him to abandon his view, the Blessed One continued to give
a critical review of three beliefs current in those days: namely the eternalist
view which holds 'I have a liking for all; the annihilist view which holds' 'I
have no liking for any;' and a form of eternalist view which holds 'I have a
liking for some, I have no liking for some.'

To summarise what the Blessed One said in this review, it was explained that
'when one holds fast to any one of the above views, there is likelihood of
clash with both the other views. And when there is clash, there will be
disputes which would lead to quarrels. And when there are quarrels, there
is harm. "Therefore the Blessed One urged that all the three beliefs should
be discarded."

Here it may be asked whether the Buddhist view that "fresh becomings arise
in new existences as conditioned by one's kamma," is not the same as the
eternalist view. The answer is no, not the same. By saying "fresh becomings
arise in new existences as conditioned by one's kamma," the Buddhist view
does not mean the transfer of Atta, living entity from one existence to
another. It means only the arising of new rūpa and nāma in the new
existence depending on one's previous kamma, whereas the eternalist
believe that it is the Atta, living entity of the present life that migrates to a
new existence. The two views are, therefore, quite different from each other.

Again, the question may arise whether the Buddhist Teaching of cessation of
nāma, and rūpa after the Parinibbāna of Arahats and the non-arrival in a
new existance 'is not the same as the nihilist view which holds that nothing
remains after death. Here, too, there is no similarity between the two views.
Because according to the annihilationists, there exists before death, a living
entity which disappears after death. No special effort is needed to make it
disappear; it makes its own 'exit'.

In addition, although materialists etc think that there is no Atta in their view,
they believe that there remains nothing after death. Good or bad sensations
are enjoyed or suffered only before death. This clinging to the notion of
suffering or enjoyment before death is clinging to Atta. In Buddhist
Teaching, the Arahat has, before Parinibbāna, no Atta but only a continuous
process of nāma, rūpa. Suffering and enjoying the sensations is the natural
phenomenon of vedanā which is manifesting itself recurrently.

After Parinibbāna, the continuous process of nāma, rūpa comes to cessation

in an Arahat. But this cessation does not come about on its own. It is by
virtue of Ariya Path, kilesā and kamma which are responsible for the arising
of nāma, rūpa are eradicated. When the cause of their becoming, namely
kilesā and kamma disappear, no new nāma and rūpa arise again. Thus
there is a world of difference between cessation after Parinibbāna described,
in Buddhist Teaching and the cessation envisaged by the annihilationists.

A further question may be also asked thus: "Just as the eternalists hold
disputes over their beliefs with the annihilationists, is there not the
possibility of disputes between those believe in non-self and those who hold
on to the notion of Self, Atta. Preaching or talking about the right view does
not amount to engaging in disputes; it should be regarded as promotion of
the knowledge of the truth for the benefit and welfare of the mass. That
'there is only the continuity of process in the phenomenon of change from
the old to the new nāma and rūpa; there is no Atta which lasts eternally, is
the doctrine of non-self, otherwise the right view. Explaining the right view is
not engaging in controversy, not engaging on polemics. It is just imparting
the knowledge of truth to the uninstructed. Thus for those who hold the right
view of non-self, there is no likelihood of involvement in disputes or
controversies. We will find the Buddha's own explanation on this point when
we come to the last part of this Sutta.

After exhorting how all the three wrong views of eternalism,

annihilationalism, and partial eternalism should be abolished, the Blessed
One went on to advise to discard clinging to the material body.

"Wanderer Dighanakha of Aggivessana clan, this material body of yours is

made up of the four great primary elements, has grown out of the blood and
sperm of parents, built up by the food eaten such as rice, bread etc; being
subject to impermanent it has to be maintained by massages and anointing;
even when sustained thus, it still dissolves and disintegrates. It must be
regarded (contemplated on) as impermanent, as suffering, as a disease, as a
spike, as an abscess, as an evil, as an ailment, as alien, as destructible, as
void of self: it is just non-self. When it is regarded so, there is abandonment
of craving and clinging to it."

Having thus discoursed on the nature of materiality, rūpa, the Blessed One
continued with the teaching on the nature of immateriality, nāma.

"Wanderer Digkanakha of Aggivessana clan, there are three kinds of vedanā

in your physical make-up: pleasant feeling, painful feeling and neither painful
nor pleasant feeling. When a person feels any one of the vedanās he does
not feel the other two. Since each vedanā arises singly, it should be known
that it is impermanent, conditionally formed (saṅkhata), dependently
originated (paticcasamuppaṇa), subject to exhaustion and dissolution
(khaya dhamma and vaya dhamma), fading and ceasing (virāga dhamma,
nirodha dhamma). (It should be noted that by these words the Blessed One
had shown how by contemplating on vedanā, one comes to know its arising
depending on circumstances and its immediate exhaustion, fading and
dissolution."

The Yogīs who are taking note of the phenomenon of rūpa and nāma
starting from the rise and fall of abdomen as instructed by us should also
concentrate on the vedanās and take note of it as 'painful, painful' when a
painful feeling arises. When unhappy feelings appear, it should be noted as
'unhappy unhappy'. When a pleasant feeling arises, it should be noted as
'pleasant pleasant' when feeling happy, it should be noted as 'happy happy'.
When the sensation is not vividly pleasant nor painful, attention should be
directed on the rūpa or the mental state which is observable distinctly.

While thus engaged in observing the vedanās heedfully, the pleasant or the
painful feelings will be perceived clearly arising recurrently and vanishing
away instantly. They may be likened to raindrops falling on the uncovered
body of a person walking in the rains and their disappearance. Just like the
feelings which keeps falling from outside, the individual raindrops also
appear as if they have fallen on the body from an external source. When this
phenomenon is clearly seen, realization comes to the Yogī that these
vedanās are impermanent, suffering because of incessant arising and
ceasing, and is not self, nor inner core having no substantiality. As a
consequence of such realization, there develops the sense of weariness,
dispassion in the Yogī, which the Blessed One continued to explain.

WEARINESS THROUGH CONTEMPLATING VEDANĀ

"Wanderer Dighanakha of the Aggivessanā clan, when the meditator sees
the three forms of vedanā in their characteristics of impermanence, he gets
wearied of sukha vedanā which is said to be pleasant, of the dukkha
vedanā which is said to be painful, distressing and of the upekkhā vedanā
which is said to be neither painful nor pleasant."

These words of the Blessed One should be specially borne in mind. The
purpose of the vipassaṇā meditation is to develop nibbidhā ñāṇa, the
knowledge of dispassion or sense of weariness. Only when the phenomenon
of incessant arising and ceasing has been personally seen and experienced,
the nature of impermanence can be fully and thoroughly grasped. It is only
then the senses of weariness is developed.

In this Dighanakha Sutta, no mention was made on detailed observation of

the separate components of rūpa. Rūpa has to be contemplated on in the
form of an aggregate. This fact should be carefully noted. From these words
quoted above, it is clear that it is possible to develop sense of weariness
without contemplating on separate components of rūpa as described in
Abhidhammā.

Furthermore, in connection with the contemplation on nāma, immateriality,

only three components of vedanā are mentioned. Nothing was said of other
components-mind and mental formations. It is clear here too that taking note
of only the three vedanās at the moment of their arising will develop the
sense of weariness. But it must be noted that it is not just the painful feeling
but all the three kinds of feeling that should be contemplated on, because it
must be understood that all three vedanās are manifesting themselves.

The Blessed One then went on to explain how knowledge of the Path and
Fruition and knowledge of retrospection arise after development of the sense
of weariness or knowledge of contemplation of dispassion.

THE PATH AND FRUITTION THROUGH DISPASSION

When weariness has been developed or because of weariness (dispassion)

his lust (craving) fades away. In other words, he becomes passion- free and
the knowledge of the Ariyā Path arises in him. With the fading away of
craving or by virtue of knowledge of the Ariyā Path which has caused the
destruction of craving, he is liberated or emancipated. In other words,
Fruition of liberation (Arahattaphala) appears when he is thus liberated,
there comes the knowledge that his mind is liberated. He understands by
retrospection that, "Birth is exhausted, the holy life has been lived out; what
had to be done had been done; there is nothing more of this to come."

In these words, the Blessed One described how Arahatship was attained and
knowledge of retrospection developed. Then he continued on to explain that
the liberated person, after attaining Arahatship, is not involved in quarrel or
dispute with any one.

"Wanderer Dighanakha of Aggivessana clan, the Bhikkhu who is thus

liberated from āsava or taints, does engage himself in discussions on beliefs
with any one; does not get involved in disputes with any one. Although he
employs the conventional expressions such as 'I, you, man, woman,' he does
not wrongly hold the notion that they represent the ultimate truth. He does
not quarrel with any one because he has come to know the truth and talks
only about the truth." Puppha Sutta of Khandavagga Samyutta has this to
say:

ONE WHO SPEAKS TRUTH DOES NOT DISPUTE

Nahan Bhikkhave lokena vivadāmi. Lokova mayā vivadāti.

Na Bhikkhave dhammavādi kenaci lokasmin vivādāti.

"Bhikkhus, I do not have disputes with the world. It is the world (in the
person of wanderers Saccaka, Uttiya and Vekhasana; the young man
Assalayana and the richman Upāḷi) that quarrel with me over their beliefs.
Bhikkhus, one who is in the habit of speaking the truth, does not engage in
arguments or disputes with any one in the world. In other words, as he
speaks the truth, it cannot be said of him to be disputatious."

This passage shows that it is not only the Blessed One but any one who
teaches his words of truth is not engaged in disputes when he is explaining
the truth to the other party. He is only helping the uninformed to arrive at
the truth in the matter of beliefs.

ARAHATSHIP FOR THE VENERABLE SĀRIPUTTRĀ

During the time the Blessed One was holding forth as described above to
teach the wanderer Dighanakha how the three vedanās should be
contemplated on, and how through such contemplation Arahatship may be
gained, the Venerable Sāriputtrā was standing behind the Blessed One
fanning him. When he hears the discourse on the three vedanās, the
Venerable Sāriputtrā, already a Sotāpanna then, gained the highest
knowledge of Arahatship even as he was fanning the Blessed One.

In Anupadā Sutta, his attainment of Arahatship was described thus: The

Venerable Sāriputtrā went into Jhānic trance in the first stage, second stage
etc. When he came out of the trance, he contemplated on the nature of the
trance etc and by such contemplation, he became an Arahat on the fifteenth
day of meditation. In another Sutta it is said that the Venerable Sāriputtrā
himself explained that he attained Arahatship through contemplating on the
physical and mental processes going on inside him. The three Suttas may be
reconciled by taking that "the Venerable Sāriputtrā had gone into trances
while listening to the discourse on the three vedanās of the jhānic stages
and consequently attains the higher Path and Fruition.

His nephew, the wanderer Dighanakha became a Sotpānna while listening to

the discourse. It must be understood here that he became a Stream Winner
by virtue of Vipassanā insight developed by contemplating on the vedanās
which became manifested in him while listening to the discourse.

HOLDING SĀVAKA SANNIPĀTA, A CONGREGATION OF DISCIPLES

At the end of the Discourse, the Blessed One went back from the Gijjhakuta
mountains to the Veluvana monastery making the journey by means of
miracles, and convened a conference of his disciples. The Venerable
Sāriputtrā came to know of the conference being convened through
reflective insight and make his way to the Veluvana monastery by means of
miracles to attend it.

The distinguishing features of this congregation of disciples are that:

1. It is to be held on the full moon day of Tabodwe when the constellation

of lion comes into prominence.

2. The Bhikkhus attending the conference must have come uninvited or

unanimated by any one.
3. These attending Bhikkhus must all be Arahats endowed with six
Abhiññās, super normal knowledges.

4. All these Bhikkhus must have received the 'Ehi Bhikkhu' ordination.

It is started one thousand two hundred and fifty Bhikkhus attended that
conference convened by the Blessed One.

We have digressed from the original discourse on Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta by

including the Dighanakha Sutta in our discussions. We shall end our
discourse today by recapitulating the passage which says vedanā is not Self.

"Bhikkhus, vedanā is not Self (one's inner core), if vedanā were self, (one's
inner core), vedanā would not tend to afflict or distress, and it should be
possible to say of vedanā, "Let vedanā be thus (always pleasant); let
vedanā not be thus (always unpleasant).

In reality, vedanā is not Self. Therefore, it tend to afflict and distress, and it
is not possible to say of vedanā, "Let vedanā be thus (always pleasant); let
vedanā not be thus (always unpleasant). It is not possible to influence
vedanā in this manner.

MNEMONICS ON VEDAKA ATTA CLINGING

Vedaka atta clinging is belief in that all sensations whether pleasant or

unpleasant are felt by the living entity, the Self.

By virtue of having given respectful attention to this Discourse on

Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, may you all attain and realize soon, the Nibbāna by
means of the Path and Fruition as you wish.

Sādhu! Sādhu! Sādhu!

End of the second Part of the Discourse

on

The Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta.

Chapter 3
THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE ANATTALAKKHAṆA SUTTA

THIRD PART

(Delivered on the new moon day of Nayone 1325 M.E.)

PREFACE

We began our discourses on the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta on the 8th waxing day
of Nayone and we have dealt with the sections on rūpa, matter, being no Self
and Feeling being not Self. Today we will go on with perception being not
Self.

Saññā, perception, is not Self.

"Saññā, bhikkhave, anattā, saññā ca h'idam bhikkhave attā abhavissa,

nayidam saññā ābādhāya samvatteya. Labbhetha ca saññāya 'evam me
saññā hotu, evam me saññā mā ahositi.' Yasmā ca kho bhikkhave saññā
anattā tasmā saññā ābādhāya samvattati. Na ca labbhati saññāya evam me
saññā hotu evam me saññā mā ahositi."

"Bhikkhus, Saññā, which is perception or remembering is not Self." Saññā is

sixfold in kind: 1. Perception born of eye-contact. 2. Perception born of ear-
contact. 3. Perception born of nose-contact. 4. Perception born of tongue-
contact. 5. Perception born of body-contact. 6. Perception born of mind-
contact.

People in general think, every time an object is seen, heard, touched, known,
It is 'I' who perceives; objects are perceived and remembered by 'me'.
On seeing a sight, it is remembered as a man or a woman: or as an object
perceived at such and such a time, at such a place, etc. Likewise, with
regard to objects of sound etc. This process of perception or remembering is
wrongly held to be a personal feat, as, 'It is I who remembers, it is I whose
memory is excellent.' The Blessed One explained here that this view is
wrong, that there is nothing individual or personal in the process of
remembering; no living entity involved, just an insubstantial phenomenon; it
is of the nature of non-Self.

REASONS SHOWING THAT SAÑÑĀ IS NON-SELF

To continue to explain how saññā is not self: "Bhikkhus, perceptions, saññā

is not self; if perceptions were self, then it would not tend to afflict, oppress;
And one should be able to wish for and manage thus: "let my perception be
thus (all wholesome); "let my perception be not thus (unwholesome).

Were perceptions, a living entity, one's inner substance, there is no reason

for it to inflict and oppress on one's self. It is not the usual thing to cause self
injury and harm. It should be possible to manage in such a way that only
good things are allowed to arise to be remembered, bad things are not
allowed to arise to be remembered. But since perception is oppressing and
does not yield to one's wish, it is not self.

DIRECT STATEMENT OF PERCEPTION BEING NOT SELF

"But Bhikkhus, in reality, perception is not self, so it is oppressing. And no

one can wish for and manage; 'let my perception be thus (all wholesome); let
my perception be not thus (unwholesome).

One can view perception from the angle of its good aspects. Cognition of
things and objects by way of their characteristics is certainly very useful. So
also retentive memory: remembering facts and retaining what has been
acquired from learning the mundane and supra-mundane knowledges is a
good function of perception, beneficial and helpful. But mental retention or
recalling to mind what is sad, sorrowful, disgusting, horrible etc, from bad
aspects of saññā which are distress and therefore oppressing. Some suffers
from haunting memories of the departed loved ones such as sons,
daughters, husbands or wives or of financial calamities that have fallen on
one. These lingering memories bring about constant sorrow and
consterration; only when such memories fade away, one is relieved of the
sufferings. Thus saññā whose function is manifested in recognition and
remembering is truly oppressing. So long as saññā is bringing back
memories of bereavements and financial losses, so long will sorrow and
lamentation cause intense suffering which may even result in death. This is
how saññā oppresses by recalling to mind the sad experiences of the past.

Suddenly recalling in mind, during a meal time of some disgusting, repulsive

object is bound to impair one's appetite. Having seen a dead body earlier in
the day, one may be disturbed in sleep at night by one's retentive memories
of it. Through fanciful imaginations, some may have visualised a dangerous
situation which they keep on anticipating with intense suffering for
themselves. Thus saññā oppress by bringing back distressing mental objects.
Hence saññā is not self, but of the nature of non-self, its appearance being
dependent on conditions.

Saññā cannot be manipulated as one wishes, so as to recall only those

experiences which are beneficial and profitable suppressing those which will
cause distress and suffering; it is unmanageable, ungovernable, not
amenable to one's will. And because it is unmanageable, ungovernable, it is
not self, nor a living entity, but mere insubstantiality, dependent on
conditions and circumstances.

We shall repeat the Myanmar translation of the Pāḷi Text:

"Bhikkhus, perception, saññā is not self; if perception were self then it would
not tend to afflict, oppress; And one should be able to wish for and manage
thus: Let my perception be thus (all wholesome); let my perception be not
thus (all unwholesome).

Saññā in one's own person, as stated in this text, is oppressing,

unmanageable, not subject to one's will. This is obvious, therefore, that
saññā is not one's self, the inner core, a living entity. But people in general
find, on recalling past experiences, that there are those which are retained in
memory and conclude, therefore, that, "It is 'I' who have stored these
experiences in mind; it is who recalls them. The same 'I' who has stored
them up has also brought them back to mind now." They cling to the belief,
therefore, there is only one individual, the self, who stored up and recalls
past experiences. This wrong belief arises because of lack of heedful noting
at the moment of seeing, hearing, etc and because of the fact that the real
nature of the phenomenon is not yet known by Vipassanā insight.
When constant arising and ceasing of the phenomenon of seeing, hearing
etc., is seen as it truly is through Vipassanā insight, then realization dawns
that saññā is also a natural phenomenon of constant arising and ceasing.

Here, it may be asked, in view of impermanent nature of saññā , how does

recollection take place of things which were cognised and known previously?
The retentivity-the retentive power of preceding saññā is handed on, passed
on to the succeeding saññās. At this retentive power increases on being
inherited by the succeeding generations of saññā , some people become
equipped with the faculty of recalling past life. This is how the perception in
the life-continuum or death-consciousness of past life ceases but arises
again, with reinforced power of recalling, as the birth consciousness and life-
continuum of the present life.

It is because of this handing over of retentive power by the pervious saññās

to the succeeding saññās that we can recollect both what is wholesome and
pleasant as well as that which is unwholesome and unpleasant. Without even
thinking about them, the experience of days gone by may re-surface
sometimes. The Yogīs engaged in Satipatthāna meditation may be recalling,
as his concentration gets stronger, episodes which and happened earlier in
his life, in childhood etc. The Yogī should dispose them off by noting them as
they appear. Remorsefuless over past mistakes, faults in words and actions
may lead to worry and restlessness in the course of meditation. Worry is a
form of hindrance, and it should be discarded by taking note of it. Worry and
restlessness may become a great hindrance deterring progress in
development of concentration and Vipassanā insight. Thus perception which
recalls past incidents producing worry and fret is oppressing. For this reason,
it may be taken that saññā is not self.

As explained in the pervious discourse, there are four ways of clinging to atta
and saññā is concerned with three of them namely, Sāmi atta, Nivāsī atta
and karaka atta.

Thinking that there is control over perception, remembering things as willed

and not remembering things when there is no wish to do so, is Sāmi atta
clinging, that is exercising control over the process of remembering. This
Sāmi atta clinging is rejected by the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta which states that
it is not possible to say of perception, "Let perception be thus (all
wholesome), let perception be not thus (all unwholesome).

Thinking there is Atta, living self ever present in the body, constantly
engaged in the task of remembering things, is Nivāsī atta. This type of
clinging can be discarded by taking note of every mental phenomenon which
makes its appearance. By doing so one perceives by one's own knowledge
that the remembered things keep appearing afresh and vanishing instantly.
Also by taking note of the past incidents in one's life as they reappear in the
mind's door, one comes to realize that there is no such thing as permanent
retentive perception. There is only recurrent phenomenon renewing itself by
arising and ceasing incessantly. This realization drives home the fact that
there is no permanent self, living entity, residing in one's body and doing the
task of remembering, recollecting.

Thinking it is I or self which is doing the action of remembering or

recollection is Karaka atta clinging and this may also be removed by
meditative noting. When perception takes place of every sight or sound, the
meditative noting observes its arising and vanishing. When it is thus
observed that perception of sight or sound arises and vanishes, there comes
the realization that perception of sight and sound is merely a recurrent
mental phenomenon and not the action of any abiding self or inner
substance. And in accordance with the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta; it cannot be
managed in such a way that only pleasant wholesome memories persist for
ever and that memories of unpleasant, unwholesome incidents fade away
into oblivion. Since it is thus ungovernable, uncontrollable, realization comes
to Yogī that perception is not self, living entity, but merely a natural process
dependent on conditions, renewing itself incessantly and vanishing. The
Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta was discoursed by the Blessed One specifically for the
purpose of removing the Atta clinging through such personal realization of
the true nature (of the khandhās).

Here question may arise what difference exists between perception at the
moment of contact and heedful note-taking at the moment of occurrence
according to the Satipatthāna. The answer is that there is a world of
difference between the two. In fact it may be said that the two are
diametrically opposed to each other in purpose of objective. Saññā perceives
so as to retain every thing that is seen, heard etc, in memory so that it may
be recalled. It may take in the form, shape or condition of the object
observed; whereas meditative note-taking according to the Satipatthāna
method is concerned just with the passing events of the nāma, rūpa so as to
realize the impermanent nature, unsatisfactoriness and insubstantiality.

This should be sufficient elaboration on the aggregates of perception being

not self. We shall go on to explaining how saṅkhāras, the aggregates of
mental formations or concomitants is not self.

SAṄKHĀRAS ARE NOT SELF, THE LIVING ENTITY OF ATTA

"Saṅkharā, bhikkhave, anattā. Saṅkhāra ca h'idam bhikkhave attā
abhavissamsu nayidam saṅhāra ābādhāya samvat-tayum labbhetha ca
saṅhāresu evam me saṅhāra hontu evam me saṅhāra ma ahesumti. Yasmā
ca kho bhikkhave saṅhāra anattā, tasmā saṅhāra abādhāya samvattati; na
ca labbhati saṅhāresu evam me saṅkhāra hontu, evam me saṅkhāra mā
ahesumti."

"Bhikkhus, saṅkhāras are not self."

Here, it should be noted that saṅkhāras are of two kinds: Conditioned things
and Conditioning things. The conditioned things are those aggregates that
have arisen through such causes as kamma (volitions activity), mind, climate
(seasonal conditions) and nutriments. Immediately after the rebirth
consciousness, mental and material phenomena arising as resultants of
kamma spring up. Vipāka types of consciousness with its concomitants and
Hadaya rūpa together with kamma produced rūpas such as eye, ear, nose,
tongue and body spring up in this way. They are all conditioned things,
resultant effects of kammic activities and are called resultant saṅkhāras as
conditioned by kamma.

Likewise, mind produced rūpas and also resultant saṅkhāras. Physical

changes involved in acts of bending, stretching, moving, going, standing,
sitting, talking, smiling are examples of such resultant saṅkhāras. Being born
of thoughts generated by a person, they are known as resultant saṅkhāras
conditioned by mind.

With regard to mind and its concomitants, they are both mutually
conditioned and conditioning and we have thus saṅkhāras as causal agents
as well as saṅkhāras as resultants.

Rūpas produced by climatic conditions are resultant saṅkhāras conditioned

by climatic conditions. Rūpas that arise through intake of food are resultant
saṅkhāras conditioned by nutriments.

Finally all the succeeding mental states with all their concomitants are
resultant saṅkhāras being dependent on the preceding mental conditions
and their concomitants for their arising. All such aggregates which arise
because of kamma, mind, seasonal conditions and food are resultant
saṅkhāras as conditioned by their respective causes. This is summarised in
the famous formula:
Sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā; Sabbe saṅkhāras dukkhā--

All things conditioned by respective causes are impermanent; all things

conditioned by respective cause are suffering, dukkha.

These are aggregates of nāma, rūpa which manifest themselves when

seeing, hearing etc, the five groups of grasping which must be realized by
Vipassanā insight as being impermanent, unsatisfactory and insubstantial.
The Blessed One has exhorted in the above formula that they should be seen
as such. In order to see them in such light, one must take heedful note of
every arising of these aggregates as they appear. While observing them in
this way, as concentration gets strengthened one becomes aware that the
aggregates are arising and vanishing incessantly. In accordance with the
Commentary statement, Hutvā abhavato, it is impermanent because it
perishes after having arisen. And in accordance with the Commentary
statement, Udayabbaya patipilanato, it is fearsome being oppressed by
constant arising and perishing. This is the manner of contemplation
conforming to the words of the Blessed One.

GOING AGAINST THE WORDS OF THE BLESSED ONE

There are people who are damaging and harming the Buddha's Dispensation
by teaching in a way diametrically opposite to what the Buddha had taught.
In the above formula of 'Sabbe saṅkhārā etc' they are teaching saṅkhārā to
mean "not conditioned things as explained above, but as "activities". Thus
according to them, the above formula means 'All activities are dukkha'.
Hence they admonish against any kind of activity such as giving alms,
keeping precepts and practising meditation. These activities will produce
only dukkha. They advise, therefore, to keep the mind as it is. Such
preachments find ready acceptance by uninstructed persons and by those
who are not keen to put in efforts in meditation practice. It can be seen by
any one, even with a limited knowledge of the teaching, that such
preachments are going against the words of the Buddha. Accepting such
preachments which go against the words of the Buddha amounts to rejecting
the teaching of the Blessed One. Once the teaching is rejected, one will find
oneself outside the dispensation of the Buddha which is a matter for serious
consideration.

In this Pāḷi text, Sabbe saṅkhārā dukkha, saṅkhāra means 'conditioned

things', resultants of determining conditioners and not 'activities' of 'making
efforts'. To recapitulate: In Sabbe saṅkhārā dukkha, saṅkhārā means
resultant aggregates produced by conditioning circumstances. It does not
mean 'activities' or 'efforts' to make good deeds. All saṅkhāras as
conditioned things are to be contemplated on as impermanent and suffering.
It is wrong to interpret 'saṅkhārā' in this context, as meritorious activities.
What is required here is to observe and note carefully all the conditioned
aggregates in one's own body until their real nature is seen and dispassion
developed over them.

SAṄKHĀRA IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS SUTTA

The saṅkhāras we have described so far, the conditioned things produced by

kamma, mind, seasonal changes and food have no connections with the
saṅkhāra mentioned in this Sutta. In the context of this Sutta, saṅkhāra
means one of the five aggregates, namely, mental formations or mental
activities which condition things and produce kammic efforts.

The Khandavagga Samyutta Pāḷi text gives the following definition: That
which brings about physical, vocal and mental activities is saṅkhāra (of
saṅkhārakkhandā). Of the five aggregates, the aggregates of matter has the
quality of being changed or transformed by opposing circumstances. It
cannot by itself bring about any action or change, but it has substantive
mass, the actions of the saṅkhāras are manifested in its material body which
then appear to be doing the action. The aggregates of sensations (vedanā)
experience the sensations, pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. It cannot effect
any action productive of results. Neither can the aggregate of perception
which merely recognizes or remembers things, just like a clerk in a office
records his note in the note book for future reference. The aggregate of
consciousness also just knows that a sight is seen, a sound is heard, etc. It is
not capable of causing any action. It is the aggregate of saṅkhāra which is
responsible for physical, vocal or mental deeds such as going, standing,
sitting, laying down, bending, stretching, moving, smiling, talking, thinking,
seeing, hearing, etc. The wish to go, stand, sit or sleep is expressed by this
saṅkhāra. All the three kinds of physical, vocal, mental activities are
instigated and organized by this saṅkhāra.

To think that all these activities are carried out by one's self is to hold the
wrong view of self in the saṅkhāra and is known as Kāraka atta clinging.

To think that this self, doing all the activities resides all the time as a living
entity in one's body is to hold the wrong view of Nivāsī atta clinging.
Thinking that this self, living entity in one's body can act according to its
wishes; that its actions are subject to its will is Sāmi atta clinging.

The saṅkhāra are held to by all these three modes of clinging. In reality,
however, there is no self, no living entity to cling to but merely natural
processes happening according to their own conditions and circumstances.
The Blessed One, therefore, taught that saṅkhāras are not living entities that
carry out these activities. From the viewpoint of common man, there
obviously exists a living entity that executes the actions of going, standing,
sitting etc. But the Blessed One refutes his belief by stating:

REASONS WHY SAṄKHĀRAS IS NOT SELF

"Bhikkhus, were saṅkhāras, volitional activities, self, inner core, they would
not inflict and it should be possible to say of saṅkhāras, 'Let saṅkhāras be
thus' (all wholesome); let saṅkhāras be not thus (unwholesome); and
manageable as one wishes."

These saṅkhāras are mental states headed by cetanā, volition. There are
fifty-two kinds of mental states; excepting the two states of sensation and
perception, the remaining fifty mental states constitute the aggregate of
mental formations, saṅkhārakkhandā. In Sutta discourses, only cetanā, the
volition is enumerated as representing the saṅkhāra activities. But according
to Abhidhammā, we have other mental formations such as attention
(manasikāra), initial application of thought (vitakka), sustained application
(vicāra), zest (pīti), greed (loba), hate (dasa), delusion (moha), non-greed,
non-hate, non-delusion etc., that can produce kammic effects. These fifty
kinds of mental formations are responsible for all kinds of activities. It is
these fifty mental formations which instigate and direct actions such as
going, standing, sitting, sleeping, bending, stretching, smilling, speaking, etc.
These actions are being carried out as directed and motivated by the
saṅkhāras which also instigate and direct mental activities such as thinking,
seeing-consciousness, hearing-consciousness.

HOW SAṄKHĀRAS OPPRESS

The Blessed One had urged us to reflect in this way: Were saṅkhāras, which
are responsible for all the actions self, the living entity, in one's self, they
would not have been oppressing. Actually they are oppressing in many ways.
Engaging in activities out of desire or greed, one finds oneself exhausted and
distressed. Speaking something which should not be spoken, one find
oneself embarassed. Doing things which should not be done one gets
punished for criminal offences. One burns oneself with longing desires for
which one suffers loss of appetite, loss of sleep etc. Doing evil deeds such as
stealing or telling lies, one lands up in states of woe undergoing intense
miseries.

Likewise, volition accompanied by hate motivates actions, vocal as well as

physical, which are not wise and produce distress and suffering. Volition
accompanied by delusion, conceit and wrong views leads one similarly to
distress and suffering in the present life and in the states of woe. These are
various ways by which saṅkhāras oppress. Were saṅkhāras self, it would not
be oppressive in the manner.

SAṄKHĀRA IS NOT AMENABLE TO ONE'S WILL

Were Volitional activities, saṅkhāras, self, one's inner substance, it should be

possible to arrange and organise in such a way that wholesome activities
productive of beneficial results only are carried out as one wishes, and not
those activities which will harm oneself. Actually it is not possible to manage
their activities as one wishes. One will find oneself engaging in activities one
should not do, speaking of things one should not speak of, thinking of
thoughts one should not think about. In this way it could be seen that
saṅkhāra is not amenable to management and control and is therefore not
self, not one's inner core. And the Blessed One had, to enable one to see
thus, taught directly:

"Bhikkhus, in reality, saṅkhāras are not self, not one's inner core. For this
reason, they tend to inflict distress. Furthermore, it is not possible to manage
and say of saṅkhāra: 'Let saṅkhāra be thus (all wholesome); let it not be thus
(all unwholesome).

Volitional activities are, therefore, not self, not inner core, but of the nature
of insubstantiality occurring in accordance with their own conditions and
circumstances. These volitional activities, accordingly, are oppressing; how
they are oppressing has been described above. Through bad companions,
through defective guidance of poor teachers and through wrong attitude of
mind, one gets involved in activities which one should not do, one should not
speak of, nor think about. With respect to mundane affairs, one gets
engaged in blame worthy actions, illegal activities and indulge in bad habits,
drinking, drug taking and gambling. Also because of greed or anger, one
speaks out that which should not be spoken about. Such activities result in
destruction of one's prosperity, punishment by legal authorities and loss of
friends and associates. From spiritual and moral standpoint, bad deeds of
killing, telling lies etc produce bad results, leading even to miseries in woeful
states. Thus volitional activities oppress by producing bad kamic effects.

Here we must recount a story of how unwholesome volitional activities of

slandering result in dire distress.

STORY OF A PETA WHO WAS TORMENTED BY PINS AND NEEDLES

Once the Venerable Lakkhana and Venerable Moggalāna came down from
the Peak of the Vultures to go round for alms-food. On their way down, the
Venerable Moggalāna saw a Peta by means of his celestial eyes. He saw
needles piercing and passing through the body of the Peta. Some needles
entered from his head to emerge from his mouth. Some entered from the
mouth and came out from the chest; some entered from the chest and left
from the stomach. Some pierced through the stomach leaving from the
thigh; some came in by the thigh and left by the legs. Some entered by way
of the legs and left from the feet. The Peta was subjected to great suffering
and was running about with intense pain.

The needles chased him whenever he ran and pierced his body. On seeing
his plight, the Venerable Moggalāna reflected on the fact that he had
become divested of all kammic effects that would land him in the existence
of Petas. Pleased with the thought of self-liberation, he made a smile which
was duly noticed by his companion the Venerable Lakkhana who asked him
the cause of his smile.

The Venerable Lakkhana was not developed enough to see the Petas; he
may disbelieve the story about Peta and cast doubt on the words of
Moggalāna. So the Venerable Moggalāna did not tell him then what he saw of
the Peta; he just told him to ask about it again when they got to the
presence of the Blessed One.

After the meal and when they reached the presence of the Buddha, the
Venerable Lakkhana repeated the question why the Venerable Moggalāna
had made a smile as they were coming down from the vulture peak. The
Venerable Moggalāna said then that he saw a Peta being inflicted with
piercing needles and he smiled because he realized on reflection that he had
become free from such unwholesome volitional activities.
Then the Blessed One said in admiration, "my disciples are well equipped
with penetrative insight, (mind's eye). I had seen this Peta on the eve of my
enlightenment while seated on the throne of wisdom. But since there was no
other eye witness of him, I have not said a word about this Peta. Now that I
have the Venerable Moggalāna to corroborate me, I shall tell about him."

The Blessed One said that while in human existence, that being had
committed the grievous misdeed of slandering for which unwholesome
saṅkhāras he had to undergo intense suffering, miseries for many lakhs and
lakhs of years. Having come up from that abode, he had become this Peta to
suffer for the remaining portion of the resultant saṅkhāras.

The Peta was invisible to the ordinary vision. Hence the Venerable Lakkhana
did not see him. The needles that kept on piercing and pestering the Peta did
not fall upon other creatures or beings. They were inflicted only on the Peta
who had done unwholesome volitional activities before. This is then an
example of how saṅkhāra is oppressing.

There were other Petas also visible to the Venerable Moggalāna. For
example, there was the cattle slaughterer who had become a Peta chased by
vultures, crows, and eagles, who attacked him with their beaks. The poor
Peta was shrieking wildly and running about to escape from the merciless
attacks of the birds. Then there was the bird hunter who had become a Peta
in the shape of a piece of meat. He was similarly pestered by vultures crows
and eagles and he was also wailing and fleeing from the attacking birds. The
sheep slaughterer had no outer skin covering in his body. A bloody, messy
lump of flesh, he was also target of attack by vultures, crows and eagles and
he too was shrieking and fleeing from the birds. The Peta who was the pig
slaughterer before had knives and two edged swords falling upon him and
cutting him up. The hunter of wild animals had spears piercing him. They
were all running about wildly, shrieking and bewailing. Furthermore, the
Venerable Moggalāna saw Petas who were suffering because of
unwholesome saṅkhāras such as torturing others and committing adultery.
They serve as further examples of oppressive nature of unwholesome
saṅkhāras.

The denizens of the lower worlds, creatures of the animal world, are
undergoing sufferings because of unwholesome saṅkhāras which they had
done in the past. In this human world, miseries due to difficulties of earning
livelihood, to illness and diseases and to maltreatment by others have their
origin in the past unwholesome saṅkhāras. These saṅkhāras are oppressing
because they are not self, not one's inner core. It is not possible to manage
so as not as to let unwholesome saṅkhāras to arise and to let only
wholesome saṅkhāras to appear. This is within the personal experience of
practising Yogīs. They want to develop only the Vipassanā saṅkhāras,
volitional activities confined only to meditation; but they find, especially at
the initial stages of meditation, undesirable distractions making their
appearance. Under the guidance of loba, greed, various thoughts suggesting
different procedures for meditational practices keep on arising. Other
thoughts under the guidance of dosa, māna (hate and conceit) make their
appearances to do this way, or that way etc. The Yogīs had to discard these
distractive thoughts by noting 'liking, desiring, thinking etc.'

As stated above, all these volitional activities tend to afflict one; they are
unmanageable as one wishes, therefore not self, not one's inner core, but
mere insubstantiality dependent on respective conditions. They may be
likened to the rain, the sun or the wind. We have nothing with the rain, no
control over it. When we wish for the rain, we may not get it unless such
conditions as rain, clouds, humidity wind elements etc permit. When the
conditions are right, we may get rain even if we do not want it. Likewise with
the sun; when covered by clouds, there is no sunshine even though we wish
for it. In the absence of the covering clouds, the sun shines brightly whether
we want it or not. The wind blows only when atmospheric conditions are
right. When conditions are not favourable, there is no wind however much
we wish for it. These external phenomena have nothing to do with us; we
have no control over them. Similarly, the volitional activities are the internal
phenomena over which also we have no control. They are happening in
accordance with conditions and are, therefore, not self.

We shall recite again the summary of the Pāḷi text:

"Bhikkhus, saṅkhāras are not self, the inner core; were saṅkhāras volitional
activities, self, inner core they would not tend to afflict and it would be
possible to say of them, "Let saṅkhāras be thus (all wholesome); let
saṅkhāras be not thus (all unwholesome) and controllable by one as one
wishes."

In reality, however, saṅkhāras are not self, not one's inner core. For this
reason, they tend to inflict distress. Furthermore, it is not possible to manage
and say of saṅkhāras. 'Let saṅkhāras be thus (all wholesome); let saṅkhāras
be not thus (all unwholesome) and controllable by one as one wishes.'

HOW REALIZATION OF NON-SELF COMES ABOUT

For the Yogīs constantly taking note of the phenomena of nāma, rūpa, it
becomes very obvious how saṅkhāras are not amenable to will, how they are
unmanageable. While contemplating on the movements of the abdomen and
the bodily motions and noting them as 'rising, falling, sitting, touching etc',
when stiffness arises, it has to be noted as 'stiffness, stiffness.' Then the
desire to change postures follows. This desire is nothing but mental activity
headed by cetanā, volition. It is cetanā which is giving silent instructions,
'Now, change the posture, change the posture.' The Yogī wants to continue
on noting without changing position but because of the insistent urgings of
cetanā, he changes the posture. This is an unwanted saṅkhāra.

Likewise, while noting the feelings of 'pain, heat, itchiness', posture is

changed as directed by the ungovernable saṅkhāra. Again during the course
of meditating, thoughts on sensual pleasures may appear. This is saṅkhāra
which the Yogī does not wish for. These have to be banished by incessant
noting. At the same time saṅkhāras may urge the Yogī to go and interview
some one, to talk to some one, to look around here, there or to do some
work. These are all undesirable saṅkhāras which rise up all the same
whether one likes it or not. These are instances of unmanageable,
uncontrollable nature of saṅkhāra. They should not be welcomed but
discarded by heedful noting.

'To think that there is a manageable, controllable self, inner core, is to hold
to Sāmi atta clinging.' The Yogī who takes notes of the processes of nāma,
rūpa as they take place, notices clearly that what one desires does not
happen, what is not desired is happening. In this way he can get rid of the
Sāmi atta clinging. As he observes the processes of origination and
dissolution taking place in quick succession, and sees that which is desired
to be maintained getting dissolved, Sāmi atta clinging abandoned. Nothing is
seen to remain stable; everything is dissolving, perishing. In this way, the
Nivāsī atta clinging which believes in permanent existence of self or inner
substance can be banished too.

'Belief in permanent existence of self, a living entity in one's body is called

Nivāsī atta clinging.'

Then the Yogī perceives also that any event takes place only when various
factors concerned with the event come together to fulfill the necessary
conditions for its happening. Take for instance the arising of eye-
consciousness. There must be the eye, the object of sight, as well as
sufficient light. Then there must be the intention to look. When there is the
eye and the object of sight, very clearly visible, the act of seeing is bound to
ensue. Likewise a sound is heard, only when there is ear, sound,
obstructionless space and intention or bending the mind, to hear. When
there is ear and a clearly audible sound, act of hearing will surely take place.
An act of touching will take place when there is object, tactile body, bodily
impression and intention to touch.
Seeing that respective resultant events of seeing, hearing, touching take
place when corresponding factors necessary for the arising of the event have
come together the Yogī decides that no self nor living entity capable of
causing to see, hear or touch exists, He thus banishes the Kāraka atta
clinging which holds there is self or living entity masterminding over seeing
all kinds of activities. In order to remove this Kāraka atta clinging, the
Blessed One had taught that saṅkhāra, volitional activities are not self, living
entity. We have fairly fully dealt with the exposition on saṅkhāra not being
self. We shall end the discourse here for today.

By virtue of having given respectful attention to this discourse on the

Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, may you all attain and realize soon, the Nibbāna by
means of the Path and Fruition as you wish.

Sādhu! Sādhu! Sādhu!

End of the Third Part of the Discourse on

The Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta.

Chapter 4
THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE ANATTALAKKHAṆA SUTTA

PART FOUR

(Delivered on the full moon day of Wāso 1325 M.E.)

PREFACE

Today is the full moon day of the Wāso, a propitious day, a holy day. A year
ago today we began giving our discourse on the Dhammacakkapavattana
Sutta after which we have continued discoursing on the Anattalakkhaṇa
Sutta sequentially. As to the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, we have so far dealt with
the account of how saṅkhāra is not self. Today we shall discuss how
consciousness is not self.

CONSCIOUSNESS IS NOT ATTA, SELF

"Viññāṇam bhikkhave anattā; viññānañca h'idam bhikkhave attā abhavissa,

nayidam viññāṇam ābādhāya samvatteyya. Labbhetha ca viññāne 'evam me
viññāṇam hotu evam me viññāṇam mā ahositi. Yasmā ca kho bhikkhave
viññāṇam anattā tasmā viññāṇam abādhāyā samvattati na ca labbhati viñ ñ
āne' evam me viññāṇam hotu evam me viññāṇam mā ahositi."

"Bhikkhus, consciousness is not self."

By consciousness is meant eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-

consciousness, tongue-consciousness, touch-consciousness and mind-
consciousness. These six kinds of consciousnesses are held to as self, living
entity: 'It is I who see; I see.' 'It is I who hear; I hear.' In this way all the six
cognitions of senses, six kinds of consciousnesses are attributed to one
single self, I. This clinging to self is ordinarily inevitable. Those objects which
are devoid of sense of cognition such as a log, a post, a lump of earth, a
stone are regarded as inanimate; only those objects invested with faculties
of cognition are regarded to be animate, living entities. Therefore, it is not
surprising that eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, etc is taken to be self,
a living entity. But in fact, eye consciousness, ear consciousness etc is not
self, a living entity. Therefore, the Blessed One declared that consciousness
is not self. He explained why it is not so as follows:

REASON WHY CONSCIOUSNESS IS NOT SELF

If consciousness were self, the inner substance, it would not tend to afflict. It
is not usual for self to oppress self. It should also be possible to manage so
as to have always wholesome states of mind and not to have unwholesome
attitudes appearing. But as a matter of fact, consciousness tends to afflict
and is not amenable to management and control. Consequently, it is not self,
the inner substance.

DIRECT STATEMENT OF CONSCIOUSNESS NOT BEING SELF

"Bhikkhus, in reality, consciousness is not self. Therefore, it tends to afflict

and it is not possible to say of consciousness, "Let consciousness be thus
(always wholesome); let consciousness be not thus (unwholesome)."

Of the fifty three kinds of mind (consciousness) and mental states (mental
formations or concomitants): generality of people are more acquainted with
mind, Myanmar's people talk about citta, mind. They rarely speak of the
concomitant such as phassa that always appear in conjunction with mind.
Furthermore, they are attached to that mind as I, self: 'It is I who sees, I see';
'It is I who hears, I hear' etc. Not only human beings but even Devas as well
as other creatures cling to the belief that consciousness is I, self. However,
consciousness is definitely not self; not being self, it tends to be oppressing.

HOW CONSCIOUSNESS IS OPPRESSING

Consciousness oppresses when seeing what is repulsive and horrible, when

hearing unpleasant sound, unpleasant talks; when smelling foul, offensive
odours; when tasting bad food; when feeling bad sensations of touch; when
thinking of depressing, distressing sad and horrible mental objects.
All beings like to dwell only on pleasant sights; but according to
circumstances, they may have to face horrible, and repulsive sights. For
unfortunate people, the majority of what they see is made up of undesirable
objects. This is how eye consciousness tends to oppress. Ever wishing to
hear sweet sounds and sweet words, circumstances may compel them to
listen to unpleasant sounds; stricken with misfortune, they may be
subjected, most of the time, to dreadful noises, threats and rebukes. This is
the way ear-consciousness is oppressing. Again, all beings like to enjoy nice,
clean smell; but they have to put up also with foul, fetid odours. This is how
nose-consciousness oppresses.

The oppressions by eye, ear and nose consciousness are not very apparent
in the human world, where as in the animal world, the world of Petas and
Niraya, the oppressive nature of these consciousness are vividly seen.
Creatures in the animal world are almost constantly seeing horrible objects;
hearing dreadful sounds, and those existing in filth have to smell putrid, foul
odours all the time. It goes without saying that Petas and beings in Niraya
will fare worse than animals. They will be all the time submerged in distress,
seeing bad sights, hearing bad sounds, smelling bad smells. In some Niraya
everything seen, heard, smelt, tasted, touched and thought about is
unpleasant; there exists nothing pleasant for them. They are being subjected
to oppression all the time by the six kinds of consciousness.

All men like to enjoy only good taste, but unfortunate people have to exist on
bad food. This is how tongue consciousness oppresses. In this respect too
the oppression is more apparent in the four nether worlds. Men like to feel
only pleasant sensations; but when circumstance would not allow, they will
have to put up with undesirable experiences, say, for instance, when they
are suffering from an illness. At such times their suffering is so oppressive
that they even yearn for instant death to get release from suffering. It is far
worse, of course, in the four nether worlds.

Men would like to live a carefree life all the time. Nevertheless,
circumstances would not let them lead such a life. Instead, there are many
who are gripped with depression, disappointment, sorrow and lamentation.
Some of them never get out of the trough of miseries and unhappiness all
throughout their life, victims of oppression by the mind consciousness.

CONSCIOUSNESS IS NOT SUBJECT TO ONE'S WILL

The oppressing consciousness is not subject to one's will. Arising as

determined by circumstances, consciousness is unmanageable and
uncontrollable. Although one may wish for a pleasant sight, in the absence of
pleasant objects, one cannot see a pleasant sight. On the other hand,
hateful, horrible sights will be seen. When there are unpleasant objects
around, and when the eyes, are kept open. This is an example of how eye-
consciousness, not being subjected to one's will, arises of itself, dependent
on conditions.

Likewise, although one may wish to hear only pleasant sound, in the absence
of pleasant objects of sound, pleasant voice and talks, etc., it cannot be
heard. Hence the necessity to keep oneself provided with a radio, a recorder,
or a cassette to produce, when desired, pleasant sound and voices.
Reluctant as we are to hear undesirable sounds, when there are such sounds
and voices, inevitably they will come into our ears. The ear-consciousness is
thus unmanageable, arising of itself, depending on conditions.

In a similar manner, although we like to enjoy sweet smell, if sweet smell is

not present, our wish cannot be fulfilled. Hence people provide themselves
with scents and perfumes and flowers. However unwilling we may be to
breathe in bad smells, when foul smells exist around, we have to suffer from
their smell and other physical illnesses too such as head-ache etc. This is
how nose-consciousness is not amenable to will and how it arises of itself
depending upon circumstances.

Although we wish to enjoy good taste, pleasant taste-consciousness cannot

arise in the absence of good food. It arises only when good food is taken.
Hence this wild pursuit after food, day in and day out. When taken ill, one
seeks relief and cure by taking bitter medicine, which we do not, of course,
relish. This is how tongue-consciousness arises of its own uncontrollably and
unmanageably.

Touch consciousness can be pleasant only when there are pleasant objects
such as fine clothings, comfortable bed, good seats etc. Therefore constant
effort has to be made to acquire inanimate and animate objects for delightful
sensations of touch. At such times as when it is extremely hot or extremely
cold, or when one is faced with dangers such as thorns, spikes, fires and
arms or when one is taken ill with a severe malaise, one has to suffer
however unreluctantly, from effects of undesirable touch-consciousness,
which is obviously uncontrollable, arising on its own, dependent on
circumstances.

Every one wants to have a happy, joyous, contented life. This can come
about only when one is well provided with sufficient wealth and means.
Hence the necessity to constantly endeavour for maintenance of such a way
of life. While thus engaged in seeking the means of a comfortable, joyous
living, thoughts about difficulties in every day life, about beloved ones,
husbands, sons, who have died, about financial and business problems,
about old age and debility, may arise to make one unhappy. This is how
mind consciousness makes its own appearance unmanageably,
uncontrollably.

RESULTANT OF A CAUSE

We have used the expression "In accordance with circumstances and

conditions." It is meant to connote circumstantial and conditional causes that
will produce a certain resultant effect; it means also that good causes will
give good resultants; bad causes will end up in bad effects. No resultant
effects can be brought about merely by one's own desire. A certain resultant
effect will arise from a given set of cause whether one like it or not.
Resultant effects are produced from respective causes and they are
uncontrollable and unmanageable. It is obvious, therefore, they are not self,
not one's inner substance. The Blessed One had therefore, stated that mind
consciousness is not self, because it is not amenable to one's will.

The Blessed One had taught thus to enable one to get rid of the Sāmi atta
clinging which holds that there is a self, inside one's person, which can be
controlled and managed as one will. When Sāmi atta clinging is removed,
Nivāsī atta clinging which believes there is a permanent self residing in one's
person is banished at the same time. When it is realized that resultant
consciousness is developed only from the conditioning causes and that it
soon disappears once it has arisen, it becomes obvious that there is no such
thing as permanently enduring self. For example eye-consciousness arises
only when there is eye and object of sight. Likewise, ear consciousness can
arise only when there is nose and odour; tongue-consciousness can arise
only when there is tongue and taste; body consciousness, only when there is
body and tactile object; and mental consciousness, only when there is
mental base and mental object. When these conditional causes are known
for the arising of respective results, the notion of a permanent entity, the
Nivāsī atta clinging will be discarded.

The Yogī who is taking note of the phenomena of nāma, rūpa at the time of
its occurrence will perceive clearly that, depending on conditions such as eye
and sight, consciousness such as eye consciousness arises and vanishes
recurrently. Perceiving thus, the Yogī clearly understands that there is no self
or living entity which is bringing about the act of seeing etc. He realizes that
there is only eye-consciousness which arises when right conditions prevail. In
this way, the Yogī gets rid of the Kāraka atta clinging, which believes all
actions, physical, vocal and mental, are being done by self, the inner
substance.
For those who cannot perceive, through heedful noting the true nature of
consciousness as it really is, it is held fast in the form of Sāmi atta, Nivāsī
atta, or Kāraka atta. It appears that the aggregates of consciousness is more
firmly attached to than the other aggregates. At present times, it is being
referred to as soul or living entity. In every day language, it is more
commonly talked about where as vedanā, saññā and saṅkhāra, although
mental concomitants themselves, are not generally referred to. People talk
as if it is the mind that feels the sensations, that recognizes things or cause
actions.

At the time of the Blessed One there was a disciple named Sāti who mistook
consciousness to be atta, clinging to the wrong view of self. We shall briefly
tell the story of Sāti.

THE STORY OF BHIKKHU SĀTI

Bhikkhu Sāti was declaring that he had understood and grasped what the
Buddha had taught. He claimed that the Buddha had taught:

'Tadevidam viññāṇam sandhāvati samsarāti anaññam.'

"It is the same consciousness that has been transmigrating and wandering
about from existence to existence. It is not another consciousness.

This was his understanding of the Buddha's teaching. He based his views on
the Jātaka stories such as king Vessantrā becoming the Buddha, Chaddan
elephant king becoming the Buddha, Bhūridat Naga king becoming the
Buddha etc. In the last existence as Buddha, there was not the material
aggregates of the king Vessantrā, nor of the elephant king and of the Naga
king. But the consciousness of the existence as Buddha was the same that
had existed previously as king Vessantrā, elephant king. Naga king etc; it
has remained undestroyed, enduring, stable throughout the rounds of
existence. This was how he understood and how he was recounting about
the Buddha's teaching. His belief is nothing but Nivāsī atta clinging to
consciousness.

Other learned disciples of the Buddha tried to explain him that he was wrong
in his view, but Sāti remained adamant believing that he knew the Dhamma
more realistically than other Bhikkhus. It is not an easy task to point out the
true Dhamma to those holding wrong views of it. They are apt to look down
on their well-wishers as being antiquated and behind the times (in the
matter of interpreting the Dhamma) unlike their leader who innovated the
new teaching of Dhamma. As a matter of fact, any one claiming to be of
Buddhist faith should ponder well to see whether his views are in accord with
the teaching of the Buddha. If one holds on to views which are not in accord
with the Buddha's teaching, one is then actually outside the dispensation of
the Buddha.

Failing to persuade Sāti to abandon his wrong views, other bhikkhus went
and reported the matter to the Blessed One who then sent for the Bhikkhu
Sāti. When asked by the Blessed One, Sāti repeated his views: "Based on the
Jātaka stories as recounted by the Blessed One the present consciousness is
the same as that one which had existed in pervious lives. That consciousness
has not reached destruction but passed on from existence to existence. This
is how I understand." The Buddha asked him what he meant by
consciousness.

He replied, 'The Blessed One, consciousness is that which expresses, which

feels, which experiences the fruits of good and bad deeds in this existence,
in that existence.'

"To whomever, you stupid one," remonstrated the Blessed One," have you
heard me expounding the doctrine in this manner? I have explained
consciousness as arising out of conditions; that there is no arising of
consciousness without conditions. Inspite of that you have wrongly
interpreted my teaching and attribute that wrong view to me. You have
caused the arising of many bad deeds; holding this wrong interpretation of
my teaching and committing the wrong deed of talking about it will cause
distress and suffering to you for a long time to come."

Sāti, however, refused to give up the view which he took to be right.

Dogmatic views are frightening. Sāti was a Bhikkhu disciple of the Buddha.
He followed the Buddha's teaching and claimed to have understood it. Yet
we find him obstinately refusing to give up his wrong views even when
exhorted by the Buddha himself, which of course amounted to not having
faith in the Buddha. Now a days too there are some 'religious teachers'
teaching that there is no need to keep the five precepts not to engage in
meditational practices. It is enough to follow and understand his teaching.'
When learned people of good will try to point out the true teaching to such
'teachers; who have entertained misleading notions of the Buddha's
teaching, they are said to have replied scornfully that they would not
abandon their views even if the Buddha himself came to teach them.'
There are many instances where non-Dhamma is being handed round as
Dhamma. It is essential to scrutinize any such teaching so as to weed out,
what is not the teaching, a concise statement of which is given below:

SUMMARY OF TRUE DHAMMA

1. Sabba pāpassa akāranam_ To abstain from all evil deeds, Physical

misdeeds such as killing, stealing, and maltreating should be avoided. Vocal
evils of lying, slandering, using offensive language should also be avoided.
Thinking of evil thoughts should also be abandoned. Evil thoughts could be
got rid of only by engaging in the practice of concentration and Vipassanā
meditation.

'Avoidance of all evil deeds, physical, vocal and mental, constitutes the First
Teaching of the Buddha.'

2. Kusalassa upasampadā_ To develop all forms of meritorious deeds such as

giving alms, keeping precepts and practicing meditation. With regard to
keeping of precepts, it may be fulfilled to a certain extent by avoidance of
evil deeds in pursuance of the first teaching. But one does not become
establish in Ariyamagga sīla, precepts pertaining to the Noble Path, by mere
practice of abstinence. It can be accomplished only through practice of
Vipassanā meditation till the path is attained; or practice of concentration
meditation or absorption concentration.

Some people talk disparagingly of concentration meditation. The Blessed

One himself had however recommended cultivation of the concentration
meditation too. When jhānic concentration is achieved, that concentration
can be used as an ideal basis for Vipassanā meditation. Alternatively, if
jhānic stage is not attainable, Access concentration may be tried for and this
concentration, when attained, may be used as a basic for Vipassanā
meditation. If even access concentration is not attainable, one has to work
for the momentary concentration of the Vipassanā meditation. Once it is
attained, the Vipassanā insights will become developed in their own
sequence till the Noble Path is accomplished.

In Buddha's dispensation, the most essential tasks is to acquire wholesome

merits of Vipassanā concentration and Vipassanā insight, since Noble Path
and Fruition is unattainable without Vipassanā meditation. Thus in order to
become equipped with the merits of the Noble Path and Fruition, the good
deeds of Vipassanā meditation must be developed. We cannot afford to
ignore any form of meritorious deeds, as the second teaching of the Buddha
enjoins fulfillment of all the three types of good deeds.

We are hearing about 'new teachings' which go against these first and
second teachings of the Buddhas. The propagandists of such 'new teachings'
said, 'the unwholesome defilement ( akusala kilesā ) do not exist
permanently; consequently, no effort is needed to dispel them. No effort is
needed either to perform good deeds of keeping precepts and practicing
concentration and insight meditation. All these efforts are futile and produce
suffering only. It must be definitely understood that all these new teachings
are diametrically opposed to the true teaching of the Buddha.

3. Sacitta pariyadapanam_ To keep one's own mind pure Through practice of

Vipassanā, the Path must be developed. With the Path developed thus, and
Fruition attained, the mind is completely free of defilements and hence
absolutely pure. According to the Commentary, the degree of purity to be
attained is no less than that of an Arahat. This exposition by the
Commentary is in full agreement with the teaching of the Buddha enshrined
in the Pāḷi texts. Nevertheless, those who are causing harm and injury to the
dispensation are discouraging the practice of keeping precepts, developing
concentration and Vipassanā meditation, saying they are futile efforts which
will land one in suffering only. "Keep the mind rested, not engaged in any
activity. Place it in a blank spot in one's person where no unwholesome
activities are developing. In this way the mind will remain pure. "This is a
teaching which is entirely devoid of reason, foundation and support. To
discourage the practice of sīla, samādhi, and bhāvanā is to despoil the
Buddha's dispensation. It is an impossibility to keep one's mind pure without
the practice of concentration and insight meditation. Consciousness is in the
nature of insubstantiality, uncontrollable, unmanageable. To assert that mind
can be kept as one will without the help of meditation is to refute the
Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta which states that it is not possible to say of
consciousness, 'Let consciousness be thus (all wholesome); let it not be thus
(all unwholesome). This is something to ponder well upon.

The last sentence in this concise statement of the Teaching says: 'Etam
Buddhāna sāsanam.' "These three namely, avoidance of evils, promotion of
all that is good, keeping the mind pure, are the Teachings, the exhortation of
all the Buddhas."

The Buddhist Dispensation thus constitutes concisely the three factors as

stated above. For the Dispensation to endure, to prosper, all evil deeds must
be avoided as far as possible by oneself; others should be taught as far as
possible to avoid evil deeds. One must perform as far as possible meritorious
deeds and teach others to do the same. If someone is found teaching the
non-Dhamma, 'Don't avoid evil deeds; don't do good deeds,' one must do the
utmost to prevent him from teaching such wrong views. One should purify
one's mind by practising bhāvanā and exhort others to do likewise. It is thus
for the purpose of safeguarding the Dispensation and promoting its
prosperity that we have to point out the wrong teaching and explain how
they have deviated from the right one.

We have digressed some what from Sāti's story by taking sometime

mentioning the dangers to the Dispensation from wrong teachings. Now to
continue with Sāti's story: When Sāti remained adamant holding firmly to his
wrong views, the Blessed One addressed the Bhikkhus:

"Have you ever heard me expounding the Dhamma in the way S āti
expressed?"

"No, the Blessed One. We have heard only that consciousness arise out of
conditions; and that there is no arising of consciousness without conditions,"
Then the Blessed. One explained further;

"Each consciousness arises because of its own conditions."

'Consciousness is named according to whatever condition through which it

arises; on account of the eye and visible objects arises a consciousness and
it is called eye-consciousness; on account of the ear and sounds arises a
consciousness and it is called ear-consciousness; on account of the nose and
odours arises a consciousness called nose-consciousness; on account of the
tongue and taste arises a consciousness called tongue-consciousness; on
account of the body and tactile objects arises a consciousness called tactile
(body) consciousness; on account of the mind and mind objects arises a
consciousness called mental consciousness. For example, a fire may burn on
account of wood and it is called wood fire, It may burn on account of bamboo
splinter, grass, cow dung paddy husk, refuse; then it is called splinter fire,
grass fire, cow dung fire etc. In a similar manner, consciousness is named
according to how it is conditioned.

In this Sutta concerning with Sāti's view, the Blessed One had given also a
comprehensive treatment of the Law of Dependent Origination. We have no
time to go into all this. We shall confine ourselves to dealing more fully with
the simile of fire.
When there is a forest fire, it might originate from burning of refuse or
burning of dried leaves. If there is constant supply (of fuels) and there is no
one to extinguish the fire, it rage on for miles around. It might seem that the
same fire continues on burning all the time. But careful observation will
reveal that the fire that burns the refuse is not the fire that burns the grass;
similarly grass fire is not leaves fire. Also the leaves fires, the fire that burns
a particular leaf is not the same as the one burning other leaves.

Even so eye consciousness and ear consciousness which appear to be one

and the same consciousness to ordinary persons are seen by careful
observers as distinct separate consciousness depending on conditions
through which they arise. When we consider even one form of consciousness
only, for example eye-consciousness we will find different consciousness
arising from different colours, white, black etc. Narrowing down to just one
colour, for instance, white, the Yogī who constantly takes note and who has
advanced to the stage of udayabbaya ñāṇa and bhaṅga ñāṇa will see in the
seemingly continuous and single consciousness of white colour, preceding
consciousness as separate and distinct from the succeeding ones.

The distinction is more pronounced in the case of hearing than in seeing;

similarly, in smelling and tasting, each consciousness is noted separately and
distinctly. The most numerous note taking is involved in the phenomenon of
touching and the distinction of each consciousness is also most pronounced
here.

When feeling the pain, careful noting as 'pain, pain, enables one to see
distinctly each consciousness of pain, part by part as it arises. Similarly
mental consciousness of thought and ideas can be noted as each
consciousness arises separately. If any thought or idea intrudes while noting
rising and falling of the abdomen, these should be noted off as they arise.
Usually the intruding thought or idea comes to cessation, as soon as its
arising is noted off by the Yogī, but if thoughts persist in arising conditioned
by the same mental objects, they should be observed making their
appearance turn by turn in sequence. When the thought moves over to
another mental object, the arising of separate consciousness is very
distinctly observable.

When Yogī can perceive the arising of each distinct consciousness with each
separate noting, he comes to realize personally the impermanent nature of
consciousness, its nature of suffering because of constant arising and
vanishing, its insubstantial nature because it is happening according to its
conditions, uncontrollable and unmanageable. It is most important to gain
such personal realization.
We have explained fully how the five aggregates namely, matter, vedanā,
saññā, saṅkhāra and viññāṇa are not self. We will recapitulate with
mnemonics on four kinds of atta clinging and on how consciousness is not
self.

MNEMONICS

1. Thinking there is a living substance inside one's person, manageable and

amenable to one's will is Sāmi atta clinging.

2. Thinking that the inner substance is permanent and enduring is Nivāsī atta
clinging.

3. Thinking that all three kinds of physical, vocal and mental activities are
carried out by the inner substances is Kāraka atta clinging.

4. Thinking it is this living substance which experiences all the good and bad
sensations is Vedaka atta clinging.

SUMMARY OF MYANMAR TRANSLATION OF THE PĀḶI TEXT

"Bhikkhus, consciousness is not self; Were consciousness self, it would not

tend to afflict and it should be possible to say of consciousness, 'Let
consciousness be thus (all wholesome); let consciousness be not thus (all
unwholesome).

Actually, consciousness is not self. For this reason consciousness tend to

afflict and it is not possible to say of consciousness, 'Let consciousness be
thus (all wholesome), let consciousness be not thus (all unwholesome), and
is not manageable at will.

Having explained fully how the five aggregates are not self, we shall bring
out, for your edification, further illustrations concerning the five aggregates,
being extracts from Pheṇapiṇḍūpama Sutta of Khandavagga, Samyutta Pāḷi
Text:

Pheṇapiṇḍūpamam rūpam, vedanā pubbulūpamā

Maricikūpamā saññā, saṅkhārā kadalupamā
Māyūpamañca viññāṇam desitādiccabandhunā.

RŪPA IS LIKE FROTH

Rūpa is like froth, which is seen floating about in the creeks and waterways,
made up of air bubbles, entrapped in droplets of water, These droplets of
water, blown up by air bubbles, congregate to form frothy scum, the size of a
human fist, a human head, the size of a man or even bigger. Casually seen, a
big mass of froth may appear to be of substance. When carefully observed, it
turns out to be insubstantial, useless for any purpose. Likewise, the human
body complete with head, body, hands and feet, in male form, in female
form, appears to be very substantial; it seems permanent, looks beautiful
and good, seemingly a living entity.

THE BODY IS INSUBSTANTIAL TOO

But when the body is subjected to mental analysis, it turns out to be just like
the mass of froth quite insubstantial - - a mere conglomeration of thirty two
abominable constituent parts namely hair, body hair, nail, toe nail, teeth,
skin, flesh, muscle, bone etc. On further minute analysis, it is found to be a
conglomerate of minute sub-atomic particles, invisible to the naked eyes. It
may be likened to a big pile of sand made up of minute individual sand
particles. Alternatively, we may take the example of rice flour or wheat flour
consisting of minute individual grains of rice or wheat powder: When soaked
with right amount of water, it turns into dough, a substantial mass; Which
can be quite big by using large amounts of flour. This substantial dough can
be shaped into figure of a man of massive size but not of one solid mass,
being made up of conglomeration of fine grains of rice or wheat powder.
Similarly, the body is not of one solid mass but made up of small particles of
matter massed together in one big heap; and just like the mass of froth,
devoid of inner substance.

There is no permanent core, no beautiful substances, no living entity called

self. The visible material qualities form a part of the body. Remove those
visible qualities and the body will become devoid of shape and form. The
earth element of extension (pathavī) forms that part of the body which is
manifested in the sense of touch, as rough, smooth, hard or soft. The
elements of heat or cold; the element of motion form the other parts of the
body. Remove these three elements and the human body which can be
touched and felt will no longer exist. The material quality of odour also forms
a constituent part of the body. The human body can therefore be sensed by
its odour; extract that too and nothing will remain by which human body may
be recognized or identified.

We see things because we have the sensitive material quality of eye; without
it the body cannot see anything just like a blind man. We also have sensitive
material quality of ear which enables us to hear; the sensitive material
quality of nose which enables us to recognize smell; the sensitive material
quality of the body with which we get the sensation of touch. All these small
but useful constituent material qualities congregate to assume the form and
shape of a human body, wholly contributing to its utility. Without them, the
human body will have no utilitarian value. As a matter of fact, without these
constituent parts the human form as such cannot come into existance.

As stated above, if these constituent parts are pulverized so as to make

them fall apart, then the human body will no longer exist. There will be left
only fine particles of matter. Furthermore, these sensitive material qualities
such as eye, visual objects are not existing permanently and enduring. They
keep on arising and vanishing, the new coming into the place of the old.
Thus this body is like a lump or mass of froth, just a conglomeration of
substanceless material qualities.

When this body is to be subjected to careful examination and analysis, one

should start from where phenomenon manifests itself vividly. When walking,
the material qualities of extension and motion become most prominent.
Therefore, in accordance with the Satipatthāna discourse, 'gacchanto vā
gacchāmīti pajānāti' (When going knows 'I am going'), the Yogī should take
note, 'going, going, raising, stepping out, dropping etc'. While standing, the
Yogī should note, 'standing, standing'; while sitting, sitting, sitting, touching,
touching, rising, falling, etc;' when the limbs etc are seen, it should be noted
as seeing, seeing when body odours are smelt, 'smelling smelling': when
limbs are moved and stretched, 'stretching, stretching'; moving, changing.'

When concentration gets strengthened by carefully noting as described, the

Yogī realizes that an act of going consists of desire to go and the motion and
expansion. Acts of standing and sitting are made up of desire to stand or sit
followed by a series of motion and expansion. Likewise, with bending,
stretching and changing postures. In an act of seeing, there is eye
consciousness and visual object; in smelling, nose consciousness and odor.
Each phenomenon is seen to arise for the moment, only to pass away
instantly. The limbs, hands and feet, the head, the shape of the body are no
longer felt and recognized as such. They appear merely as a recurrent
physical process, rising and passing away incessantly. At that stage, Yogī
comes to understand by himself how the body is like a mass of froth.

Perceiving thus, Yogī realizes that rūpa is impermanent, terrible suffering

because of incessant rising and vanishing. Not-self because it is happening,
not as one wishes but according to its conditions, not one's own inner
substance, not manageable, not controllable.

Rūpa is likened to froth,

Unstable, impermanent:

Constantly rising, vanishing,

T' is Suffering, not self.

VEDANĀ IS LIKE A BUBBLE

Vedanā is likened to an air bubble. When rain drops fall on the water surface,
little pockets of air find themselves trapped in the surrounding wall of water
forming minute bubbles. Children produce similar bubbles to play with, by
blowing softly from a blow pipe. Conglomeration of these minute bubbles
form a mass of froth.

These bubbles are formed whenever rain drops fall on the surface of water
only to vanish instantly. Vedanā which experiences the sensations is likened
to the bubbles, because of its nature of incessant perishing after arising. This
is in conformity with what the Yogī have known through personal knowledge,
but at variance with what ordinary people presume to be. Because ordinary
common people's view, on looking long at a beautiful object, is that the
pleasant sight remains for quite a long time.

When an unpleasant sight has been seen for sometimes, they think it will
also last for a long time. The ordinary object, neither pleasant nor
unpleasant, is also thought to last long, to remain permanently. In a similar
manner, whatever is pleasant or unpleasant to hear is believed to remain
long. Especially, the painful feeling is thought to remain for days, months or
years. Thus, ordinary people's view of feeling is not quite what really
happens-it quickly vanishes like a bubble. To personally realize this truth,
one must become engaged in observing constantly the psycho-physical
process happening inside one's body.

If engaged thus in observing constantly the psycho-physical process, the

Yogī will perceive at the stage of Udayabbaya and Bhaṅga ñāṇas, that
whatever is pleasant, unpleasant to see, to hear, to smell, vanishes instantly.
The passing away of painful feeling is especially vivid. Observing the painful
feeling as 'painful, painful,' with each noting is seen the perishing of each
pain. At the stage of Samāsana ñāṇa, painful feeling becomes more
intensely and more numerously noticeable. At each noting, the pain from
each place of observation vanishes; thus the pain from one place vanishes
when noted, from another place vanishes when noted, It goes on and on in a
similar manner. The pain vanishes when noted as if instantly removed by
hand.

Thus for the Yogī whose concentration has become strengthened, the
pleasant sight which is seen and noted vanishes quickly. But since there is
eye and visual object, the sight is seen again. Every time it is seen, it is
noted and it quickly vanishes again. The process thus goes on and on. The
same process takes place with unpleasant objects and neither pleasant nor
un-pleasant objects. Disappearance with each noting of pleasant, unpleasant
and neither pleasant nor unpleasant sensations of sound is more distinct.

So do the various sensations of smell disappear when noted. The taste

sensations are specially vivid to the Yogī who keeps noting the taste. The
delicious taste he feels while chewing the food keeps on vanishing and rising
with each act of his noting, The pleasant, the unpleasant and neither
pleasant nor unpleasant sensations of touch too arise and vanish when noted
as has been described.

Similarly, feelings of unhappiness, sorrow, sadness, happiness and gladness

will be seen, when subjected to heedful noting, that they vanish quickly by
noting. Thus feelings are just like bubbles, disappearing fast, impermanent,
untrustworthy, of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

Feeling is likened to bubbles,

Unstable, impermanent,

Constantly rising, vanishing,

T' is suffering, not Self.

SENSE PERCEPTION IS LIKENED TO MIRAGE

Sense perception which apprehends ordinary sense-objects (whatever is

seen, heard, touched or known) as reality is likened to a mirage. Mirage is
optical illusion caused by atmospheric conditions especially appearance of
sheet of water or pictures of houses in the hot gases that rise from the earth
in the midday sun of the last month of the summer, (Translator's note; Here
only a shortened account, instead of the full translation of the description of
the mirage on page 119 of the original text, is given).

Thus mirage is an optical illusion. Wild beasts such as deers etc roam about
in summer heat in search of water. When they see a body of water in the
distance, they hasten towards that place only to find a dry tract of land
instead of a pond or a lake. They have been misled by a mirage and put to a
great deal of trouble. Just as a mirage gives the illusion of a body of water or
of houses where no such things exist, so also saññā perceives people into
thinking whatever is seen, heard, touched or known to be a human being a
man, a woman etc. Having an illusory perception of whatever is seen, heard,
touched or known, people are engaged in multiple activities concerning
them, just like the deers of the wild forests who go after a distant mirage
taking it to be a mass of water.

To realize that perception is illusory and to save oneself from the sufferings
of pursuing after non-existent objects, one must take heedful note of all the
material and mental phenomena as they occur. When concentration gets
strengthened, it is seen that in every phenomenon there are only material
object to be known and the mind knowing it; later it becomes known that
each phenomenon is a related event of cause and effect. Finally it is
personally experienced that the knowing mind as well as the object to be
known keep on perishing; perishing while they are being noted.

Thus what was formerly held by saññā to be enduring permanent, an

individual, a being, a man, a woman, self, is now being seen as a deception
by saññā which is creating an optical illusion like a mirage. In reality, the
Yogī realizes that it is merely a phenomenon of incessant arising and
vanishing, of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

Saññā is likened to a mirage,

Unstable, impermanent;

Constantly rising, vanishing,

T' is suffering, not self.

SAṄKHĀRA IS LIKE A PLANTAIN TRUNK

Volitional activities are likened to plantain trunks. A plantain trunk looks like
an ordinary tree trunk, which has a solid, hard inner core. But when the
plantain trunk is cut up and examined, it will be found to be made up of
layers of fibrous material with no substantial, solid inner core. Saṅkhāra is
like the plantain trunk, void of inner substance. It consists of fifty kinds of
mental concomitants headed by cetanā, volition. The outstanding members
of this group are phassa, contact with the object; giving attention to the
object, manasikāra; ekaggatā, one-pointedness of mind; vitakka, discursive
thinking or initial application vicāra, investigation or sustained application;
viriya, effort, loba, greed, dosa, hatred, moha, delusion; māna, conceit;
diṭṭhi, wrong view; vicikicchā doubts; aloba, non-greed; adosa, non-hatred;
amoha, non-delusion; saddhā, faith, sati, mindfulness; mettā, loving
kindness; karunā, mercy; muditā, sympathetic joy etc., are all mental
concomitants forming saṅkhāra, Cetanā responsible for all volitional
activities (physical, vocal and mental) is its leading member. These saṅkhāra
dhammas are numerically large and being involved in all activities (physical,
vocal and mental) are very prominent. Thus saṅkhāras are mainly
responsible for the atta clinging that it is I; self, doing all these activities.

Saṅkhāras appear to posses a hard core of inner substance. In reality,

however, saṅkhāras are devoid of useful inner substance, the hard core. The
Yogī can see the reality by taking note constantly of the phenomenon of
nāma and rūpa. The Yogī who is constantly taking note while going, as
'going, going', 'raising, stepping, dropping', comes to notice also the arising
of the desire to go, when concentration becomes stronger. This desire to go
is also observed to vanishing and arising. Although desire to go is usually
described as 'mind to go', it is actually saṅkhāra under the guidance of
cetanā, volition. It is the volitional activity led by cetanā, that motivates the
action of going. Urged on by the cetanā, the act of going, involving raising,
stepping, dropping, is accomplished.

Before such knowledge is gained, there was the notion that it is I who wants
to go; I go because I want to go, a clinging to atta. Now that the desire to go
is seen to be perished away, the knowledge appears that there is no self,
only a phenomenon. The desires to bend, to stretch, to move, to change are
also seen in this true light. In addition, the effort put in to fulfill the desire to
look, the desire to see are also saṅkhāras making momentary appearance
and vanishing at once. It is realized therefore, they are void of essence, not
Self, mere phenomenon, passing away. Likewise, with regard to desire to
listen and effort made to hear in fulfillment of the desire to listen.

Further it is seen that thinking, vitakka; investigating, vicarā, and effort,

viriya, when noted as they arise, vanish instantly. Thus they are also devoid
of essence, not self mere phenomenon. As loba, dosa make their
appearance, they are noted as 'wanting, liking, being angry' and they soon
disappear establishing the fact that they are also not self, having no essence
nor hard core. When saddha, mettā, karunā, arise, they are noted as having
faith, confidence, wishing well, wishing happiness, having compassion etc.
They vanish away instantly. They are, therefore, not made up of substance
devoid of essence, not Self. This analytical knowledge brings home the fact
that saṅkhāra is like a plantain trunk, which reveals no solid inner core, when
cut open and examined layer by layer.

Saṅkhāra is like a plantain trunk,

Unstable, impermanent;

Constantly rising, vanishing,

T's suffering, not self.

CONSCIOUSNESS IS LIKE A CONJUROR'S TRICK

Becoming conscious of something is like producing a conjuror's trick. When

seeing an object, a person ordinarily knows he sees a man, a woman; he also
knows that 'I sees; it is I who see. (When hearing anything too, he knows, I
hear a man's voice, I hear a woman's voice. I hear, it is I who hears.' Getting
a smell, he knows. 'This is the smell of such and such a person, 'I smell;'
when eating he knows, 'this food I eat is prepared by such and such a
person, it is I who eats.' 'When touching he knows, 'I have touched so and so:
It is I who touches.' In thinking too he considers that,' 'I think, It is I who
thinks.' To know, too become conscious of things in this manner is, not
knowing things as they truly are; or to know wrongly judged from the
standpoint of the ultimate truth. Such wrong knowledge is not brought about
by the five viññāṇas, namely, eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness etc.
These five viññāṇas cognizes only what is ultimately true, namely visible
sight, sound, etc., not as the wrongly conceived objects of man, woman etc,
But at the end full process of a particular cognition (citta vītthi) when
reflection takes place with rising of mind consciousness (mano viññāṇa),
misconceptions, as man or woman with regard to the visible sight previously
seen are liable to occur.

For your general information, we shall briefly explain the process of cognition
with respect to process of seeing and process of reflection. If the eye has
caught sight of visible form, the flow of Bhavaṅga is interrupted to be
followed immediately by pancadvāravajjana consciousness that turns to and
considers the sensation. Immediately after that arises the eye consciousness
which first cognizes the sensation of sight, without any reflection obey it is
conventional terms man or woman etc. As it ceases, it is followed by
recipient consciousness, sampaticchana, a moment of reception of the object
so seen. After its cessation comes the investigating consciousness.
Santirana, the momentary examination of the object so received. After this
comes the stage of determining consciousness votthapana. When this
consciousness ceases, there arises for seven times in rapid succession with
much impetus, the impulsive or the active consciousness called javana. With
the cessation of the last javana, comes the registering consciousness.
Tadalambana, which is repeated twice holding on to the same object which
is still attracting the attention. At the expiration of this registering
consciousness, the processes of cognition is complete and there follows a
series of bhavaṅga, a passive state of mind like that obtaining in a deep
sleep.

To recapitulate;

The consciousness that arises from the bhavaṅga state is the mind door
consciousness avajjana; it is followed by eye consciousness and recipient
consciousness sampaticchana. Then comes the investigating consciousness
santīrana, followed by the determining consciousness votthapana. Then
followed for seven times in rapid succession the janava consciousness, the
impulsions; then the registering consciousness tadalambana appears twice
in succession. Thus every time a sight is seen, from the appearance of the
sense-door consciousness to the sinking of the last tadalambana, there are
altogether fourteen thought moments which complete a process of cognition
in a regular manner.

If the impression of the object is not very strong, it survives only as far as the
consciousness has reached its javana stage. When very enfeebled near
death's door, javana consciousness occurs only five or six times. When the
impression of the object is very obscure, the process of cognition runs up to
the stage of votthapana, after two or three thought moments of which the
process of cognition comes to an end. When Vipassanā is very strong, the
process does not advance till javana stage. It abruptly ends after two or
three thought moments of votthapana and sink back to the bhavaṅga level.
This is in accordance with the meditation instructions given to the Venerable
Pothila by the young novice who instructed that the process of cognition with
respect to five door consciousness should not sink to javana stage.

As staged above, in the process of cognition with respect to eye

consciousness, the object is only the ultimate visible sight, not the
conceptual form of a man or a woman. After running the complete process, it
sinks down to the bhaṅga which runs its course for some time. Then the
process of cognition with respect to the mind door, manodvāravīthi, arises
through reflection on whatever has been seen. Arising from bhavaṅga, the
mind door apprehending consciousness manodvāravijjana, appears, followed
by javana process which runs for seven moments and the tadalambana
consciousness which lasts for two moments. The whole course, therefore,
runs for ten thought moments after which it sinks down to bhavaṅga level
again. In this thought process, the object is just the reflection on the sight
that has been seen, not yet on any wrong concept of pervious experiences.

When the reflective process of cognition takes place for the second time, it is
the concept of form and appearance that have become its object -- the form
and appearance of a man or a woman. When the process is repeated for the
third time, it is the concept of name (of man or woman) that has become the
object. From then onwards, everytime there is a reflection on what have
been experienced previously the object is always wrong concept: 'I see a
man, I see a woman.' This is how consciousness plays conjuring tricks and
brings on wrong concepts in place of realities.

SUMMARY

1. In the first process of cognition of sight, consciousness registers only the

ultimate reality of sight.

2. In the first round reflection on what has been seen, there is still
consciousness of what has actually been seen namely the sight. No
misconcept has appeared yet. If at this stage, heedful noting is done, wrong
concept cannot come in. Cognition will rest only on the ultimate object.

3. In the second round of reflection, concept of form and shape of

man and woman begin to appear.
4. In the third round of reflection, the concept of name as man and woman
has appeared. Likewise in the process of cognition of sound, odour, taste and
touch, the same sequence of transition from consciousness of reality to
consciousness of concept takes place.

When consciousness of sight, sound etc arises or when the first round of
reflection on what has been seen, heard etc., takes place, if careful noting is
done instantly as 'seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching etc, wrong
concepts cannot comes in. The consciousness will rest on the reality of what
is actually seen, heard etc. That is the reason for taking note of 'seeing,
hearing, touching' at the instant of each arising so that consciousness will
remain with reality.

If note is taken as seeing, seeing while an object is being seen the object of
cognition will cease just with the fact of seeing; process of cognition of
concepts through reflection of what was seen cannot take place. In
accordance with the teaching 'diṭṭhe diṭṭhamattam bhavissati', just seeing at
the time of seeing and consciousness of seeing ends its course there.

Then there appears the analytical knowledge of the unknowing matter such
as eyes, sound etc of the body and the knowing mind which is consciousness
of the objects. There is also knowledge that seeing and noting appears
recurrently, rising and vanishing. Realization comes that there is only anicca,
dukkha, anatta.

Likewise with what is heard, smelt, tasted, touched or thought about.

Constant note taking of these phenomena will reveal the difference between
nāma and rūpa, their nature of anicca, dukkha, anatta. Realization comes to
Yogī "Previously, because there was not taking any note of the phenomena,
the wrong concepts are believed to be reality; the conjuring tricks have been
accepted as reality. Now that the phenomena are noted as they occur at the
moment of occurrence, there is not seen any such thing as self, atta; there is
only incessant arising and perishing. When seeing an object, the eye
consciousness immediately vanishes after it has arisen; there is no such
thing as seeing for a long time; there is only fresh arising of eye
consciousness with each act of seeing and its instant perishing.

Likewise with hearing, touching, thinking etc. There is no hearing for a long
time. With each act of hearing, the ear consciousness arises and vanishes
instantly. There is no touching for a long time. At each act of touching, the
touch consciousness arises and vanishes instantly. There is no thinking over
for long; with each act of thinking, the mind consciousness arises and
vanishes instantly.
Therefore everything is impermanent. Arising is always followed by instant
perishing; there is nothing reliable, trust-worthy; only terror and suffering.
Every thing happens not as one wishes, but as conditioned by their own
causes and circumstances just nature of Non-self.

Mere conjuring tricks, this consciousness,

Unstable, impermanent.

Constantly rising, vanishing,

T' is suffering, not self.

From this Phenapindūpama Sutta also, it is quite obvious that the five
aggregates are void of permanent substance, whole-some, pleasant inner
core, which is subservient to one's will. They are not self, but of the nature of
insubstantiality. We have amply made these points very clear. We shall end
our discourse here today.

By virtue of having given respectful attention to this discourse on the

Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta may you all attain and realize soon, the Nibbāna, by
means of the Path and Fruition of your wish.

Sādhu! Sādhu! Sādhu!

End of the Fourth Part of the Discourse on

The Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta.

Chapter 5
THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE ANATTALAKKHAṆA SUTTA

PART FIVE

(Delivered on the 8th waxing day of Wāso 1325 M.E.)

PREFACE

The series of discourse on the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta was begun on the 8th
waxing day of Nayone. Already four discourses have been given with full
expositions of the teaching on the five aggregates being non-self. From
today, we will go on to the second Part of the Sutta which described the
aggregates in terms of the characteristics of anicca and dukkha,
(impermanence and unsatisfactoriness). But before we deal with them, we
wish to explain before hand the characteristic of non self and how this
characteristic is hard to comprehend.

THE CHARACTERISTIC OF NON-SELF

All the nāma rūpa components of the five aggregates are Non-self. That they
are not Atta, Non-self becomes evident through their characteristics or sgins
of non-self. The Commentary describes these characteristics as below: That
it is not amenable to one's will is a characteristic of non-self. In this Sutta this
characteristics is expressed in these terms: 'It is not possible to say of rūpa,
"Let rūpa be thus (all wholesome)".

Further in this Sutta we find the expression, 'It tends to afflict.' Affliction or
oppressing should thus be taken as another characteristic of Non-self. Also
there is a query in the Sutta, 'Is it fitting to consider it a self that which is
subject to change?' Thus constant change and alteration is a characteristics
of non-self.
When these characteristics are observed in the cause of taking note of the
nāma rūpa phenomena as it is happening, the knowledge developed that the
aggregates of nāma rūpa are non-self, but mere phenomena; such
knowledge is termed Anattānupassanā ñāṇa, knowledge developed by
contemplation on the characteristics of non-self. The name of
Anattalakkhaṇa is given to this Sutta since it deals with the characteristics of
Non-self.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF NON-SELF IS HARD TO COMPREHEND

"The characteristics of impermanence and suffering are easy to understand,

but the characteristics of non self is hard to comprehend," states the
commentary of Sammoha. According to the Commentary, utterances easily
come to the mouth. "Oh, impermanence, not enduring," when a pot is
dropped accidentally and gets broken. Again, afflicted with boils or sores on
the body and with pain because of piercing thorns or pointed sticks, one
usually murmurs "Oh what trouble, what suffering." In this way the nature of
impermanence and unsatisfactoriness is clearly visible and easily
understandable. But the characteristic of Non-self is not so easily
comprehensible just like an object lying in the dark is hard to explain to
others.

The characteristics of impermanence and unsatisfactoriness are well known

either inside the Dispensation or outside it. But the characteristics of non-self
is known only in the Dispensation, it is non-existent outside it. The wise
hermits such as Sarabaṅga who were outside of the Dispensation could
teach only about the nature of impermanence and suffering; the doctrine of
Non-self was beyond them. If they could only teach this doctrine, their
disciples would have attained the knowledge of the Path and Fruition. But
since they could not teach it, attainment of Path and Fruition was an
impossibility outside of the Dispensation.

It is the unique quality of the attribute of the Exalted Enlightened One to be

able to teach and explain the doctrine of non-self. Teachers outside of the
dispensation could not handle this doctrine which is so subtle and profound.
The commentary states that the non-self doctrine is so deep that even the
Enlightened One had to employ either the characteristics of impermanence
or the characteristics of suffering or both of them to facilitate the teaching of
the doctrine of non-self.

The sub-commentary explained further that: 'In the above statement of the
commentary, the anicca and dukkha known outside the Dispensation are
mere conventional terms, by means of which idea of non-self could not be
known. Only the anicca and dukkha realized in the absolute sense could be
useful in explaining the doctrine of non-self. Making use of this sub-
commentary comments, we have described conventional and real concepts
of anicca-dukha in our book on Sīlavanta Sutta: reference to which may be
made for further information on them.

ANATTA EXPLAINED BY MEANS OF ANICCA

In Chachakka Sutta of Uparipaṇṇāsa Pāḷi Text we find Anatta explained by

means of anicca. According to this Sutta, the Yogī should know the following
six classes of six kinds:

1. The six internal bases namely eye, ear, nose etc.

2. The six external base namely sight, sound, odour etc.

3. Six kinds of consciousness.

4. Six kinds of phassa, impressions.

5. Six kinds of feeling.

6. Six kinds of desire, hunger for sight, sound etc.

Here 'should know' means, according to the Commentary, 'should know' by

means of vipassanā contemplation, by means of Ariya magga ñāṇa.
Therefore, whenever anything is seen, it should be mindfully noted so that
the eye and its objects of sight, the eye consciousness, the contact and the
vedanā that arises on seeing are all made aware of. And if liking and craving
for the object develops along with seeing, that rising desire should also be
noted as 'liking liking etc.'
Likewise, while hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, and thinking the six
classes of six kinds of objects should be known. To the Yogī who is aware of
these by noting each phenomenon of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting,
touching, thinking the knowledge is gained personally that eye, visible sight,
eye consciousness etc rising and vanishing away. The Yogī realizes,
"previously, it was thought that there is a permanent entity, an enduring
self. Now it is perceived by actual observation that there is only a natural
phenomenon of incessant rising and vanishing. Perceiving no self, no living
entity, the Yogī may even wonder for whom is he engaged in meditation.
Realization, that there is no self, is attained through fully understanding the
nature of impermanence. In corroboration of this practical experience, the
Blessed One continued to state in this Chachakha Sutta:

"The sensitive material quality of the eye, which serves as the base for eye
consciousness, rises and vanishes on every occasion of seeing; it is,
therefore, not permanent, not the seemingly enduring, everlasting entity,
the self. If one says, 'the eye is self,' it will amount to saying one's self, Atta
is arising and passing away, not stable. Therefore, it must be concluded that
the unenduring material quality of the eye is not self."

Likewise, similar conclusions may be drawn with respect to the visible form,
eye consciousness, eye contact and Vedanā resulting from eye contact,
liking and desiring for the sight, that they are not self. This is how the six
phenomena which become prominent at the moment of seeing are to be
regarded as non-self. In a similar manner, the six classes of the six kinds of
phenomena which are apparent at the moment of hearing, smelling, tasting,
touching, and thinking may also be regarded as non-self.

SEEING NON-SELF THROUGH SEEING DUKKHA

Anatta is explained in terms of dukkha in the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta itself: '

Rūpa tends to afflict because it is not self,' states the sutta. That which is
oppressing is a terror, a suffering; and it is very plain that a terrible suffering
cannot to be one's self, one's inner entity.

NON-SELF EXPLAINED IN TERMS OF BOTH ANICCA AND DUKKHA

To explain non-self in terms of both anicca and dukkha, the Blessed One
said, 'Rūpa is not permanent. What is not permanent is suffering. what is
suffering is not self. What is not self should be regarded with proper wisdom
according to reality thus: This is not mine; this I am not; this is not my self.'
In short, 'Rūpa is subject to change and suffering and is therefore, not self. It
is not proper to regard with acquisitiveness as mine what is really not self; it
is not proper to think vainly of oneself as I am, I can etc; it is not proper to
regard it as my self. 'In this manner should rūpa be viewed and regarded in
accordance with reality.

In a similar manner, vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa are also

shown to be not self by their nature of impermanence and suffering. We shall
find in the latter portions of the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, the nature of non self
being described in terms of anicca and dukkha.

The concept of anicca and dukkha is known and accepted outside of the
Buddhist teaching too. But the doctrine of non-self, refusing the existence of
living entity, is hardly acceptable to those outside of the Buddha's
dispensation. At the time of the Buddha, a certain wandering recluse by the
name of Saccaka came to the Blessed One and disputed with him on this
subject of non-self.

DISPUTES BY THE WANDERER SACCAKA

There was a wandering recluse by the name of Saccaka, who was a teacher
of the prince of Vasālī. The wandering recluse asked of Assaji, the youngest
of the group of five Bhikkhus, "How is Samaṇa Gotama teaching his disciples,
what are the chief instructions of his?". Assaji replied, rūpa, vedanā, saññā,
saṅkhāra, viññāṇa are impermanent, not self; That's how the master is
teaching us; these are his chief instructions."

Upon this, Saccaka, the wandering recluse said, "Friend, we hear an

utterance which is evil, unpropitious, We have been hearing that Samaṇa
Gotama used to teach this doctrine of anatta, to hear which is evil,
unpropitious for us. One of these days we may have opportunity to meet
with Samaṇa Gotama and rid him of this wicked, obvious doctrine of his, the
wrong view of nonself."

This is an example of how believers in atta look down upon this doctrine of
anatta. To hear what the Blessed One has taught about non self is utterly
evil and baneful for them. The wandering recluse even talked about ridding
the Blessed One of his 'wrong view'. Dogmatists are always of this frame of
mind; they run down others, holding fast to their own view. Even those who
are teaching in accordance with the Pāḷi canons are disparaged. Such people
who are reviling others are usually found to be deficient in their knowledge
of the texts and not to have much practical experience of meditational
exercise.

The said Saccaka had not yet made sufficient study of Buddha's teaching
and had no practical knowledge of the Dhamma. Yet he held a poor opinion
of it, feeling himself very much above and superior to it. Therefore, he made
an attempt to go to the Blessed One and to engage in contest of beliefs. He
was feeling certain to come out the winner in the contest and he wanted
people to witness his victory. He went to the Licchavis of Vesali and invited
them to accompany him, making a vain boast that he would whirl the
Blessed One round in the matter of doctrines just like a powerful man,
catching hold of a kid by his fleece, whirl it round and round.

When they reached the presence of the Blessed One, the wanderer asked
permission from the Blessed One to put questions to him. He then asked,
"Venerable Gotama, how are your disciples instructed?" What are the main
points in your instructions? The Blessed One's reply was exactly the same as
that given by the Venerable Assaji namely, "Rūpa, vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra,
viññāṇa are impermanent, not self. In this way I instruct my disciples. These
are the main points of teaching to my disciples."

The wanderer then began to introduce doctrinal matters into discussion by

way of illustrations. "Venerable Gotama, the seed and the shoot (cutting)
have to rely on the earth, depend on the earth for their growth into plants
and trees; likewise, every action that is done with vigour and strength needs
the earth for its support; in a similar manner, a person having rūpa as
substantial self, Atta, depends on it for both wholesome and unwholesome
activities. Likewise a person having vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, viññāṇa as
substantial self, depends on vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, viññāṇa for both
wholesome and unwholesome activities."

What is meant by this assertion is that: seeds and trees have to depend on
the support of the earth for their growth; so also all kinds of activities require
strength and vigour. They need the firm support of the earth. Similarly, the
wholesome and unwholesome activities are performed by individuals having
rūpa, vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, viññāṇa as self; dependent on these attas
are the activities carried out. Also, it is the atta that reaps the fruits (good or
bad) thereof. Were rūpa not self, where would be the support for the
performance of wholesome and unwholesome deeds; and who would enjoy
the fruits of these action?
It is outside the intellectual scope of the disciples to solve this doctrinal
matter of atta which is likened to the earth. Only the Blessed One could
handle the problem. So said the commentary. Accordingly, the Blessed One
intending to tackle the problem personally, asked of the Wanderer, "Saccaka
of the Aggivessana clan, Do you hold that rūpa is self, vedanā is self, saññā
is self, saṅkhāra is self, viññāṇa is self?"

"Yes, Venerable Gotama, I hold that view and these people here also hold
the same view."

The Blessed One urged him, "Saccaka of Aggivessana clan, leave aside other
people's view; let us hear what you hold as your own."

It was Saccaka's intention to share the blame, if his view of Atta happens to
be blameworthy with the others present there. But the Blessed One urged
him to confine his reply only for himself. He was thus forced to admit, that he
holds that rūpa is his atta, vedanā is his atta, saññā is his atta, saṅkhāra is
his atta, viññāṇa is his atta.

Then the Blessed One asked him, "Saccaka of Aggivessana clan, Rulers like
king Pasenadi, king Ajātasatta hold sovereign powers in their own dominions;
they kill of those who should be killed, punish those who should be punished,
and banish those who should be banished. They rule over their countries as
they will; is this not a fact, Saccaka?"

"Sovereign kings have indeed such authority over their countries: Even the
Licchavis, elected by popular votes to rule, hold such powers to kill, to punish
or banish in their own countries," replied Saccaka, going beyond the bounds
of the question put to him, not foreseeing what repercussions it would have
on his personal beliefs.

Thereupon, the Blessed One said, "Saccaka of Aggivessana clan you said,
rūpa is self, 'My Atta'; Could you exercise your control over that Atta, saying,
"Let this Atta of mine be thus; let this Atta be not thus."

The wanderer Saccaka was finding himself on the horns of dilemma. The
doctrine of self holds that it can exercise control as one will. The Sāmi Atta
clinging, which we have repeatedly mentioned before, believes that it can
manage self as it will. At this juncture, Saccaka had admitted that sovereign
kings had complete control over their kingdoms; it appeared that he would
have to admit that Rūpa which he regarded as self would be amenable to
management. If he did that, there would come the further questions whether
he would exercise control over his Rūpa so as to keep it youthful like the
rūpa of the Licchavi princes. If he replied that it could not be managed, then
that would amount of admission that there could be no control over rūpa and
therefore it could not be self. Finding himself in this difficult dilemma,
Saccaka kept silent without giving any answer.

The Blessed One repeated the question for the second time, but Saccaka
remained silent all the time. Before asking him for the third time, the Blessed
One gave him this warning: "Saccaka of Aggivessana clan, you'd better
answer my question. It is not the time to remain silent. When questioned by
a Tathāgatā for a third time, one has to come up with answer or else his
head will get split open into seven pieces."

At that time a celestial ogre was said to be hovering above Saccaka head.
Armed with thunderbolt, the ogre was poised to split open his head with the
thunderbolt. The ogre was visible only to the Blessed One and Saccaka and
invisible to others. It is somewhat like ghost manifestations of present days,
the ghost being visible to some, invisible to others. Saccaka was greatly
frightened by the sight of the ogre; but when he saw the rest of the audience
undisturbed in any way, he realized that the ogre was not visible to them. He
could not therefore, say that he had to answer the way he did, being in terror
threatened by the ogre. He knew also that he had no other refuge but the
Blessed One, to whom, therefore, he submitted: "May it please the Blessed
One to put the question; I am ready to answer."

Thereupon, the Blessed One asked; "Saccaka of Aggivessana clan, what do

you think of that? You said Rūpa is self; Could you say of that self, "Let this
rūpa be thus, let this rūpa be not thus, according to your wish?"

"No, the Blessed One there is no control over it", replied Saccaka,
contradicting himself thereby. He had said that rūpa is self; if rūpa were self;
it should be amenable to control. Now he said that there was no control over
rūpa. This amounts to admission that rūpa is not self, one's inner substance.

When the Blessed One heard him contradicting himself, he was cautioned
thus; 'Saccaka of Aggivessana clan, take heed, be careful with what you say
in reply; what you said later is not in accord with what you have said earlier.
What you have said earlier is not in accord with what you said later.
'Now, Saccaka of Aggivessana clan, what do you think of that? You said
vedanā is self; could you say of that self, "Let vedanā be thus, let this
vedanā be not thus," according to your wish.'

"No, the Blessed One, there is no control over it."

Similar questions were asked concerning saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa

prefaced by the same caution to take heed so as not to be contradicting
himself. Saccaka also provided similar answers saying there was no control
over each of them.

Then the Blessed One asked him whether rūpa is permanent or

impermanent. He answered, 'Impermanent, Sir' "What is not permanent, is
that suffering or happiness 'Suffering Sir', answered Saccaka." Then, what is
impermanent, suffering and subject to change, is it proper to regard it as
'This is mine, This I am, This is my self.' "Not that, the Blessed One", he
replied. The same questions were repeated with regard to vedanā, saññā,
saṅkhāra and viññāṇa and similar replies were given by Saccaka.

Then he was further questioned thus: "Saccaka of Aggivessana clan, what do

you think of that? A certain person holds fast to these aggregates of
suffering, clinging to them, attached to them, clasping them firmly, believing
them to be 'This is mine, This I am, This is my self;' Is there possibility for this
person to understand suffering truly and well, to end this suffering. "This
question is quite subtle and profound. The aggregates of nāma and rūpa
which manifest themselves at the six doors, at every moment of seeing,
hearing, touching, knowing .. one who takes delight in them, and thinks them
to be, "This I am, This is mine, This is myself' would this person know that
these aggregates of nāma and rūpa are suffering; would it be possible for
him to end these sufferings, to be rid of these sufferings.

Saccaka provided the answers according to the questions asked. "Venerable

Gotama how could it be possible for him to know the truth of suffering, to
end the suffering, impossible Lord Gotama.

In that case, the Blessed One asked, 'are you not the person who holds fast
to these aggregates of suffering, clinging to them, attached to them,
clasping them firmly, the person who believes them to be "This is mine, This
I am, This is my self", Saccaka replied. "The Blessed One I am verily that
person, Sir How could I be otherwise?"
The wanderer Saccaka had thought very highly of his own belief in Atta. He
was very vain with regard to it, spoke boastfully about it, but when examined
by the Blessed One he was forced to admit all along the error of his views.
His belief in Atta, Atta vāda, was thoroughly annihilated. To give a final blow
to his bloated ego, pride and vanity, the Blessed One taught thus by way of
an illustration:

"Saccaka of Aggivessana clan, suppose a person wanting the heartwood or

draymen of a tree went into the forest to look for it. Seeing a plantain tree
and believing to find the heartwood inside it, he fell the tree cutting it down
from the bottom of it. He cut off the top part of the tree and began to peel
off the outer skin of the plantain trunk. Not to say of the inner heartwood, he
could not even find the outer wood fiber that surrounds the inner pith in the
plantain trunk.

"Exactly as in that example, when I examine your doctrine in atta, it is found

to be void of essential inner substance. Did you not make the boast amidst
the crowd in the city of Vesāli: "There is no one who can withstand me in any
contest of doctrines, without trembling, without sweating; I have not yet
come across any recluse or Brahmin, who can withstand me without
trembling nor sweating, nor any one who has admitted himself to be an
Arahat (fully accomplished Worthy One) and who has become all
Enlightened. Even a lifeless wooden post, not endowed with mind or mental
concomitants, when challenged by me in the matter of doctrine, would
tremble and tumble down, not to say of a human person. "Had you not made
such boasts, Saccaka of Aggivessana clan? As it happens, some of the sweat
from your brows have soaked through your upper robe and are dropping on
the ground. As for me, I have no sweat on my body, "So saying the Blessed
One exposed a portion of his body so as to let people see for themselves,
there was indeed no sweat on him.

The wanderer Saccaka, having nothing to say in reply, remained silent,

embarrassed and crest-fallen, with slumping shoulders and lowered head.
Then one of his followers, a Licchavi prince by the name of Dummukha rose
and asked permission from the Blessed One to bring up an illustration. On
being permitted by the Blessed One, Dummukha, the Licchavi prince, said,
"The Blessed One, there was a tank not far from the town and there was a
crab living in the tank. The young people of the town came out from the
town and arriving at the tank, caught hold of crab and place it on land. That
crab was clumsily raising its hand and feet and waving them about. Every
time the crab raised its hand or feet, the young people had it smashed off by
beating it with sticks or broken pieces of pottery. With its limbs thus crushed,
the crab could not make its way back to the tank. In a similar manner, the
Blessed One had destroyed all the thorns and spikes of Saccaka's wrong
view, pastures (haunts) of wrong views, and movements of his wrong views.
Thus there is no more possibility for Saccaka to approach the Blessed One
again to dispute over doctrinal matters."

While Dummukha, the Licchavi prince was addressing the Blessed One, other
Licchavi princes were anxiously awaiting their turn to denounce the
wanderer Saccaka by more illustrative stories. Seeing the dangerous
situation developing in which the Licchavi would be heaping disgrace on him,
one after another Saccaka decided to stop Dummukha from marking further
remark. "Hold on Dummukha, we are having our discussions with the
Venerable Gotama, not with you. "Then he addressed the Blessed One, "The
Venerable Gotama, let those be, what we had said and what others have
said. I wish to bring them to a close. There have been such random talks."

Then he asked the Blessed One how one had to go about (practise) in the
Buddha's dispensation to reach the stage where sceptical doubts are
overcome and courage of conviction attained. The Blessed One taught him
that one has to engage oneself in the practice of meditation until one attains
the stage when one can see, with Vipassanā insight and knowledge of the
Path, that the five aggregates of rūpa, vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra and viññāṇa
which are liable to be misconceived as 'This is mine, This I am, This is my
self" are in reality "This is not mine. This is I am not, This is not my self.'

Saccaka wanted to know also how to practise to become an Arahat. The

Buddha told him that, after realization that the aggregates of "nāma and
rūpa are not mine, This is I am not, This is not my self," one has to continue
on practicing until one is free of clinging and attachments.

What comes out of this disputatious arguments of Saccaka with the Blessed
One is that there is a type of wrong belief which holds all the five aggregates
are self and that those who cling to atta always think disparagingly of those
who believe in the doctrine of Non-self.

Further there is another type of wrong belief which holds only one of the
aggregates to be Non-self. This is evident from the atta clinging of Sāti which
we have described in part IV and also from vedaka atta clinging as well as
kāraka atta clinging.

REFUTING THE ATTA WHICH IS SAID TO BE APART FROM THE FIVE

AGGREGATES
There appears in modern times, still another type of atta belief. As described
in a book on Indian Philosophy, this new type of atta clinging has no
reference to the five aggregates; it lies apart from them. This must be
rejected as just an opinion, for in the absence of the five aggregates, there
can be no atta clinging. Consider for a moment: if that atta has no rūpa, it
cannot be experienced in any form or substance. If nāma still exists, there
can be atta clinging to be similar to the attachment of the common worldling
to the formless realm. But if that nāma is not existent, then there is nothing
to be attachment to as one's atta. If there is no vedanā, too, there can be no
clinging to feelings, pleasant or unpleasant. In the absence of saññā, no
attachment can arise, to recognizing or remembering. Having no
consciousness nothing can be known; and since there is no saṅkhāra, such
as cetanā etc., that atta cannot have anything done. Therefore that type of
atta will exist only in name; it will be of no practical use; even no description
of it can be given. Thus, although they assert that their atta is apart from the
five aggregates, actually it is obvious that their atta clinging is one of the
five aggregates or on many of the five aggregates, or on all of the five
aggregates. It is an impossibility to have any clinging on atta apart from or
outside of the five aggregates.

Thus in the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, we find the words, 'Rūpa is not self;
vedanā in not self; saññā is not self; saṅkhāra is not self; viññāṇa is not self'
which remove and refute all types of clinging, doing away with the possibility
of atta clinging that is said to exist apart from the five aggregates, and atta
clinging for two kinds of aggregates, three kinds, four kinds or all five kinds
of aggregates.

If rūpa is clung to as atta, then the remaining four aggregates such as

vedanā etc form part of that atta, its attribute, its support and are also clung
to as such; or if one of the other aggregates such as vedanā is clung to as
atta then the remaining four are also clung to as part of that atta as its
attribute and its support. All these types of atta clinging are refuted by the
statement "rūpa is not self etc." Now the Blessed One had talked fully about
Anatta, but in order to explain it further in terms of the characteristics of
anicca, and dukkha, he continued:

"Tam kim maññathā Bhikkhave rūpam niccam vā aniccām vāti. aniccam

Bhante. Yam panā'niccam dukkham vā tam sukham vāti. Dukkham Bhante.
Yam pana'niccam dukkham viparināma dhammam kallam nu tam
sammupassitum etam mama eso 'ham asmi eso me attāti. No h'etam
Bhante."

"Bhikkhus, what do you think of that? (I am about to ask; my answer in any

way you think fit). Is rūpa permanent or impermanent?"
"Not permanent, the Blessed One"

The Blessed One asked them whether rūpa is permanent or not permanent.
The group of five Bhikkhus replied, 'Not permanent', and answer which can
be given from knowledge gained by ordinary hearsay. But what the Blessed
One wanted was an answer based on their own knowledge. And the group of
five Bhikkhus having become all; Sotāpanas, had seen the truth and their
answers were thus out of their own knowledge in accordance with the wishes
of the Blessed One.

The Yogī of this center, who have been practicing the meditation, can also
answer with their own knowledge. When the Yogī takes note of the actions of
rising, he perceives the phenomenon of extension, pressure and motion in
the abdomen quite vividly. This phenomenon of extension, was non-existent
before; it becomes manifested just as the abdomen beings to take a rise.
This is then the rising of the phenomenon ... its becoming. The beginning of
the phenomenon is thus the arising of the abdomen which comes under
observation, and duly noted. When the rising comes to an end, there is no
more extension, pressure and motion in the abdomen. They are said to
terminate, disappear, cease, pass away. Thus while the rising of the
abdomen is being noted, the Yogī also perceives this rising to pass away, to
disappear. This dissolution following on the heel of rising, becoming, is the
sure characteristic of impermanence.

Realizing this nature of impermanence in the course of noting the rising and
falling of the abdomen is true insight into the nature of impermanence,
Aniccānupassanā ñāṇa. This knowledge of the impermanence accruing from
noting the beginning and end of each arising constitutes Sammasana ñāṇa,
the first step in the series of ten ñāṇas, developed through Vipassanā
meditation. This Samāsana ñāṇa, sees through only the beginning and the
end of phenomenon of the same types of nāma, rūpa; the fine details of
what happens in between cannot be perceived yet. It is just the knowledge
of impermanence which accrues from perceiving the becoming and
dissolution of the continuing processes, presently happening.

When noting the phenomenon of rising, the beginning of the rise is perceived
as well as its end. To know the beginning of the rise is to know the
becoming; to know the end of the rise is to know its dissolution of each
arising, there can be no misconception on it to be permanent. It is definitely
impermanent.
When noting the phenomenon of falling, the contracting motion of the
abdomen is distinctly seen. It is the vāyo element in motion. In seeing the
beginning of the falling motion of the stomach and its end, the phenomenon
of vāyo element is being seen. The falling rūpa was not in existence at the
time of extension, only when the rising motion comes to an end, that the
falling rūpa comes into being. Then finally the falling rūpa vanishes away,
disappears instantly. So this falling rūpa is also definitely not permanent.

WHY IT IS CALLED IMPERMANENT

Aniccam khayathen .. impermanent because of its nature of coming to an

end. In accordance with this definition, the falling of abdomen, manifested by
the contracting motion, comes to an end, ceases. Hence, it is impermanent.

According to another Commentary definition .. Hutvā Abhāvato aniccā. Non-

existent previously, it comes into being and then dissolves, perishes away.
Hence it is impermanent.

While making note, 'falling,' 'falling,' the beginning and end of the
phenomenon of falling is perceived, and the Yogī realizes its impermanent
nature. This is true Aniccānupassanā ñāṇa, that is understanding the nature
of impermanence, at the stage of samāsana ñāṇa by seeing the becoming
and dissolution of the 'continuous processes presently happening', At the
level of Udayabbaya ñāṇa during the interval of the one cycle of rising and
falling, three, four, five distinct moments of beginning and ending of the
phenomenon can be noted. When the Yogī comes to the bhaṅga stage,
during the interval of one cycle of rising and falling, numerous moments of
dissolution will be seen to flit by. The material body of rising and falling,
being subjected to incessant dissolution is indeed not permanent.

When the motion of bending or stretching the limbs are heedfully noted, as
bending, bending, stretching, stretching the beginning and end of each
bending or stretching is distinctly seen. It is seen thus because the
respective motion are being carefully noted. A person not engaged in noting
may not be aware of the bending or stretching of his limbs, he will not
perceive the beginning of the motion separately from their ends. He will be
under the impression that the hand which was there before bending or
stretching still remains there till after the motion.

When bending or stretching, it will be seen that there is a slow motion of the
limbs gradually passing from one moment to another moment. At every
occasion of bending or stretching, the beginning of the extending and
moving is the coming into being (becoming) of the material quality of vāyo
element; the end of the extending and moving is the dissolution of the vāyo
element. When noting the bending, to know the beginning and ending of
each bending is to know the arising and dissolution of vāyo element.
Similarly, when noting the stretching to know the beginning and end of each
stretching is to know the arising and dissolution of vāyo element. During the
time taken by one single act of bending and stretching, knowing the
separate slow motions of the limbs gradually passing from one moment to
another is also knowing the arising and dissolution of the vāyo element
whose characteristics are extension and movement. The gradual slow motion
of the limb definitely brings out the nature of impermanence which cannot,
however, he realized without taking heedful note of each action.

While going, the Yogī who is taking note as 'right stepping out; left stepping
out, knows the beginning and end of each step. This is knowing the arising
and dissolution of the vāyo element which is responsible for extension and
movement of the legs. Similarly the Yogī who takes note of the movements
of the legs in raising, steeping out, dropping down knows separately the
beginning and end of movements .. raising, stepping out, dropping down.
This is also knowing the arising and dissolution of the vāyo element. Knowing
the separate slow motions of the legs involved in each act of moving is also
knowing the coming into being and dissolution of vāyo element. Thus the
vāyo element, responsible for movement of step, is arising and passing away
with each step and is, therefore, impermanent.

When noting the feeling of touch that may be felt anywhere on the body,
knowing the arising of sensation of touch and its disappearance is knowing
the arising and dissolution of the material quality involved in touch
sensation. The Yogī knows the arising and passing of the sensitive material
quality of his own body as well as that of the tactile body. He realizes the
freshly arising material bodies are not stable, but impermanent because he
has seen their incessant arising and passing away by actual noting.

When hearing and taking note as 'hearing, hearing', the Yogī notices the
sound to be freshly arising and disappearing. This is knowing the arising and
dissolution of sound. Thus the sound which arises every time sound is heard
is not permanent. Along with this material quality of the sound, the material
quality of the ear on which sound makes its impression also arises a fresh
and disappears with the sound. So it may be said that once the arising and
dissolution of sound is perceived, the arising and dissolution of the material
quality of ear is also known. Thus the Yogī who takes note of sound as
'hearing, hearing,' every time a sound is heard, and knows the impermanent
nature of the sound, knows at the same time the impermanent nature of the
material quality of the ear as well. The whistle from the rice mill or the
howling of dogs are generally regarded to be heard at one continuous
stretch, but to the Yogī whose Vipassanā insight has grown strong, those
sounds appear in minute portions, section by section, one after another. The
Yogī therefore, realizes that material quality of sound also is arising and
perishing in a very fast pace.

Likewise the Yogī who is noting 'seeing, seeing' at the time of seeing an
object knows, when his vipassanā ñāṇa gets highly developed, that eye
consciousness and seeing the objects are fast appearing and disappearing.
Then the visible form which arises a fresh and perishes instantly are
permanent. The material quality of eye which arises and perishes
simultaneously with the visible form is also impermanent.

While eating, the Yogī who notes knowing the taste as 'knowing knowing'
knows, when the taste which has thus appeared, disappears. The taste which
appears afresh and disappears is, therefore, impermanent. The impermanent
nature of the taste is very prominent. However pleasant the taste is, it
remains only for a short while on the tongue before it disappears. Just like
the taste the material quality of the tongue in which the taste manifests
itself disappears simultaneously. Thus when the taste is seen to be
impermanent, the material quality of the tongue is also seen at the same
time to be impermanent.

The Yogī who keeps note of smell knows that the smell keeps on appearing
and disappearing, all the time renewing itself. Smell, which comes into being
and gets dissolved instantly, is therefore impermanent and the material
quality of the nose which arises and vanishes simultaneously with the smell
is also impermanent. When thinking, or ideation occurs while noting the rise
and fall of abdomen, it has to be carefully noted. It will be observed that the
thinking disappears even while it is being noted. Every time thinking
disappears, the material quality on which thinking is based disappears also.
This material base which arises and vanishes with every act of thinking is
non-enduring, impermanent.

What we have stated above concerns with material qualities which can be
stated to be impermanent by the Yogī who has realized the knowledge
personally by nothing constantly the phenomena of the aggregates. These
material qualities relate to the whole of one's body; they arise and dissolve,
renewing themselves at every moment of seeing, hearing, smelling,
touching, tasting and thinking. Just like these material qualities from inside
one's body, the material qualities from the body of other people are also
simultaneously arising and vanishing. For instance noting the sound as
'hearing, hearing' the material quality of sound is perishing so also other
material qualities in one's body as well as those outside in the whole world
are also disappearing simultaneously.
Thus the Blessed One asked of these material bodies which are
impermanent, because they are dissolving all the time, "Is rūpa permanent
or impermanent?" The group of five Bhikkhus who had personal knowledge
of their impermanent nature, replied, 'Impermanent, Blessed One.' We would
also ask of this audience, 'Is rūpa in your body permanent or impermanent?'
Impermanent, Sir.' 'Is rūpa in other people's body, permanent or
impermanent?' 'Impermanent, Sir.' 'Is rūpa in the whole world, permanent or
impermanent?' 'Impermanent, Sir.'

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF IMPERMANENCE

These are questions concerning the characteristics of impermanence. When

one knows the characteristics of impermanence thoroughly, one understands
easily the characteristics of dukkha and anatta. The characteristics of
impermanence is that it does not endure. The Commentary defines it as
'Hutvā Abhāvākāro Anicca lakkhanam .. not being in existences at first, it
comes into being and then it ceases to exist, disappears, dissolves away ..
these are the characteristics of impermanence. The streak of lightening in
the sky, every one knows. It does not exist before; then it comes into being,
signified by a flash. But it does not last long, it disappears instantly. The
phenomenon of lightening provides all the characteristics of impermanence.
Whatever arises afresh to disappear soon is said to have the characteristics
of impermanence.

"Having arisen, things cease to exist. This is the sign of Impermanence."

ANICCĀNUPASSANĀ ÑĀṆA

The Yogī who keeps on noting when seeing, hearing etc, sees things arising
and ceasing to exist. Only when he has acquired this personal knowledge of
the characteristics of impermanent, is the true knowledge of
aniccānupassanā ñāṇa developed in him. Seeing dissolution while noting, the
Yogī knows that it is impermanent. This knowledge is the Aniccānupassanā
ñāṇa. In order to help develop this ñāṇa had the Blessed One asked, 'Is rūpa
permanent or impermanent?' We have fairly fully dealt with this question of
impermanence. We shall now go on with the question dealing with the
characteristics of Dukkha.
"That which is impermanent, Is it unsatisfactory or satisfactory?" asked the
Blessed One. The five Bhikkhus answered, 'Unsatisfactory, the Blessed One.'

TWO KINDS OF DUKKHA

There are two kinds of dukkha, suffering or unsatisfactoriness. The first kind
relates to unbearable pain or suffering, the second kind is dukkha because it
is terrible, objectionable, disgusting, repulsive. The impermanence because
of incessant arising and vanishing is not of the painful kind of suffering. It
belongs to the second kind in accordance with the Commentary definition: 'It
is suffering because it is terrible, the phenomenon of incessant arising and
perishing is terrible; fearsome, or synonymously with the Myanmar word's
not being good.' The question, "that which is impermanent, is it suffering or
happiness?, dukkha or sukkha ?" is the same as "Is it bad or good?" The
group of five Bhikkhus answered, 'It is dukkha;' in Myanmar idiom 'It is not
good.'

The reason why it is dukkha, why it is not good, is that it is ever arising and
perishing, impermanent, and so it is terrible. People imagines it to be sukha,
good because it appears to be enduring, stable. When they realize that it
does not endure even a second, and is constantly dissolving, they can no
longer see any sukha or goodness in it.

We depend for our existence on the aggregates which are in dissolution all
the time. If at any moment, the aggregates are not renewed, we die which is
a terrible thing to know. It is just like living in an old dilapidated building
liable to collapse at any time. In the case of such building, there is the
possibility that it may last for days, months, or even years before coming
down; where as the nāma, rūpa aggregates inside the body cannot endure
even for a second. They are undergoing dissolution all the time and,
therefore more terrible. Hence it is termed suffering, dukkha.

"Objectionable, undependable, not good at all."

CHARACTERISTICS OF DUKKHA

What are the characteristics of Dukkha? According to the Commentary,

Abhinha sampaṭipilanākāro dukkha lakkhanam: Incessant, unceasing
oppression is the characteristics mark of Dukkha. Here unceasing oppression
means arising and passing away incessantly of aggregates of rūpa and nāma
which are subject to constant arising and perishing, are regarded as dukkha,
things which are 'not good.'

"Oppression by incessant origination and dissolution is the characteristic

mark of dukkha. "

DUKKHĀNUPASSANĀ ÑĀṆA

Seeing the sign of dukkha by personal experience and realizing them to be

terrible suffering, 'not good', objectionable, not dependable is true
Dukkhānupassanā ñāṇa. "

HOW THE DUKKHĀNUPASSANĀ ÑĀṆA IS DEVELOPED

The Yogī while noting constantly the phenomenon of nāma, rūpa, starting,
from the rising and falling, bending, stretching, lifting, stepping, dropping,
the origination and dissolution taking place incessantly. Similarly in noting
every instance of touching hearing, seeing, tasting, the origination and
dissolution is seen. He begins to see the aggregates of rūpa and nāma being
oppressed by processes of origination and dissolution. There is possibility of
death at any moment; hence the oppression is seen as a terrible dukkha.
This is true Dukkhānupassanā ñāṇa."

In order to help develop this ñāṇa, the Blessed One had asked, 'That which is
impermanent, is it dukkha or sukha ?' In the paragraph stating, 'Rūpa is not
self, it is definitely mentioned. 'Since rūpa is not self, it tends to affliction.'
Therefore it is very plain that rūpa is terrible suffering, and the five Bhikkhus
had given the answer, 'Dukkha, the Blessed One.'

Having shown in this way that rūpa is Anicca and dukkha, the Blessed One
went on to urge the Bhikkhus not to regard the rūpa as 'This is mine, This I
am, This is my self.'

"That which is impermanent; suffering, unsatisfactory and subject to change,

is it fitting or proper to regard it as 'This is mine, This I am, This is my self?"
The five Bhikkhus answered, 'Not proper, the Blessed One.'
CLINGING WITH CRAVING, 'THIS IS MINE.'

Of the above three forms of grasping, 'This is mine' is clinging with craving;
'This I am' is clinging with conceit; 'This is my self' is clinging with wrong
view. When one has taken delight in an object with craving, even if the
object does not belong to oneself, it is grasped with craving as if it is one's
own. Thus going into the bazaar, seeing delightful objects, one takes delight
in them as if one already owns them. Jackets and longyis we fancy, we put
them on in imagination; the shoes too, we wear them in imagination, as if
they were one's own already. We grasp every thing, animate or inanimate,
as if one's own if we fancy them. Therefore, the Blessed One asked, whether
it was wise to grasp and take delight, as 'This is mine.' In things that are
impermanent, suffering and subject to change, meaning whether it is proper
to delight in terrible suffering.

The rūpas in one's person are constantly originating and dissolving; if one
sees this phenomenon of arising and dissolution as it really is, one would be
frightened just like having to live in the dilapidated building as said above.
Even though feeling well and all right at the present moment, a change for
the worse may take place depending on conditions and circumstances. Once
it is realized that it is not enduring even for a moment, always changing and
therefore, terrible suffering, how could one take delight in it? Would any one
choose with great pleasure as one's life partner, some one who is going to
become a patient within hours or days or who is going to die soon. No one
would take delight in such course of action if he really knows what is about
to happen.

Likewise the Yogī who sees the unceasing process of origination and
dissolution of the aggregates finds only terrible suffering in them. Finding
them as such, the Yogī has no desire to grasp his rūpa as 'This is mine. The
group of five Bhikkhus, therefore, answered that it is not proper to regard
the rūpa as 'This is mine.' 'This is an account of the questions and answers
on how, having seen the characteristics of dukkha, it is not proper to take
delight in it as sukha, happiness, some thing that is 'good'.

CLINGING WITH CONCEIT ......'THIS I AM'.

To consider rūpa as 'This I am' is to cling to it with conceit. When one has
good eyes, ears etc and can see, hear well etc one begins to take pride in
them: 'I have good eyes, ears; I look beautiful; I have a pleasant voice; I am
well; I am strong; 'Is it proper to cling to rūpa, in this manner, with conceit?
Conceit is developed with regard to one's possessions when there is
misconception that they are enduring and permanent. The material qualities
of eyes, ears, visible forms, are wrongly held to be permanent and
consequently vanity is built round them. Take for instance the case of a
person who has a cache of wealth, gold, silver etc hidden in a certain place.
The owner is full of pride over his wealth. But when he knows that his cache
has been robbed and he no longer owns any rich property the bubble of his
conceit gets busted.

Likewise, clinging to the material qualities of eyes, etc., which become

manifest at the moment of seeing, hearing etc., and thinking they are still in
existence, conceit is developed over them. For the Yogī who is always taking
note, he knows that they all vanish after they have arisen and finds no
excuse to show pride as 'I have good eyes, I am beautiful.' Therefore when
the Bhikkhus were asked, 'Is it proper, to regard rūpa as 'This I am,' their
reply was, 'Not proper, the Blessed One.' the Blessed One let it be known by
means of this question and answer that there is conceit when things are
conceived as permanent; there is no conceit when they are known to be
impermanent.

CLINGING WITH WRONG VIEW......'THIS IS MY SELF

Holding on to the belief 'This is my self' is clinging with wrong view. This
wrong view is held fast when there is belief that the rūpa in one's person is
ever lasting, and amenable to one's control. When knowledge arises it is
unstable, rising and vanishing all the time and suffering because it is
unenduring and subject to change, there is no more ground to cling to rūpa
as 'Self, as a living entity. When the Yogī knows that rūpa cannot be
controlled:' Let every thing be pleasant, good; let nothing unpleasant or bad
happen, let all good rūpas remain permanent,' there is nothing for him to
cling to as self. Thus to the question, 'Is it fitting to regard rūpa as 'This is my
self,' the five Bhikkhus replied'. No, the Blessed One. 'With this question, the
Blessed One made it clear that, when it is known that it is changing every
instant, rūpa is to be clung to as self when it is known thus, there is no more
clinging.' According to this question, 'changeableness at every instant'
should also be taken as a characteristic mark of Non-self.

To recapitulate, we shall ask the question to which the audience here should
provide answers as they think fit.

(a) Is rūpa permanent or impermanent? Impermanent, Sir.

(b) That which is impermanent, is it dukkha or sukha? Dukkha, Sir. Is
impermanent a good thing or bad thing. A bad thing, Sir.

(c) Is it fitting to regard that which is impermanent, suffering, subject to

change as 'This is mine' and take delight in it? .. No Sir; 'to get conceited
believing it, 'This I am' .. No Sir; or to cling to it, 'This is my self' .. No Sir.

We shall also recite the questions asked by the Blessed One and the answers
provided by the group of five Bhikkhus.

"Bhikkhus, what do you think of this? Is rūpa permanent or impermanent?

Impermanent, Sir. Now, that which is impermanent, is it dreadful suffering or
delightful happiness? Dreadful suffering the Blessed One. Now, that which is
impermanent, unsatisfactory, suffering, subject to change, is it proper to
regard that as 'This is mine, This I am, This is my self', Indeed not that the
Blessed One."

"Is feeling permanent or impermanent? .. Indeed not the Blessed One."

"Is perception permanent or impermanent? .. Indeed not the Blessed One."

"Are mental formations permanent or impermanent? ..... Indeed not, the

Blessed One."

"Is consciousness permanent or impermanent? .. Indeed not the Blessed

One."

We have dealt with the characteristics of impermanent in the first part of

today's lecture; in the latter portion of today's discourse, we have gone over
all the three characteristics stated in the Anattalakhaṇa Sutta in the form of
questions and answers. Our exposition on the aggregate of rūpa is fairly
complete. We shall deal with the questions and answers concerning the
aggregates of feeling etc, in our next discourse. We shall stop here today.
May you all, by virtue of having given respectful attention to this discourse
on Anattalakhaṇa Sutta, attain and realize soon the Nibbāna, by means of
the Path and Fruition of your wish.

Sādhu! Sādhu! Sādhu!

End of the Fifth Part of the Discourse on

The Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta.

Chapter 6
THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE ANATTALAKKHAṆA SUTTA

PART SIX

(Delivered on the new moon day of Wāso and the 8th waxing day of
Wāgaung, 1325 M.E.)

PREFA CE

We have already delivered five lectures on the Anattalakhaṇa Sutta. We

have so far explained the teaching on how the five aggregates are not self
and have dealt with the three characteristics concerning rūpa. We shall go
on to the questions and answers on whether vedanā is permanent or
impermanent.

VEDANĀ IS NOT PERMANENT

"Vedanā niccā vā aniccā vāti aniccā, bhante. Yam pana' niccam dukkham vā
tam sukham vāti. Dukkham bhante. Yam panā' niccam dukkham viparināma
dhamman kāllam nu tam samanupassitum' etam mama eso' ham-asmiī eso
me attatī, no hi' etam bhante."

The Blessed One asked: 'Is vedanā permanent or impermanent?' 'Not

permanent,' replied the group of the five Bhikkhus.

We have spoken about vedanā to a certain extent in the previous sections,

but as it is its turn to be considered according to the Sutta, we shall explain a
little more a about it.
Feeling is of three kinds: feeling of pleasantness or happiness; feeling of
unpleasantness or unhappiness; feeling of neither pleasantness nor
unpleasantness. Ordinary common worldlings regard all these three types of
feeling as being self, living substance, enduring, permanent. This form of
clinging in called Nivāsī atta clinging and vedaka atta clinging.

Nivāsī atta clinging is belief in a permanent entity or self in one's person.

Ordinary people believes that there exists a living entity, self, in one's body
from the time of conception to the time of death. Some believe that it
continued on enduring even after death, this is Nivāsī atta clinging.

This same permanent entity in the body is the one that feels the sensation
pleasant or unpleasant. This Self feels pleasant in mind and body; the same
self feel unpleasant and uncomfortable on certain occasions. Thus they
believe the feelings last forever, enduring. Actually, when feeling pleasant,
there is no unpleasant feeling; no neutral feeling; when feeling unpleasant,
there is no pleasant nor neutral feeling. Similarly when feeling the neutral
feeling, there is no pleasant nor unpleasant feeling. There is no feeling which
is ever lasting. Whether pleasant, unpleasant or neutral, it arises depending
on its conditions to last for only a moment and then disappears.

The uninitiated person who is unable to follow the feelings as they arise is
liable to have the impression that all the three feelings are simultaneous co-
existent. Thus while is feeling a painful sensation in the body, he hears some
glad news and feels happy over it. Or he may be enjoying a pleasant
sensation in the body when he happens to think about an unhappy event
and feels unhappy. On these occasions, it is usually believed that both
pleasant and unpleasant sensations are being felt at the same time,
simultaneously. It is believed so, because one lacks the ability to distinguish
between two minds or two feelings, the preceding one as distinct from the
following one. In reality, the feelings arise only one at a time one after
another.

Therefore when the Yogī who is constantly engaged in noting the

phenomenon of rising and falling notices the appearance of a painful feeling
inside his body, he should give concentrated attention to it and note it
continuously as 'painful, painful'. If his concentration is strong enough, the
unbearable pain keeps decreasing in intensity even as he is taking note of it.
It will finally disappear. For some, the pain will vanish completely in a short
time as if removed by hand. When there is no pain nor pleasant feeling to
take note of, the Yogī reverts back to noting the usual, ordinary phenomenon
of rise and fall of the abdomen. This amount to contemplating the neutral
feeling. While engaged thus in contemplating the neutral feeling, if pleasant
feeling arises, attention should be switched on to it. Similarly attention
should be given to the unpleasant feeling if it happens to arise too. Taking
note of the pleasant, unpleasant and neutral feelings, in this manner, as they
arise personal knowledge ensures that these feelings are not everlasting.
This is knowing discriminately each kind of feeling as it occurs in the
'continuity of the present'.

The Yogī who has advanced up to the stage of udayabbaya ñāṇa and bhaṅga
ñāṇa while taking note of the pleasant feeling finds such pleasant feeling
vanishing and coming to an end section by section, bit by bit, the ordinary
phenomenon of rise and fall is also found to be passing away section by
section, bit by bit. When pleasant feeling and neutral feeling appear in turn,
they are not separated and not as one continuous phenomenon or process.
Similarly with unpleasant feeling appearing along with neutral feeling, they
are noted as two distinct feelings. The Yogī observing in this manner
perceives each feeling or sensation to arise and disappear instantly which
drives home the fact that vedanā is not everlasting. This is knowing the
phenomenon section by section in terms of the 'moment present'. The Yogīs
who are watching the phenomena of rising, falling, feeling painful are doing
so, in order to see each phenomenon, section by section, bit by bit, in its
'momentary present.'

Therefore, the Yogī who is watching the phenomena as they arise at the six
doors while noting 'seeing, hearing, touching, thinking, etc, perceives well
how the pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling, neutral feeling with respect to
seeing etc., vanish, disappear immediately after they have arisen. Similarly,
all the feelings with respect to hearing, thinking etc. Thus the Yogī realizes
with the personal knowledge that all the vedanās are of the nature of
impermanence.

The group of five Bhikkhus, having reached the stage of Sotāpana through
contemplating in a similar manner, gave an answer to the question. 'Is
vedanā permanent or impermanent?' they reply with their own personal
knowledges, Not permanent, Sir.'

We will also ask of our audience similar questions which they may answer as
they seem it fit.

'Is the unbearable pain in the body, permanent or impermanent?'

'Impermanent, Sir.'
'It is not permanent because the pain was not here before. It arose just at
that moment. Did it not? ... 'Yes, Sir.'

'While noting that pain as 'painful, painful' 'It vanished away? Did it not?' ...
'It did, Sir.'

'For the Yogī whose concentration is getting quite strong, each sensation of
pain disappears with each noting as 'painful' As one sensation disappears, a
fresh one arises only to vanish away instantly. It is not perceived thus? ...
Yes, it is perceived in this manner, Sir."

'When noting with very good concentration, some good feelings may be
observed appearing in the body. When these feelings are noted as 'good,
good', they disappeared quickly. Didn't they? ... They did, Sir.'

Disappearing thus, are these good feelings permanent or impermanent? ...

'Impermanent, Sir.'

'Sometimes unhappiness, worries make their appearance; when these are

noted as 'unhappiness' as 'worries', they disappeared, didn't they? So are
they permanent or impermanent? ... Impermanent, Sir'.

'Sometimes, happiness will arise; when noted as 'gladness happiness,' it will

disappear. Is it permanent or impermanent? ... Impermanent, Sir.'

'When seeing a pleasant sight, there arises an agreeable feeling; this also
disappears when noted. Is it permanent or impermanent? ... Impermanent,
Sir.'

In a similar manner, an unpleasant sight causes a disagreeable feeling

disappears when noted. Pleasant to unpleasant feeling which arise from
hearing, smelling or tasting also disappear when noted. Are these feelings
permanent or impermanent? ... Impermanent Sir.

'When noting, neither particularly, pleasant nor unpleasant, just the ordinary
objects of contemplation such as the rising and falling of abdomen, the
feeling observed is a neutral one, which also disappears with every noting, Is
that permanent or impermanent? ... Impermanent, Sir.'

'All the three feelings pleasant, unpleasant and neutral, are they permanent
or impermanent? ... Impermanent, Sir.'

When these three feelings pleasant, unpleasant and neutral are perceived to
be impermanent, it is realized too that they are suffering, not self just a
phenomenon. Perceive them to be suffering and not self, the Blessed One
continued to question: 'That which is impermanent, is that suffering or
happiness?' 'Suffering, the Blessed One.'

We have dealt considerable fully on this previously; therefore, it needs not

much further elaboration. People have liking for pleasant sensations or so
called happiness, thinking they are enduring, everlasting. Seeing them
dissolving fast every moment, not lasting even for the tenth of a second,
they lose their passion for them. Just for the sake of enjoying the so called
happiness, they have to go in pursuit of it, not for one hour, not for one day,
one year but their whole life. While in pursuit of this happiness, people meet
their death. There is nothing one can rely upon. Even if the happiness one is
seeking for is not obtained, one has to find means of avoiding unhappiness,
unpleasantness, that is, of maintaining oneself in neutral condition of neither
happiness nor unhappiness. Even as the neutral feeling of neither happiness
nor unhappiness is being sought for, physical pain and mental anguish may
arise causing suffering. And they can appear because the happy feeling and
the mental feeling are not permanent. Thus the impermanent happy feeling
and the neutral feeling are also not dependable. To go after them is
suffering; when they disappear it is suffering too because unhappy feeling
comes in to take their place. Especially so after the disappearance of the
happy feeling, one may be plunged into depths of unhappiness. Take for
instance the plight of parents who have been given delight and happiness by
the presence of their children, when suddenly deprived of them through
death; or of a united, happy family when suddenly bereaved of dear ones of
the family through death or separation; or of some one who has been happy
with his wealth and affluence, when deprived of them. They will all become
subjected to intense unhappiness, which may cost some of them their lives
even. Thus vedanā is terrifying because of its nature of impermanence.

Coming to the next paragraph of the Pāḷi text:

"That which is impermanent, suffering and subject to change, is it proper to

regard it as "This is mine, This I am, This is my self." It is not, the Blessed
One. This is the same type of the questions and answers employed when
explaining rūpas . The difference is that in the case of rūpa, the term
involves not only the material qualities inside one's person, but also all those
external animate and inanimate objects too. As to the feeling the main thing
is internal one, which one grasps as one's own. In feeling of happiness, sukha
he takes delight with craving: "This is mine." The neutral feeling, being
devoid of unpleasantness, has the nature of a happy feeling; although
attachment to it is not so strong, as with the proper happy feeling, still there
is taking of delight to some extent in the very fact of being neither pleasant
nor unpleasant, but just neutral. The unpleasant feeling is no doubt,
undesirable as such, but thinking 'It is I who is suffering,' there is still
grasping for it as Self.

Attachment to the feeling in this way is brought about by ignorance of the

real nature of impermanence, suffering and subjection to change. The Yogī
who is taking note of the feeling as it occurs knows at once the oppressive
nature of the feeling. What is the difference between the Yogī and the
ordinary person with regard to their knowledge about feeling? There is
indeed a very great difference. The ordinary person perceives his feeling in
terms of Self: "I suffer; I feel happy; I feel pain while delighting in happiness;
if this pain goes away, I will feel happy.' So he views his feelings all in terms
of self, whereas for the Yogī, he knows, from the very outset, there is just
continuous phenomena of the aggregates arising and perishing incessantly.
When unhappy feeling appears, the Yogī perceives it as an undesirable
intrusion occurring in the continuous process of nāma and rūpa and
renewing, itself afresh. The Yogī perceives it as another process of arising
and perishing superimposed on the first one he has been observing. From its
very first appearance, the Yogī recognizes its oppressive nature just like a
thorn which comes to be embedded in the flesh.

The happy feeling appears to be pleasant, good while it is happening; but the
effort that has to be put in, in search of the pleasurable sensation, is
suffering itself. If an akusala act happens to be performed while in the
pursuit of pleasurable feeling, suffering has to be faced in the apāya state to
which one will be doomed for the akusala acts. Taking delight in the
pleasurable sensations that arise will keep on renewing the cycle of
existences, resulting in suffering of old age, death. When that happy feeling
disappears, the attachment to it will give rise to intense unhappiness.
Therefore, happy feeling is to be regard as suffering. We have already
explained this as well as how neutral feeling too is regarded as suffering
because of its impermanence.

The Vedanā Samyutta Pāḷi Canon describes how these feelings should be
noted and regarded:

Three types of feeling seen as they really are.

"Yo sukham dukkhato adda, dukkha maddakkhi sallato, adukkha ma sukham
santam, addakkhin am aniccato, sa ve sammaddas abhikkhu, parijānati
vedanā."

"The Bhikkhu has seen the happy feeling as suffering; the unhappy feeling as
a thorn and the neutral feeling as suffering too because of its
impermanence."

"The Bhikkhu has seen the feelings rightly add well (so as not to give rise to
notions of permanence, happiness and self) and comprehensively (knowing
that should be known)."

The Yogī who is all the time engaged in noting sees the unpleasant feeling as
an oppression like a thorn; the pleasant feeling as frightful suffering having
to pursue after it and because of the pain it causes when it is absent. The
neutral feeling is seen as suffering because of its impermanence and the
effort or volitional activities required to maintain it. Thus when asked
whether it is proper to regard vedanā as 'This is mine, This I am, This is my
self.,' the group of five Bhikkhus replied, 'Not indeed, the Blessed One.'

We would also ask questions in accordance with the Pāḷi Canon; the audience
may give their replies as they deem fit,

1. "Is pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling, permanent or Impermanent?"

"Impermanent, Sir."

2. "That which is impermanent, is it suffering, or happiness?" "Suffering, Sir."

3. "That which is impermanent, suffering, subject to change, is it fitting to

regard it as 'This is mine, and take delight in it?" "No, Sir." "Or to get
conceited by regarding it as 'This I am.' Or to be attached to it as 'This is my
self?'" "No, Sir."

Vedanā which is impermanent because of incessant arising and vanishing,

suffering and subject to change is taught not to be viewed as 'This is mine,
This I am, This is my self' so as not to see vedanā as being permanent, as
being 'This is mine, This I am, thus causing the arising of craving and
conceit. For the common worldling, not to cause the wrong view 'This is my
self.

That vedanā is anattā is explained in terms of characteristics of anicca and

dukkha. This is not self is very clear from its nature of oppressing, the
characteristic mark of terrible dukkha.

We have dealt sufficiently with Vedanā. We shall now go on to considering

Saññā, perception starting with the Pāḷi Text:

IMPERMANENCE OF SAÑÑĀ, PERCEPTION

"Saññā niccā vā aniccā vāti. Aniccā, Bhante. Yam panā niccam, dukkham vā
tam sukham vāti, dukkham, Bhante. Yam pananiccam dukkham viparināma
dhammam kallam nu tam samanupassitum etam mama eso h'asmi eso me
attāti, no hetam Bhante."

"Is saññā, perception, permanent or impermanent", asked the Blessed One.

"Impermanent, the Blessed One."

Saññā is of six kinds: Recognizing and remembering visible objects;

recognizing and remembering sound; recognizing and remembering smell;
recognizing and remembering taste; recognizing and remembering touch
and recognizing and remembering what one has thought about. It is saññā
which remembers object one has seen before; saññā is essential in learning
and remembering what one is studying. A good saññā will remember for long
anything seen or heard only once. This retentiveness is wrongly taken to be
everlasting, to be good, to be self.

But saññā having recognized what it has seen, vanishes; what are
recognized later are the function of the saññā which arise later. The same
applies to hearing etc. What is heard and remembered first vanished away,
followed by what is heard and recognized later. The Yogī who is taking note
of everything seen or heard perceives that seeing and recognizing hearing
and recognizing, the two processes vanish together. Knowing this, he
concludes that saññā is also impermanent. The group of five Bhikkhus, also
knowing the same fact, answered when asked, whether saññā is permanent
or impermanent, 'Impermanent, Sir.' Because they found the words of the
Blessed One, even while being heard and recognized by them are vanishing
away rapidly:

"Furthermore, that which is impermanent, is that suffering or happiness?"

"Suffering Sir." "Satisfactory or unsatisfactory?" "Unsatisfactory, Sir." "Now,
that which is impermanent, unsatisfactory, subject to change, is it proper to
regard it as "This is mine, This I am, This is my self." "Not proper, Sir."

These are the same types of questions and answers we have discussed
before. It is necessary to know only how saññā is attached to with craving,
conceit and wrong view. Generally people who cannot contemplate on the
phenomenon of nāma, rūpa like saññā (or act of recognition by saññā) and
are pleased with it, clinging to it as 'This is mine'. He thinks he has better
retentive memory than others and is proud of it: This is clinging by conceit,
'This I am'. He thinks also that every act of seeing, hearing is recognized and
remembered by him which is atta clinging to saññā, 'This is my self'.

Actually, the saññā which retains every object as seen, so as not to forget it,
is impermanent as it arises and vanishes instantly. The Yogī who is ever
watchful knows saññā to be impermanent because it is seen arising and
vanishing instantly; unpleasurable suffering because of its impermanence;
saññā may retain memories of abominable, terrible things and therefore,
oppressing and suffering. It does not exist in one form but keeps on
changing. Therefore saññā is after all not desirable as something pleasant,
nothing to take pride in as everlasting, nothing to cling to as self, a living
entity. Therefore, the group of five Bhikkhus replied, it was not proper to
regard saññā as 'This is mine, This I am, This is my self.' We shall now ask
question pertaining to saññā; you may answer in any away you deem fit.

1. "Is saññā, perception, permanent or impermanent?" "Impermanent, Sir."

2. "That what is not permanent, is it satisfactory or not satisfactory, Not

satisfactory, Sir. Good or bad?" "Not good, Sir."

3. "That which is not permanent, suffering, subject to change, is it proper to

delight in it taking it as 'This is mine?" - "Not proper, Sir." "To take pride in it,
thinking This I am?" - "Not proper, Sir." "To cling to it wrongly as This is
myself?" - "Not proper, Sir."
This question is asked so as not to let you cling with craving and pride to the
impermanent, suffering, changing saññā as 'This is mine, This I am.' Also not
to let the common worldling cling to it with wrong view of self.

We have dealt sufficiently with saññā. We shall go on to explain the teaching

with regard to saṅkhāra.

IMPERMANENT OF VOLITIONAL ACTIVITIES

"Saṅkhāra niccā vā aniccā vāti; aniccā bhante. Yam panā niccam dukkham
vā tam sukham vāti; dukkham bhante. Yam panā niccam dukkham
viparinūmadhammam kāllam nu tam samanupassitum 'etam mama eso
h'amasmi eso me attāti; no hi'etam bhante."

"Are saṅkhāras, the volitional activities, permanent or impermanent? asked

the Blessed One. 'Not permanent, the Blessed One."

Saṅkhāras are the volitional motivation responsible for physical, vocal and
mental actions. In abstract sense, they are the fifty kinds of mental
concomitants headed by cetanā, volition, which we have already talked
about before, saṅkhāras, volitional activities, cover and extensive field. The
motivating power behind all physical actions such as going, standing, sitting,
lying, bending, stretching, moving is the saṅkhāra; the vocal actions are also
caused by the same saṅkhāra agents- We are now talking as urged on by the
saṅkhāra while thus talking and reciting, every word uttered has been
primed by the saṅkhāra. It is the saṅkhāra too which is at the back of all
thoughts and imaginations.

Ordinary people think all the said actions (physical, vocal and mental) are
being done by 'me, self' and this self' the doer is believed to be ever lasting,
permanent. But the Yogī who is ever watchful of rising and falling of
abdomen takes note of any activity of the mind as soon as it occurs. Cetanā,
volition accompanied by lobha, desire is perceived by the Yogī to be arousing
the desire to want and urging to go after that which is wanted. The Yogī
notes these mental activities as liking, wanting. Associated with dosa,
volition appears as anger, an out rage that has to be noted as 'angry,
outrageous.' When headed by delusion, moha, wrong actions are thought
about; these thoughts have to be noted. When associated with conceit, or
ego, one becomes bloated with ego and one has to get rid of it by noting,
'conceit, conceit.' When accompanied by envy, jealousy, avariciousness, it
manifests as enviousness and avariciousness and it should be noted as such.

When volition appears associated with faith and confidence, devotion and
piety develop towards the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sanghā. Urging one
to give homage and respect to them. These thoughts are noted as they arise
as devotion, piety etc. Akusala leads to unwholesome results. Cetanā may
manifest itself, discouraging one from it, hindering it; Kusala leads to
wholesome results; Cetanā may arise one to practice it. In similar manner
volition may manifest in a number of ways and as such should be noted. It
may appear accompanied by mindfulness, heedful of the fact at such and
such a time, such a wholesome act will be done. It may arise in various
manners and the mental attitudes of those moments should also be noted.
When mettā, loving kindness arises with volition, there appears feeling of
benevolence to others, thinking of ways of making others happy. With
compassion, volition arises having pity on others and thinking of how to help
others out of suffering. All these mental attitudes should be carefully noted.

While noting the rise and fall of the abdomen, if there is feeling of stiffness or
heat appearing, they should be noted. As these are being noted, there
appear the thought and the urge to bend, stretch and change postures.
These have to be noted too. Then there is the urge to lower or raise the
head, to move forward or backward etc, to get up and walk. These are
physical activities conditioned and willed by volition and they are all noted.

Then there is volitional urging concerning vocal activities, urging and

directing what to say and how to say, just like now when I am saying things
as willed by volition. The Yogī who keeps constant track of all these volitional
activities knows with personal experience that these activities appear and
vanish instantly and are therefore, impermanent. And the group of five
Bhikkhus had become Sotāpanas through their own knowledge of the nature
of impermanence. While listening to this discourse on the Anattalakkhaṇa
Sutta, they saw again the nature of impermanence by perceiving the
constant rising and falling of the saṅkhāras such as phassa, cetanā
manasikāra, saddhā, sati etc. Thus to the question "Is saṅkhāras permanent
or impermanent?", they replied, "Not permanent, Sir."

"Furthermore, that which is impermanent, is it dukkha or sukha?" - " Dukkha,

the Blessed One."

"That which is impermanent, suffering and subject to change -- Is it fitting to

regard that as This is mine, This I am, This is my self?" "It is not proper, the
Blessed One."
These are the same types of the questions and answers as we have dealt
before. We have only to know here how saṅkhāras could be clung to with
craving conceit and wrong view and how to become free of these clingings.

Ordinary persons who cannot take note of the phenomena of rūpa, nāma as
they occur believe that volitional activities headed by cetanā are good,
pleasant and take delight in them. This is clinging with craving. To think that
these activities are his to perform, that he can perform better than others is
clinging with conceit. Thinking that activities such as going, stopping, sitting,
bending, stretching, moving, etc., are being done by me, "I do, It is I who
does the action; I talk, It is I who talk; I think, It is I who think; I see, hear,
look, listen, It is I who sees, hears, locks, listens, etc." This is clinging with
wrong view; as the clinging is in the person of the doer, it is known as Kāraka
Atta clinging. Believing all actions, physical, vocal, mental are being done by
self is Karaka atta clinging. Believing that this self resides permanently in
one's person is Nivāsī Atta clinging. This self which resides permanently in
one's person goes when it wants. stands, sits, bends, stretches, talks, thinks
when it wants, when it wills, and is subject to one's control. Believing thus is
Sāmi Atta clinging.

The Yogī who is ever on the watch of the nāma, rūpa phenomenon perceives
that activity that arises namely desire to think, desire to see, hear, bend,
stretch, change position, rise, go talk, vanishes instantly after it has been
noted; therefore, all these activities, arising and vanishing incessantly are
impermanent: Consequently they are not delightful, not dependable, mere
suffering; thus it is concluded through personal knowledge. Therefore, he
realizes that there is nothing to cling to as "This is mine," to take pride in, as
'This I am, and to believe that 'This is my self.' The group of five Bhikkhus
had realized in a similar manner and become Sotāpanas. While listening to
this discourse too, they perceived the volitional activities rising and
perishing. Therefore they replied to the Blessed One that it was not proper to
regard that which is impermanent, suffering and subject to change as 'This is
mine, This I am, This is my self.'

We will now ask questions regarding the saṅkhāras; the audience may reply
as they deem fit.

1. Is the effort to do permanent or impermanent? (Impermanent, Sir); Is the

thought of doing permanent or impermanent? (Impermanent, Sir); Is the
desire to bend, stretch, change position, get up, to go, raise the legs, step
out, drop down, permanent or impermanent? (Impermanent, Sir); Is the
desire to turn back, to stand, sit, permanent or impermanent?
(Impermanent, Sir); Is the desire to see, talk, eat, chew, permanent or
Impermanent? (Impermanent Sir).

2. That which is impermanent, is it pleasant or unpleasant? good or not

good? (Unpleasant, Sir; Not good, Sir).

3. That which is impermanent, suffering, subject to change, is it fitting to

delight in it regarding it as 'This is mine? (not fitting Sir); to get conceited
regarding it as 'This I am?' (not fitting Sir); to cling to it as 'This is my self?'
(not fitting Sir).

These questions are asked so as to prevent the clinging to saṅkhāras by

craving and conceit as 'This is my idea,' 'I can think it out'; and for the
common worldling to prevent clinging to the saṅkhāras with the wrong view
of self.

This should be enough explanations on saṅkhāras. We shall go on to

consideration of viññāṇa now.

IMPERMANENCE OF VIÑÑĀṆA, CONSCIOUSNESS

"Viññāṇam niccam vā aniccā vāti, aniccam bhante. Yam panā niccam

dukkham vā tam sukham vāti. Dukkham bhante. Yam panā niccam dukkham
viparināma dhammam kallam nu tam sammanupassitum etam mama eso
h'amasmi eso me attāti no h'etam Bhante."

"Is mind, consciousness permanent or impermanent?" asked the Blessed

One. The Bhikkhus answered, 'Impermanent, Sir.'

Viññāṇa is mind or consciousness; the term consciousness is not commonly

employed as mind. Even mental concomitants such as cetāna, lobha and
dosa are talked about as just mind, because mind plays a leading role. We
shall also generally use Mind instead of consciousness in this chapter.

Those who cannot watch and note the mind as it is arising imagine that the
mind is everlasting, permanent, thinking that it is the same mind that is
conscious of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, thinking; the same mind that
sees for a long time, hears, smells, etc for a long time; the same mind that
was in existence when young, still existing; will continue to exist till death.
Right through out the whole of one existence, it is the same mind that has
been functioning. Some even hold the belief that it will be the same mind
that will move onto future existences. This is how mind is regarded to be
permanent and everlasting.

When the Yogī who is ever watchful of the phenomenon of nāma, rūpa while
noting the rise and fall of the abdomen, notices the arising of an idea or a
thought, he at once notes it as 'idea', 'thought'. When noted thus, the idea or
thought vanishes. Thus the Yogī realizes that 'the thought was not in
existence before; it makes its appearance only now and disappears at once.
We have been imagining thought to be permanent because we have not
carefully observed it before; now that we have watched it; we have seen it
fast disappearing. We now know it truly as it is-its impermanent nature."

When hearing too, if noted 'hearing, hearing' it keeps on arising, vanishing,

arising, vanishing, instantly. The same applies to consciousness of smelling,
tasting. Consciousness of touch that is appearing inside the body is noted to
be arising and vanishing quickly, here and there, all over the body. When the
concentration is very strong, the act of seeing is observed to be happening
and disappearing in a series of separate but continuous events one after
another. Thus it is realized that consciousness of thinking, hearing, touching,
seeing etc arise separately and disappear one by one, all impermanent,
unstable.

The mind that wants to bend, change posture, get up, go etc., renews
themselves afresh and gets dissolved instantly. The mind that takes note of
each phenomenon also vanishes with each noting. Thus, the mind which is
conscious of various kinds of subjects is arising and vanishing incessantly
and is therefore impermanent. The group of five Bhikkhus had realized the
same thing and had become Sotāpanas. And while listening to this discourse
on the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, they saw again the nature of impermanence by
perceiving the constant arising and vanishing of consciousnesses such as
eye consciousness, ear consciousness, tactile consciousness, mental
consciousness, etc., Therefore, to the questions of the Blessed One, "Is
consciousness, permanent or impermanent," they had replied, 'Not
permanent, Sir.' To the Yogī who is ever watchful, this is of course very clear.

"Furthermore; that which is impermanent, is it dukkha or sukha ?" asked the

Blessed One. 'Dukkha, the Blessed One.'
"That which is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change is it fitting to
regard it as 'This is mind, This I am, This is my self.' 'Not fitting, Sir.'

These are the same types of the questions and answers as we have dealt
before. We have only to know how thinking, knowing mind may be wrongly
clung to with craving, conceit and wrong view and how to become free from
these clingings.

Ordinary persons who cannot take note of the mind as it appears at the six
doors at every instance of seeing, hearing, touching, knowing, takes delight
in it as 'This is mine, This I am.' They are pleased with the mind which is
manifesting at the present moment; they are delighted with the mind which
had risen before and they wish to enjoy such delightful mind in future. This is
clinging with craving. The Yogī who keeps on noting every phenomenon
perceives that consciousness with respect to good sight or sound associated
with gladness, happiness, all disappears even as he is taking note of them.
He, therefore, does not takes delight in them, does not yearn for them. This
is how one keeps free of clinging with craving.

Ordinary person who cannot take note of the mind cannot distinguish the
preceding mind from the mind following it. They think the mind of their
younger days still persist as one continuous permanent mind. The mind that
was there before keeps on seeing, hearing, touching, thinking etc.. Believing
it to be permanent and having special qualities, conceit is developed, 'I know
in this way, I won't stand any nonsense, I have a courageous mind.' This is
clinging with conceit. But the ever watchful Yogī knows that all these
consciousness of seeing, hearing, touching etc., keeps disappearing as they
are being noted. He knows their impermanent nature. In the same way, no
conceit arises in a person who knows he is about to die, No conceit is
developed by the Yogī with regard to his mind. This is how to become free
from clinging with conceit.

Ordinary people believe 'It is I who sees, hears, smells, touches, thinks; I can
know various kinds of objects; I want to bend, stretch, go, talk, all the
thinking, all the actions are under-taken by my mind, by my self.' This is
Kāraka atta clinging.

"Believing all actions, physical, vocal and mental are done by self is Kāraka
atta clinging."
Clinging in the form of activities may be classed under saṅkhāra, but is also
concerned with mind. Generally desire to bend, stretch to go, talk are usually
described as mind. Therefore desire to do an act is classed under mind or
consciousness. 'This mind or consciousness as self exists permanently in
one's person, it is this self which becomes conscious of seeing, hearing etc.'
Believing in this manner is Nivāsī atta clinging.

"Believing there is a permanent self in one's person is Nivāsī atta clinging."

In modern times too some religions mention about a consciousness or soul

permanently residing in one's body. According to some of them, when a
person dies, the soul leaves the perishing body and goes to reside in a new
body. At the time of the Buddha, a Bhikkhu by the name of Sāti, took
consciousness to be self. The story of Sāti has been told in Part Four of these
discourses. (See page ..) This is then the wrong view which takes
consciousness to be self.

Then there is the belief that one can think if one wishes; one controls one's
mind as one will. This is Sāmi atta clinging.

"Believing there is a self inside the body subject to one's control is Sāmi atta
clinging.."

For the Yogī engaged in constant noting, even while noting, 'thinking,
thinking', the thinking mind disappears; noting 'hearing, hearing', the
consciousness of hearing disappears; noting 'touching, touching', the
consciousness of touching disappears; noting 'seeing seeing', the
consciousness of seeing disappears. Thus perceiving the disappearance of
consciousness even while noting, realization comes that "these various
consciousness concerning thinking, hearing, touching, seeing, noting etc are
mere phenomena coming into being conditioned by their own causes and are
dissolving away. They are not self, living entity."

Realization comes in this way. In accordance with 'cakkhum ca paticca rūpe

ca uppajjati cakkhu viññāṇam', eye consciousness arises because there are
the eyes and visible forms; ear consciousness arises because there are the
ears and sounds; consciousness of touch arises because there are the body
and the tactile body; there is mental consciousness because there is the
base mind (bhavaṅga and thinking) and the mental object; the
consciousness of noting because there is the intention (to note) and the
object to note. They all arise because of their own causes and the conditions.
When there are these conditioning causes, they come into being and perish
away, whether we wish it to happen or not. In the absence of these
conditioning causes, no amount of wishing will produce them. The pleasant
mind, we wish to endure, does not last; it passes away quickly.

Thus the Yogī can decide with his own personal knowledge that
'consciousness is not self, which engages in activities, which is permanent
and subject to one's control and will. It comes into being in accordance with
its own conditioning causes and vanishes away as a mere phenomenon. The
group of five Bhikkhus' knowledge of these phenomena was not ordinary
knowledge; it was the insight resulting from the Sotāpattiagga ñāṇa, entirely
free from clinging. Thus when asked, 'That consciousness which is
impermanent, suffering and subject to change, is it proper to regard it as
'This is mine, This I am, This is my self,' by the Blessed One, they replied,
'Not proper, revered Sir.'

We shall also ask you similar questions which you may answer as you deem
fit:

1. Is mind permanent or impermanent? (Not permanent, Sir); While

observing the rise and fall of abdomen a thought arises, is that thought
permanent or impermanent? (Impermanent, Sir); When sitting for long, heat
sensation manifests itself. While noting it as 'hot, hot', the wish comes for a
change of posture. When this wish is noted, it disappears, does it not? (It
does, Sir); Is it then permanent or not permanent (Not permanent, Sir). When
feeling stiff, you note it as 'stiff, stiff, then the wish comes for a change of
posture. When this wish is noted. it disappears, does it not? (It does, Sir). Is it
then permanent or impermanent? (Impermanent, Sir). When you wish to
bend, you note it as 'wishing to bend, wishing to bend' and the wish
disappears. Is it then permanent or impermanent? (Impermanent Sir). There
is the desire to stretch, when it is noted, it disappears. Is it then permanent
or impermanent? (Impermanent, Sir). Again the desire to get up, to go; when
it is noted, it disappears. Is it then permanent or impermanent?
(Impermanent, Sir).

Whatever is being noted, the noting mind disappears even while noting. Is
this noting mind then permanent or impermanent? (Impermanent, Sir). The
consciousness of hearing when noted as 'hearing, hearing, disappears; is
that consciousness of hearing permanent or impermanent? (Impermanent,
Sir). The consciousness of touch when noted as 'touching, touching,
disappears. Is that consciousness of touch permanent or impermanent?
(Impermanent, Sir). The eye consciousness, is it permanent or impermanent?
(Impermanent, Sir). Then nose consciousness, the tongue consciousness, are
they permanent or impermanent? (Impermanent, Sir).
2. That which is impermanence, is this suffering or happiness (Suffering, Sir).
Is Impermanence good or bad? (Bad, Sir).

3. Is it proper then to regard consciousness which is impermanent, suffering

and subject to change, as 'This is mine' and take delight in it? (No, Sir); as
'This I am' and take pride in it or as 'This is my self' cling to it wrongly? (No
Sir).

These questions are asked so as to prevent clinging with craving and conceit
to consciousness which cognizes objects, regarding them as 'This is my
mind, I know; the thinker and doer is my self' and for common worldling not
to cling to it with wrong view.

We have fully explained the questions in the Teaching dealing with clinging
of craving conceit and wrong view concerning with the five aggregates of
rūpa, vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa. Now we shall go on to the
Teaching on how to contemplate to get clear of these three types of
clingings.

Removal of three types of clingings. (Third Part of the Sutta).

(1) CONTEMPLATION ON RŪPA

"Tasmātiha Bhikkhave yam kinci rūpam atitānāgatapaccu-ppannam

ajjhattam vā bahiddhā vā olārikam vā sukhumam vā hinam vā panitam vā
yam dūre santike vā sabbam rūpam 'netam mama neso hamasmi na meso
attāti' eva metam yathābūtam sammappaññaya dathabbam."

"Bhikkhus, as stated above, since it is not fitting to regard as 'This is mine,

This I am, This is my self', all forms of rūpa, whether past, future or present,
internal or external, coarse or fine, whether inferior or superior, far or near,
all rūpas should be regarded with right understanding, according to reality,
'This is not mine, This I am not, This is not my self.' All rūpas must be
contemplated on so as to realize the truth, as it really is, with personal
knowledge that 'This is not mine, This I am not, This is not my self.'
In the above statement, rūpa is described and enumerated in eleven ways
such as past, future, present etc. With respect to time, rūpa is described in
terms of past, future or present. 'The past' refers to what had happened in
the past, what has arisen and ceased in the previous existences or in the
past time of the present existence. 'By future' is meant that which has not
yet happened, which is going to happen at some time in the future. The
present means what is actually happening now. Sequentially it amounts to
what had happened before, what is happening now and what will happen in
the future. Thus when rūpa is enumerated in these three ways of difference
in time, all the rūpas is self, in others, animate, inanimate, all are covered.

WHAT THE DISCIPLES SHOULD CONTEMPLATE ON

But, for the purpose of vipassanā meditation disciples are mainly concerned
with contemplating on what is happening in one's body, as definitely stated
in the Commentary and subcommentary of the Anupadā Sutta of
Uparipannāsa Pāḷi Canon. Phenomena happening elsewhere need be known
only conjecturally. Thus the Yogī needs only to understand the phenomenon
of nāma, rūpa happening inside one's body and see with one's own (insight)
knowledge, the true nature as it really is.

Even in connection with the phenomenon happening inside one's person,

one can be only guessing in attempting to understand the phenomenon of
the future, because it has not occurred yet, is not yet in existence.
Concerning those that had occurred before, their nature cannot be known as
they really were; it would be mere guess work. Even for those phenomena
that occurs during one's life time, it is not easy to see what they really were
what happened some years ago, some months past or even some days
previously. It is hard even to know the absolute truth of what happened a
few hours ago because, for ordinary persons, once an object is seen, heard,
touched etc., attachment for it would have arisen immediately as 'I, he, a
woman or a man' in terms of conventional concepts.

ONLY THE PRESENT SHOULD BE NOTED INITIALLY

Therefore, as stated in Bhaddekaratta Sutta, Paccuppannañca yam

dhammam, tatthā tatthā vipassati: Only the present should be contemplated
on in Vipassanā meditation, that is, as the phenomenon is being seen, heard
etc. In the Satipaṭhāna Pāḷi Canon, also it is stated the present phenomenon
actually happening now, while presently going, standing, sitting, lying,
should be noted initially. We have provided a searching analysis of this
paragraph, because this paragraph mentions 'past rūpa', which comes first in
the sequential order of past, present, future, doubt may arise whether one
should start meditating with what had happened in the past. This analysis
should remove away that doubt.

Therefore, only those phenomena of nāma, rūpa which manifest themselves

at the six doors every time an object is seen, heard, touched should be
constantly noted, just like our Yogīs who are now taking note of the
phenomena of rising, falling, sitting, touching etc. Engaged in this manner as
the concentration gets strengthened, Yogī comes to differentiate between
the phenomenon of falling and the phenomenon of noting it. The extension,
the pressure and the motion of the moment of rising do not last till the
moment of falling; they disappear at the moments of their respective
phenomena. The distension and motion at the moment of falling do not last
till the next moment of rising; they disappear and cease then and there.

While walking too, the extension and motion involved in the 'right step' do
not stay on till the 'left step'; similarly the rūpas of the 'left step' are not
retained till the 'right step'. They vanish just at the moment of their
respective appearance. The rūpas of the 'raising moment' do not last till the
moment of stepping out; that of the stepping moment do not stay on till the
moment of dropping down; they all vanish away at the respective moments
of appearing.

Similarly in bending and stretching, each phenomenon disappears at the

respective moment of appearing. When the concentration gets particularly
strong, the Yogī will observe, during the period of one act of bending, or
stretching, the process of dissolution in very quick serial motion happening
in the same place without change of position. The Yogī therefore realizes
"that the nature of phenomena was not known before because they were not
heedfully noted. Now that they are noted, it is perceived that the aggregates
do not pass on from one moment to another. They perish ceaselessly at the
very moment of their appearance." Thus the rūpas which had occurred
before do not last till the present moment; they have all perished. The rūpas
which are manifesting themselves now in rising, falling, bending, stretching,
dropping, stepping, moving will not reach a future moment. They will all
vanish away presently. The rūpas of the coming phenomena will also cease
at their respective moments of arising. Therefore all kinds of rūpas are
impermanent, incessantly arising and disappearing. They constitute
suffering, not self, but mere phenomena because they are not amenable to
one's control, arising and vanishing in accordance with their own conditional
causes. The Yogī comes to realize them through his own knowledge. To
enable such realization, the Blessed One exhorted that meditative effort
should be made until it is perceived that 'This is not mine.'

CONTEMPLATION ON NETAM MAMA AND ANICCA --- A DISCUSSION

'Netam mama- This is not mine,' according to which it may be asked,
whether contemplation should be done by reciting this formula. No recitation
should be done. Meditation should be carried out so as to know the true
nature of anicca, dukkha, and anatta. To k now the real nature of anicca etc
is to know the meaning of netam mama which is a peculiar ancient idiom of
the Pāḷi language.

In the Channa Sutta of Salāyatanavagga of Samyutta Pāḷi Canon, there was a

passage where Channa was asked 'Do you perceive thus 'This is mine, This I
am, This is my self' and Channa replied, "I perceived thus, 'This is not mine,
This I am not, This is not my self," The Commentary explained that it meant
that Channa had perceived it merely as anicca, dukkha, anatta.

Here seeing "This is not mine" is the same as perceiving that incessantly
arising and passing away, there is nothing delightful, not dependable, just
suffering. Seeing 'This I am not' is the same as perceiving that it is not
permanent. Conceit arises believing in permanence. When truth is known
about its impermanent nature, there is nothing to take pride in. Seeing "This
is not my self" is exactly the same as seeing that it is not atta. Failing to take
note of every phenomenon of nāma, rūpa as it arises at the six doors and
then believing it to be permanent, the conceit makes its appearence 'This I
am'.

But when perceived that the phenomenon does not last even the blink of an
eye, everything is impermanent conceit cannot arise. When it is not known
to be non-self, there is clinging as self; when it is seen to be non-self, no
clinging is possible as atta - This is of course very clear and needs no
elaboration.

Ordinary people who cannot observe the phenomena of seeing etc at the
moment of their arising believe that the rūpas at the moment of seeing
linger on to become rūpas at the moment of hearing; or vice versa lasting
from one moment to the next. They believe also that it is the single I who
sees as well as hears, touches, etc. The rūpas of the past have arrived at the
present, and the present one will go on to the future. They believe in this
way too which is clinging to the belief in their permanence.

But the Yogī who is ever watchful of these phenomena knows that the rūpas
at the moment of seeing perishes then and there, does not reach the
moment of hearing; the rūpas at the moment of hearing perishes then and
there, does not reach the moment of seeing. Every act of seeing, hearing,
touching, knowing is a new arising, rising afresh all the time. This is knowing
the truth of impermanence as it really is. Knowing this, the Yogī realizes that
the rūpa of the past has ceased in the past, has not come forward to the
present; the present rūpa keep on perishing away even while being noted
and will not reach the future. He knows also that rūpas of the future will also
perish away at the moment of arising. He realizes that this rūpa does not
endure even for a duration of a flicker of an eyelid. Realizing thus, there is no
opportunity for arising of clinging by craving 'This is mine,' clinging by
conceit, taking pride as 'This I am,' not clinging by wrong view as 'This is my
self'. The Blessed One exhorted the group of five Bhikkhus to contemplate in
this way so as to be rid of clinging by craving and conceit. The ordinary
worldlings are also instructed to contemplate so as to be free of the clinging
by wrong view.

SOTĀPANNAS INSTRUCTED TO CONTEMPLATE ON NON-SELF

Why was the group of Bhikkhus who had already become Sotapānnas
instructed to get rid of Atta, 'This is not my self'? This is something to ponder
upon. According to Visuddhi Magga, Sotāpannas are free from illusions of
wrong view of atta clinging as well as illusions of perceptions (saññā
vipallāsa) and illusion of the mind. Being free from all the three kinds of Atta
clinging, to rid of what clinging, was this exhortation to contemplate on Non-
self given to the group of five Bhikkhus? In the first part of this book, it was
explained how this Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta was taught to remove the Asami
māna which is akin to Atta clinging. But here, as separate instruction have
been given to get rid of Asami māna in 'neso hamasami.. This I am not' the
instruction to contemplate on na meso Atta.. This is not my self' cannot be
said to be given to remove Asami māna; then to remove what kind of
clinging has it been asked to contemplate on 'Non-self', Anatta? This is the
point to consider.

This problem is not easy of definite and accurate solution. We shall attempt
to solve it in three ways. (I) The first solution. In Sīlavanta Sutta, it is
mentioned that the Arahats also do meditate on the nature of Non-self.
Reference may be made to page 470 of the discourse on Sīlavanta Sutta.
Although Sotāpanna has no Atta clinging to be rid of, he nevertheless
contemplates on non-self just like the Arahats for the attainment of higher
knowledge.

If this first answer is found not satisfactory, here is our second answer (2)
The second solution .. This is in accordance with what is provided on page
330 of Sīlavanta Sutta. There is no doubt that Sotāpanna is free from illusion
of wrong view which believes in self, in permanency of self. As to the illusion
of perception, it should be taken that Sotāpanna is free from it only when
reflecting intentionally it or when engaged in contemplate on it. Only on such
occasions the Sotāpanna may be taken as free from wrong perceptions of
permanence, wrong perception of self. If he is regarded to be free from these
illusions on other occasions also when no particular attentive note is being
taken on them, it will amount to putting Sotāpannas on the same level of
developments as Arahats; He will be knowing all acts of seeing, hearing etc
to be impermanent, mere phenomenon; he will have no conceit, no arising of
lustful desires regarding men or women.

Therefore, on inattentive moments, Sotāpanna can have wrong perceptions,

wrong notions of things. Thus to enable the group of five Bhikkhus to get rid
of such wrong perceptions and notions, this exhortation to contemplate on
Non-self was given by the Buddha.

(3) The third solution .. This based on explanation offered by the Venerable
Khamaka who had already reached the stage of Anāgam. Khamaka said that
he did not cling to rūpa as 'I am' nor to each of the other aggregates vedanā,
saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa. But with regard to the five aggregates as a
whole, he still was not free from the notion 'I am.' Just as in this explanation,
for a Sotāpanna, there is no clinging as self towards any of the aggregates
such of rūpa, vedanā, saññā etc., but with regard to the five aggregates as a
whole, Sotāpanna is not free from perception, the sensual passions still arise
in him to the extent of sitting down in a married life. Therefore it should be
regarded that the group of five Bhikkhus were exhorted to contemplate to
Anatta so as to become free from such ordinary perceptions and notions.

This is an attempt to reconcile the text in the Pāḷi Canon with the statement
in the Commentary which says that Sotāpannas are free from perceptions of
self or motions of self.

CONTEMPLATING IN ELEVEN WAYS SUCH AS PAST, PRESENT, FUTURE ETC.

We shall go on discussing how rūpas of past, present and future are

contemplated as anicca etc. We have already described how the Yogī
observing the rūpas at the moment of rising and falling perish away as they
come into being comes to know the phenomenon of anicca, dukkha and
anatta. The Yogī who knows thus can decide with his own knowledge that
rūpas of the past have not reached the present; the presently occurring
rūpas will not reach the future, they perish away at the moment of coming
into existence and are therefore impermanent. Consequently, they are
suffering, not self, but mere phenomenon. You will recite now how such
decisions and considerations are arrived at as described in the
Visuddhimagga; while reciting you should make an effort to reflect on them.
1. The rūpas of the past have ceased to exist; they do not reach nor come
over to the present. As they have ceased and terminated now, they are
impermanent. Because they disappear and perish instantly, they are
dreadful, pure suffering. Not being a controlling authority (sāmi), a
permanent entity (nivāsī), a doer (kāraka), one who experiences the
sensations (vedaka), it is not self with any essence, just the phenomenon of
Non-self.

2. The rūpas of the present will perish away and cease now. They will not
reach the future. As they are ceasing and vanishing, they are impermanent.
Because they are disappearing and perishing incessantly, they are dreadful,
pure suffering. Not being a controlling authority, a permanent entity etc., it is
not self with any essence, just the phenomenon of Non-self.

3. The rūpas which will come into being in the future will cease to exist then
and there. They will not be carried over to any further future existences.
Because they will perish and cease they are impermanent. As they are
disappearing and perishing instantly, they are dreadful, pure suffering. Not
being a self with any essence, it is just the phenomenon of Non-self.

This is how rūpas etc are generally considered with respect to its true nature.
Now we shall recite how we reflect while contemplating on them.

1. The past rūpa at the moment of last rising did not reach the stage of
falling; the last rūpa at the moment of falling did not reach the stage of
rising. It perished away at the moment of rising and falling away and is,
therefore, impermanent. Because it is impermanent, it is suffering. Because
it is unmanageable, it is nature of Anatta.

The last rūpa at the time of last seeing and hearing did not reach the present
moment of seeing and hearing; it perished away at the respective moments
of coming into being; it is, therefore, impermanent, suffering, just of the
nature of Anatta.

2. The presently rising rūpa does not reach the stage of falling; the presently
falling rūpa does not reach the stage of rising. It perishes away even while
rising and falling. It is, therefore, impermanent, suffering, just of the nature
of Anatta.
The rūpa at the present moment of seeing and hearing do not reach the next
moment of seeing and hearing. They perish away even while seeing and
hearing. They are, therefore, impermanent, suffering, just of the nature of
Anatta.

3. The rūpas at the moment of future rising and falling will not reach the next
future moments of rising and falling. They will perish away at the respective
moments of coming into being. They are, therefore, impermanent, suffering,
just of the nature of Anatta.

This is how the rūpa of the past, present and future are considered while
presently taking note of the phenomena of rising and falling. There is also
this method of reflecting on the rūpas of the past and future by
contemplating on the rūpas of the present. We shall recite about this method
of reflection.

Just as there are impermanent rūpas with respect to rising, falling, bending,
stretching, raising, stepping, dropping, seeing, hearing, etc., which rise and
fall and perish even while they are being noted now, so there have been
similar rūpas with respect to rising, falling, stretching, bending etc in the
past perishing away at the respective moments of coming into being and
are, therefore, of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

Having perceived by oneself how the rūpas in one's person perish away,
there remains the task of reflecting on the rūpas of other people, the rūpas
of the whole world. Just like the rūpas in one's person perishing away even
while they are being noted, the rūpas in other people, the rūpas of the whole
world, will also be perishing away and are, therefore, of the nature of anicca,
dukkha and anatta.

We have sufficiently dealt with consideration of behavior of rūpas with

regard to three aspects of time. We shall go to considering the internal and
external rūpas.

CONTEMPLATING ON THE INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL RŪPAS

People imagine that when they spit, defecate or excrete, the rūpas from
inside the body get expelled or discarded to outside the body. When food is
eaten or air is breathed in, the external rūpas are believed to have comes
into the body. Actually, it is not like this at all. Rūpas undergo dissolution at
the moment and place of their coming into being; the new rūpas rise afresh
to manifest themselves at the new place. The Yogī who is taking note
perceives such dissolution and ceasing taking place at each place of
origination.

And this is how it is perceived; when mindfulness and concentration get

strong, while noting the rise and fall, the out-breath is seen to break into
small sections in the chest, throat and nose before it finally make the exit
from the body. The in-breath is also seen to be entering, pushing in, in
succession of small sections. The Yogī who smokes knows the smoke, going
out and pushing its way in, in series of small portions. Similar phenomenon is
seen while drinking water when it pushes its away into the throat portion.
Therefore, the internal rūpa does not get outside; the external rūpa does not
get inside. It ceases, vanishes at the place where it comes into being.
Therefore, it is impermanent, suffering, not self, (445). We must recite this:
Internal rūpa does not get outside; the external rūpa does not get inside. It
ceases, vanishes inside or outside, wherever it arises and comes into being.
Therefore, they are of the nature of anicca, dukkha, anatta.

CONTEMPLATING ON COARSE AND FINE RŪPAS

Ordinarily people believe that it is the tender rūpas of our young days which
have become the coarse, gross rūpas of the adults; the healthy, light, fine
rūpas that becomes the unhealthy, heavy, gross rūpas; the unhealthy,
heavy, gross rūpas that have becomes the healthy, light, fine, rūpas. The
Yogī who is constantly watching the tactile bodies perceives these rūpas
breaking up into tiny bits even while being observed. Thus perceiving, he
knows the gross rūpas, does not form into fine rūpas, neither does not the
fine rūpa become the gross rūpa. The gross, hot or cold rūpa does not
become fine, cold or hot rūpa; fine, cold or hot rūpa does not become gross
hot or cold rūpa. The gross, stiff, extending, moving rūpa does not become
fine, stable, still rūpa. They all vanish at the moment of arising; they are,
therefore, impermanent, and of the nature of Anatta. We must recite thus:
(6&7). In the body, the gross rūpa does not become fine rūpa; the fine rūpa
also does not become gross rūpa. They perish away at the moment of arising
and are, therefore, of the nature of impermanence, suffering and not self.

CONTEMPLATING IN TERMS OF INFERIORITY OR SUPERIORITY

Ordinarily, it is believed that the unhealthy, inferior rūpas become the

healthy, superior rūpas; the youthful rūpas have become the rūpas of the old
man. But the Yogī who keeps track of the rūpas, at the moment of their
arising, perceives that any rūpa that manifests itself ceases and vanishes as
it is being noted and, therefore, knows that the inferior rūpa has not become
the superior rūpa; neither does the superior one become an inferior one.
They all disappear at the moment of arising; they are not permanent and
hence of the nature of suffering, non-self. We must recite thus: (8&9) in the
body, the inferior rūpa does not become superior rūpa; superior rūpa does
not become inferior rūpa. Disappearing at the moment of arising, they are
just anicca, dukkha and anatta.

CONTEMPLATING IN TERMS OF FAR AND NEAR

Ordinarily, it is believed that when a man comes from afar, he has arrived
with his rūpas of that far distance. When a man departs from a near to a far
distance, he carries away the rūpas of the near distance. But the Yogī who is
always noting the phenomenon of nāma, rūpa knows, when watching, for
instance, the phenomenon of stretching the body, that the rūpa that
stretches, vanishes away in a series of blurring fade outs without reaching
any distance; when bending, the rūpa that bends, vanishes away in a series
of blurring fade outs without reaching any distance. Perceiving thus, the Yogī
is convinced that the rūpa which is near, has not gone afar; the rūpa from
the distance has not come near. They vanish at the respective moments of
becoming and are, therefore, not permanent, but suffering, of the nature of
non-self.

While looking at someone coming from a distance and approaching, and

when noted, 'seeing, seeing', the man disappears section by section, part by
part in a series of quick blurring fade out. While looking at someone leaving
from a near distance and when noted 'seeing, seeing', the man disappears
section by section, part by part in a series of quick blurring fade out. Thus
the rūpa from a distance has not come near; the rūpa which is near has not
gone to a distance. The old rūpa keeps on vanishing and the new rūpa keeps
on rising, making them appear as if someone is coming from afar and
someone is going away. Only the Yogī who has reached the stage of Bhaṅga
ñāṇa and whose intelligence sharp can perceive the phenomenon as it really
is in this manner. Others with not so sharp an intellect may not perceive so
clearly.

Again, while in the course of walking to and fro, taking note of raising,
stepping, dropping etc, raising appears separately as one part, stopping
separately as one part. When insight is well developed, the movements of
body and limbs are seen as series of blurring fade outs. Perceiving thus, the
conclusion is arrived at that rūpas do not reach from one place to another;
they cease and vanish at the place they come into being. This is knowing in
accordance with the statement of the sub-commentary, "absolute realities
do not move over to another place; they cease and vanish at the places they
come into existence."

(10&11). Therefore, rūpas from afar do not come near; rūpas which are near
do not go afar. They cease and vanish at the place where they come into
existance. They are, therefore, of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.
This is then an account of how rūpas described in eleven ways are
contemplated on as 'This is not mine -- netam mama etc.'

To recapitulate.

"All rūpas whether past, future or present; internal or external; gross or fine;
inferior or superior; far or near: all rūpas should be seen with own knowledge
as they truly are; that 'This is not mine, This I am not, This is not my self.'

Let us stop here for today.

By virtue of having given respectful attention to this discourse on

Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, may you all attain and realize soon, the Nibbāna, by
means of the Path and Fruition of your own wish.

Sādhu! Sādhu! Sādhu!

End of the Sixth Path of the Discourse

On

The Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta.

Chapter 7
THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE ANATTALAKKHAṆA SUTTA

PART SEVEN

(Delivered on the full moon day of Wāgaung, the 8th waxing day of
Wāgaung, and the 8th waxing day of Tawthalin 1325 M.E.)

PREFACE

During the past weeks, we have finished with that portion of the
Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta which deals analytically with the anicca, dukkha,
anatta nature of the rūpas in eleven aspects. We have now come to the part
which deals with eleven aspects of vedanā analytically.

2. VEDANĀ ANALYTICALLY STUDIED IN ELEVEN ASPECTS

"YĀ kāci vedan, atītānāgatapaccuppannā ajjhattan vā bahiddhā vā olarika vā

Sukhumā vā hina vā panita vā yā dure santike vā sabbā vedanā, 'netam
mama neso hamasmi na meso attati Eva metam yathābhūtam
sammappaññaya dathabban."

Whatever vedanā, whether past, future or present, internal or external; gross

or fine; inferior or superior; far or near; should be seen with own knowledge,
as they truly are that 'This is not mine; This I am not; This is not myself."

This is the exhortation to contemplate on vedanā analytically under eleven

headings so as to bring out the anicca, dukkha, anatta characteristics of
vedanā. Here past vedanā means the sensations experienced in previous
existences as well as those experienced days, months, years ago in this life
time. There are also those experiences in the earlier part of today, of these,
it is obvious that the vedanās of the past existences had all ceased to exist;
but to those with strong attachment to atta, it would not to be so obvious
because they hold to the view that the self that had experienced the
sensations of the previous existence keeps on experiencing the sensations
now. In their view, they do not think all the sensations of the earlier times in
the present existence have all perished and ceased. They believed that the
self that had enjoyed these sensations before is still enjoying them now.

VEDANĀ CONTEMPLATED ON WITH REGARD TO THREE ASPECTS OF TIME

While the Yogī who is ever watchful is contemplating on the rising and
falling, if unpleasant vedanā such as stiffness, hotness, pain etc., appears, he
takes note of them. When thus noted, the unbearable vedanā gets less and
less painful and then vanishes away. When the concentration is specially
strong, it will be seen that each pain passes away with each noting.
Perceiving thus, it is realized with one's own personal knowledge that vedanā
which experiences sensations is not everlasting, does not even endure even
for about a second, incessantly arising and vanishing. Not to say of the
vedanās of the previous experiences, even vedanās of the present existence,
which had arisen earlier in the life, are non-existent now. The vedanā which
manifested only a moment ago is also no longer in existence now. All these
are realized by the observing Yogī who sees also that the pleasant,
unpleasant or neutral sensations, which are being experienced just at the
moment are also arising and vanishing, arising and vanishing all the time.
Hence it can be visualized that vedanās which are coming up in the future
too will arise and vanish away at the moment of arising. We shall
recapitulate by reciting;

1. The vedanā of the past has ceased in the past; it does not come over to
the present. As it has ceased and terminated now, it is impermanent. Being
impermanent, it is not pleasant, not dependable. It is merely dreadful, pure
suffering. The unbearable dukkha vedanā is dreadful too because it is
oppressing. Not being a controlling authority (sāmi), a permanent entity
(nivāsī), one who experiences the sensations (vedanā), it is not self with any
essence, just the phenomena of Non-self.

2. The vedanā of the present will perish away and cease now. It will not
reach the future. As it is ceasing and vanishing, it is impermanent. As it is
impermanent, it is dreadful suffering. It is pure suffering also because it is
unbearable. Not being a controlling authority, a permanent entity etc, it is
not self with any essence, just the phenomenon of Non-self.

3. The vedanā which will come into being in the future will cease to exist
then and there. It will not be carried over to any further future existence.
Because it will perish away and cease, it is impermanent. As it is
impermanent, it is dreadful suffering. Not being a self with any essence, it is
just a phenomenon of Non-self.

This is how vedanā is contemplated on with regard to three aspects of time.

Now we shall recite how we reflect while contemplating on it.

1. The feelings of stiffness, hotness, pain and discomfort which was

experienced a moment ago did not reach the present moment of
comfortable feeling. It passed away at the moment of feeling stiff, hot,
painful and unbearable. As it passed away in this manner, it is impermanent.
And because it is impermanent, and unbearable, it is dreadful suffering. The
comfortable feeling of a moment ago did not reach the present moment of
intense discomfort. It passed away at that very moment of feeling
comfortable and is, therefore, impermanent. Since it is impermanent, it is
dreadful suffering. All the feelings, pleasant or unpleasant are not self with
any essence, just the phenomena of Non-self.

2. The pleasant or unpleasant vedanās of the present cease and vanish,

cease and vanish even while they are being noted and are, therefore,
impermanent, suffering, just the nature of anatta.

3. The pleasant or unpleasant vedanās of the future too will cease and
vanish at the moment of their arising. They are, therefore, impermanent,
suffering, just the nature of Anatta.

This is how vedanās of the past, present and future are considered as they
manifest themselves at the moment of taking note of them. There is also this
method of reflecting on the vedanās of the past and the future by
contemplating on the vedanās of the present. We shall recite:

"Just as there are impermanent vedanās, pleasant, unpleasant, neutral,

which cease and perish even while they are being noted, there have been
similar vedanās before, perishing away at the moment of their coming into
being and are therefore of the nature of anicca, dukkha, anatta. The vedanās
which will come into being in future will also pass away at the moment of
arising and are, therefore, of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta."

Having perceived by oneself how the vedanās in our person, perish away,
there remains the task of considering by inference the vedanās in other
people, the vedanās in the whole world. We shall recite thus:

"Just like the vedanās in oneself which cease and vanish even while they are
being noted, the vedanā in other people, the vedanās in the whole world will
also cease and vanish. They too, are therefore of the nature of anicca,
dukkha and anatta."

We have sufficiently dealt with how vedanā is contemplated on with regard

to three aspects of time. We shall go on considering the contemplation of the
internal and external vedanās.

CONTEMPLATING ON THE INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL VEDANĀS

"Just as rūpa is considered in two aspects, internal and external, the internal
rūpa not becoming as external rūpa and vice versa, so also vedanā should
be considered in two aspects, internal and external," states the
Visuddhimagga. The vedanā from inside does not reach outside; the vedanā
from outside does not reach inside. In this way, it should be contemplated
on. The question arises here: Does it mean vedanā from inside one's person
not reaching the body of an external person; and other people's vedanā not
reaching one's person. But nobody believes that one's vedanā gets to other
persons and other person's vedanā gets to oneself. So this manner of
contemplation is not meant here. It should be regarded that what is meant
here is change of object, internal to external and vice versa.

When vedanā that has arisen dependent on an internal object is replaced by

vedanā that has arisen dependent on an external object, ordinarily people
think that the internal vedanā has become an external one. Conversely when
pleasant or unpleasant feelings conditioned by an external object get
replaced by pleasant or unpleasant feelings dependent on an internal object,
people think that the external vedanā has become an internal vedanā.
Similarly, the vedanā arising from an object far away changes to one
dependent on a near object, people think that vedanā has moved from a far
distance to one closely. And vice versa. What is meant here, therefore, is
change of objects external and internal, far and near, dependent on which
feelings arise.

The Yogī engaged in noting the phenomena of nāmas and rūpas as they
occur, takes note of the pain etc., when an unpleasant feeling arises in the
body. While doing so, if the mind passes on to an external object and
feelings of happiness or sorrow with regard to that external object, these
feelings should be noted as happiness or sorrow etc. Thus during all this time
of careful noting, the original feeling of unpleasantness does not reach
outside. It ceases and perishes internally. Then attention is switched on to an
external object which causes the arising of new vedanā. The Yogī thus
understands these phenomena. He fully understands also when the reverse
process takes place; that is, the original feeling of happiness etc., arising
from an external object ceases and new feeling of pain etc., is experienced
internally.

(4&5). The internal vedanā does not reach outside; the external vedanā also
does not reach inside. Respective vedanās arise and cease at the respective
moments of becoming and are thus of the nature of anicca, dukkha and
anatta.

CONTEMPLATING ON THE COARSE AND FINE VEDANĀS

While experiencing the gross sensations of pain etc., if one begins to feel
subtle ones, ordinary people believe that the gross sensations have changed
into subtle ones. From experiencing subtle pains, when the feeling becomes
very grossly painful, the belief is that the subtle pains have grown into gross
pains. The watchful Yogī, however, sees with every note taking that painful
sensations perish away, part by part section by section and, therefore,
knows that the subtle pains have not changed into gross ones; nor the gross
ones have ever changed into subtle ones. The old vedanās perish away and
get replaced by new ones arising in their place, mere nature or
impermanence. He realizes all this by his own knowledge.

(6&7) Gross pains etc., do not become subtle pains etc., and vie versa. They
perish away at the respective moments of arising. Thus vedanā is of the
nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

CONTEMPLATION AS INFERIOR OR SUPERIOR VEDANĀ

The painful sensation on the body is regarded as inferior form of vedanā,

whereas fine, pleasant sensations are regarded as superior kinds of vedanā.
Likewise, unhappiness, sorrow, dejection, sadness are inferior vedanās,
happiness, gladness etc., are of superior kinds. In other words feeling angry,
depressed and unhappy is inferior vedanā; feeling happy is superior vedanā.
But here even, happiness with delighting in sensuous objects of worship such
as the Buddha etc., is superior. As the experiencing of vedanās change from
one type to another, ordinary people think the inferior vedanā has become a
superior one, or the superior vedanā has changed into one of inferior type.
But the Yogī perceives that the vedanās perish away even while they are
being noted and, therefore, knows that superior vedanā does not become
the inferior one; nor the inferior becomes the superior. They perish away at
the moment of their arising and are, therefore, impermanent.
(8&9). The painful feeling of inferior vedanā does not become the happy
feeling of superior vedanā. Neither does the superior vedanā become the
inferior vedanā. They perish away at the moment of their arising and are of
the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

CONTEMPLATION ON VEDANĀS, FAR AND NEAR

We have already dealt with considerations of vedanās, far and near (10&11).
Feelings arising from far away objects do not become feelings dependent on
near objects; feelings with regard to near objects do not become feelings
concerned with distant object. They perish away at the moment of
experiencing and hence are of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

We have considered classifications of vedanās under eleven headings. We

will go on to similar exposition on Saññā, Perception.

3. SAÑÑĀ, PERCEPTION, CLASSIFIED UNDER ELEVEN HEADS

The Blessed One said "YĀ kāci saññā atītānāgatāpaccuppannā, ....

p .... santike vā sabbā saññā netam mama ... p ... yathābhūtam
Sammappaññaya dathabban."

"Whatever saññā, whether past, future or present; internal or external; gross

or fine; inferior or superior; far or near should be seen with own knowledge,
as they truly are that 'That is not mine, This I am not, This is not my self."

This is the exhortation to contemplate on saññā under eleven headings such

as past, present or future, analytically so as to bring on the anicca, dukkha,
anatta characteristics of saññā. Here past saññā means the perceptions
experienced in the previous existences as well as those perceptions of a few
months ago in this life time and those experienced only recently. Of these
past perceptions, it is obvious that perceptions of previous existences had
long ceased to exist. But to those with strong attachment to self, atta, it
would not be so obvious because they hold to the view that the same self
that recognized and remembered things in the previous existences is still
keeping on recognizing and remembering things now. All acts of recognizing
have been done and is being done by the single self, the same self. In this
life time too, what was recognized in young days or very recently is the work
of the same self, the single self right through out.

The Yogī who is ever watchful of the phenomenon of rising and falling etc at
the moment of touching, thinking, hearing, seeing etc., finds the perception
of sound at once disappears when noted as hearing, hearing; the perception
of sight vanishes when noted as seeing, seeing; so also the perception of
thoughts, ideas disappears as soon as they are noted as thoughts or ideas.
Observing thus, realization comes through personal knowledge that
perception is not everlasting; it does not last even one second and has the
nature of ceasing incessantly. Not to say of the saññās; perceived in
previous existences, even for the present life, perception experienced in the
past moments are no longer existent now. They have all ceased and
vanished; thus the Yogī can decide for himself. Even the perception that had
occurred only a moment ago has passed away now. So also have perished,
the saññās that are presently being manifested in the acts of seeing,
hearing, touching, happening at the moment. They all keep on arising,
vanishing, arising and vanishing. Thus it can be concluded that perception
coming up in the future will also disappear at each moment of their
becoming.

1. The saññā of the past has ceased in the past; it does not come over to the
present. As it has ceased and terminated now, it is impermanent. Being
impermanent, it is dreadful suffering. Not being a controlling authority, a
permanent entity, one who recognizes and remembers things, it is not self
with any essence, but just a phenomenon of Non-self.

2. The saññā of the present life will perish away and cease now. It will not
reach the future existence. As it is ceasing and vanishing, it is impermanent.
As it is impermanent, it is dreadful suffering. Not being a self with any
essence, it is just a phenomenon of non-self.

3. The saññā which will come into being in the future will cease to exist then
and there. It will not be carried over to any further future existence. It is,
therefore, of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

This is how saññā is considered with regard to three aspects of time. We

shall recite how they are considered while contemplating on them.

1. The saññā which recognized the visible form, sound etc., a moment ago,
does not reach the present moment. It disappeared even while recognizing.
Therefore, it is of the nature of anicca, dukkha, anatta.

2. The saññā which is recognizing and remembering things now also perishes
away while actually recognizing. Therefore, it is of the nature of anicca,
dukkha, anatta.

3. The saññā which will recognize things in the future will also vanish at the
time of recognizing them and is, therefore, of the nature of anicca, dukkha,
anatta.

Basing on the knowledge of the saññā which manifests at the time of noting,
saññās of the past and the future, and of the whole world can be considered
by inference.

Just like the impermanent saññās which are perishing even while being
noted now, so also the saññās of the past also had vanished away at the
time of occurrence and are, therefore, of the nature of anicca, dukkha,
anatta. Likewise the saññās coming up in the future will also disappear at
respective moments of occurrence and are, therefore, of the nature of
anicca, dukkha and anatta. The saññās in one's person, in other people, in
the whole world also perish and vanish at the respective moments of arising
and are all of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

That the saññā which recognizes and remembers things is impermanent and
is quite obvious if we just reflect on how easily we have forgotten what we
have studied or even learnt by heart. We shall recite how to reflect on the
internal and external aspect of saññā.

(4&5). The saññā with regard to one's own person does not reach the
moment of perceiving the external objects. The saññās on the outside bodies
also do not last till the internal objects are perceived. They perish away at
the respective moments of their arising and are, therefore, of the nature of
anicca, dukkha and anatta.

The saññās with regard to desire and craving, with regard to anger and
transgression, with regard to conceit, wrong view, doubts and misgivings, all
these unwholesome saññās are of the gross type. Saññās with regard to
devotional piety towards the Blessed One etc., saññās with regard to
Dhamma discourse, with regard to good advice and instructions from
teachers and parents. These are fine subtle types of saññās, wholesome
saññās of superior types. The gross types belong to the inferior class of
saññās. In other words, recognition of prominent, coarse objects is coarse
saññās; recognition of fine objects is subtle saññā. We shall recite how we
consider these coarse and fine saññās.

(6&7). Coarse saññās do not reach the moment of occurrence of fine saññās.
Fine saññās do not reach the moment of occurrence of coarse saññās. They
vanish at the respective moment of occurrence and are of the nature of
anicca, dukkha and anatta.

We shall also recite how we consider the inferior and superior type of
saññās.

(8&9). The inferior saññā does not reach the moment of occurrence of
superior saññā; so also the superior saññā does not reach the moment of
occurrence of inferior saññā. They vanish at the respective moments of
occurrence and are of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

Thinking about the distant objects, fine objects and recognizing,

remembering them is called saññā of the far distance. Recognizing the
coarse objects, near objects, objects in one's person is called the near saññā.

(10&11). The distant saññā does not reach the moment of occurrence of
near saññā; the near saññā also does not reach the moment of occurrence of
distant saññā. They vanish at the moment of arising and are of the nature of
anicca, dukkha and anatta.

We have finished enumeration of saññā under eleven heads. We will go on to

considering the aggregates of saṅkhāra.

4. SAṄKHARAKKHANDHĀ UNDER ELEVEN HEADS

The Blessed One stated: " Ye keci saṅkhāra atītānāgatapaccuppanna

ajjhattam vā bahidhā vā olārikā vā sukhumā vā hina vā panitā vā ye dure vā
santike vā sabbe saṅkhāra netam mama, neso hamasmi na meso attāti
evametam yathābhūtam sammappaññaya dāthabbam."
"Whatever saṅkhāra, whether past, future or present; internal or external;
gross, or fine; inferior or superior, far or near, should be seen with own
knowledge, as they truly are, that This is not mine, This I am not, This is
myself."

This is the exhortation to contemplate on saṅkhāra under eleven headings

such as past, present or future etc, analytically so as to bring out the anicca,
dukkha, anatta characteristics of saṅkhāras.

Here it should be noted there are many Dhammas classified under

saṅkhārakkhandhā. We have already stated before that apart from vedanā
and saññā, the remaining fifty kinds of mental concomitants come under the
classification of saṅkhārakkhandhā. To brief, these are the motivating forces
enabling production of physical, vocal and mental activities.

They are responsible for the four bodily positions of going, standing, sitting
and lying down. It is as if they are giving the commands, 'Now go; now stand,
now sit down'. They also bring about actions of bending, stretching, moving,
smiling etc as if they are issuing orders 'to bend, stretch, smile, laugh or cry.
It is also these saṅkhāras which are causing vocal actions as if they are
ordering, 'now say this. They are also responsible for acts of thinking, seeing,
hearing, etc.

Thus the saṅkhāras of the past existences ... the wish to go, stand or
speak ... could not come over to the present existence. Could they? Didn't
they all perish and pass away, then and there. It is obvious, of course, that
the desire to do, take or think, in previous existence, had all ceased and
vanished now. But those who cling firmly to the belief, "It is I who is doing all
actions; all actions are being done by me", are attached to the idea of a
single self, "It is I who had done all the actions in the previous existence; the
doer in the present existence is also I," For them, holding on to this Atta
clinging, 'the doer I' is everlasting.

The Yogī, who is ever watching the rise and fall, if itchy feeling is felt, during
the course of noting, in some places, notes 'itching, itching; while noting
thus, if the desire to scratch the itchy spot arises, he notes at once, 'want to
scratch, want to scratch'. Then the saṅkhāra, namely the desire to scratch, is
seen to be disappearing every time it is noted. Also while noting, 'stiff, stiff'
because of the feeling of stiffness, if the desire to bend or stretch appears, it
has to be noted. Thus the saṅkhāras namely the desire to bend, to stretch,
change posture, perish when noted, vanish when noted, keep on perishing.
In this manner, saṅkhāras of wishing to change, to talk and think are seen to
be ceasing and perishing away.

CONTEMPLATING ON SAṄKHĀRAS IN THREE ASPECTS OF TIME

For the Yogī who keeps on meditating, not to say of the saṅkhāras of the
past existences, the presently forming saṅkhāras are seen to be perishing
incessantly; thus perceiving, he knows the saṅkhāras of past existences
have not come over to the present, the present saṅkhāras will also not go
over to the future; the future saṅkhāras will also not move over to the future
of much later time. They vanish away at the moment of arising. He realizes,
therefore, with his own knowledge that saṅkhāras are impermanent,
suffering and of the nature of Anatta.

We shall recite how saṅkhāras are considered with regard to three aspects of
time:

1. The saṅkhāras of the past (desiring to do) ceased to exist in the past. They
do not reach the present moment. Consequently, they are of the nature of
anicca, dukkha, anatta.

2. The saṅkhāras of the present moment (desiring to do) will not extend into
the future. As they are perishing and vanishing away now, they are of the
nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

3. The saṅkhāras which will arise in the future (desiring to do) will not go
over to the future of much later time. They will perish and decay at the
moment of their arising and are therefore, of the nature of anicca, dukkha
and anatta.

This is how saṅkhāras manifesting as desire to go, desire to do, talk etc., are
considered with regard to three aspects of time. We shall recite how they are
treated when contemplating on them.

1. The desire of a moment ago to step out with the right foot does not reach
the moment of desiring to step out with the left foot. The desire of a moment
ago to step out with the left foot does not reach the moment of desiring to
step out with right foot. It perishes and vanishes away at the respective
moments of arising and is, therefore, of the nature of anicca, dukkha and
anatta. Similarly, the saṅkhāras of the past do not reach the present
moment. They perished away at the moment of their arising and are of the
nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

2. The presently forming saṅkhāras of desiring to do or of careful noting do

not reach the next moment. They keep on perishing and decaying as they
are forming and are of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

3. The saṅkhāras which will arise in the future concerning the desire to do
and careful noting, will also perish and decay without reaching the future of
a much later moment. They are, consequently, of the nature of anicca,
dukkha and anatta.

Basing on the knowledge of the saṅkhāras which occur at the time of noting,
the saṅkhāras of the past, and the future and of the whole world can be
considered by inference in this manner:

Just like the impermanent saṅkhāras of wishing to do and of knowing the

noting, which are perishing even while being noted now, so also had the
saṅkhāras of the past vanished at the time of occurrence and are, therefore,
of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta. Likewise, the saṅkhāras of the
coming future such as wishing to do etc., will also disappear at the
respective moments of occurrence and are, therefore, of the nature of
anicca, dukkha and anatta. The saṅkhāras of one's own person or in other
people and the whole wide world also perish and vanish, just like the
saṅkhāras which are being noted at the present moment. They are all of the
nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

THE INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL ASPECTS OF SAṄKHĀRAS

The method of differentiation between the internal and external saṅkhāras is

the same as the one we have described vedanās and saññās. The saṅkhāra
of thinking on an internal object is the internal saṅkhāra. The developed
concerning an external object is the external saṅkhāra, that is, thinking of
acquiring external animate or inanimate things or bring destruction to them
is external saṅkhāra.

(4&5) The saṅkhāras concerning intention to do an internal action come to

termination and perish before reaching the moment of thinking of an
external action. Therefore they are of the nature of anicca, dukkha and
anatta. Similarly with respect to saṅkhāras concerning an external action.

Thinking of doing a rough action is saṅkhāra of coarse type; contemplating

on doing fine, subtle deeds is saṅkhāra of fine type.

(6&7) Saṅkhāras of coarse types do not become saṅkhāras of fine types. And
vice versa. They perish at the moments of arising and are of the nature of
anicca, dukkha and anatta.

CONTEMPLATING ON INFERIOR OR SUPERIOR TYPES OF SAṄKHĀRAS

All kinds of thinking about and doing bad deeds are inferior saṅkhāras.
Thinking of and doing meritorious deeds are superior saṅkhāras. Of the
meritorious deeds, act of keeping precepts is superior to acts of giving
charity; meditation is superior to keeping precepts and insight meditation is
superior to concentration meditation.

(8&9) Inferior saṅkhāras do not reach the moment of arising of superior

saṅkhāras; superior saṅkhāras too do not reach the moment of arising of
inferior saṅkhāras. They perish at the respective moments of their arising
and are therefore of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

The saṅkhāras of charitable deeds do not reach the moment of arising of the
saṅkhāras of keeping precepts. And vice versa. The cetanā saṅkhāras of
keeping precepts do not reach the moment of arising of saṅkhāras of
meditation. And vice versa. The cetanā saṅkhāras of the development of
concentration meditation do not reach the moment of arising of saṅkhāras of
insight meditation and vice versa. They all vanish at the moment of their
arising and are, therefore, of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

Contemplation on saṅkhāras of unwholesome and wholesome deeds is very

subtle. But the constantly meditating Yogī can know by his own personal
knowledge how these saṅkhāras keep on vanishing at the respective
moments of arising. For instance, while noting the rise and fall of abdomen, if
thinking about wanting and desiring arises, the Yogī notes that phenomenon
as wanting, desiring. When noted thus, thinking about wanting and desiring
vanishes before reaching the moment of wholesome deed of noting. The Yogī
who has advanced to the stage of bhaṅga ñāṇa knows this phenomenon
rightly and well. When Yogī feels glad having as his object the act of charity,
he should note, 'glad, glad'. When noted in this way, the Yogī who has
reached the stage of bhaṅga ñāṇa sees clearly the saṅkhāra of the
wholesome deed of contemplating on charity vanishes before reaching the
moment of noting. In addition, while noting the rise and fall, when random
thought arises, it should be noted. When noted thus, the saṅkhāra of noting
the rise and fall vanishes without reaching the moment of rising of the
random thought; the saṅkhāra of random thought also vanishes without
reaching the moment of noting it as a random thought. In this manner, the
Yogī perceives each and every saṅkhāra perishing away before it reaches
the moment of rising of another saṅkhāra. If the Yogī does not perceive the
phenomena in the way described, it must be said that he has not yet
reached the stage of development of that type of ñāṇa.

(10&11). Saṅkhāras of thoughts arising from distant objects do not reach the
moment of thoughts on near objects; vice versa. They all vanish at the
respective moments of their arising and are, therefore, of the nature of
anicca, dukkha and anatta.

We have finished enumeration of saṅkhāras under eleven heads. We shall go

on considering the exposition on viññāṇa, mind, or consciousness.

5. MIND OR CONSCIOUSNESS CONSIDERED UNDER (11) HEADS

The Blessed One said, "Yam kiñci viññāṇan atītānāgatapaccuppa-nnam

ajjattam vā bahidhā vā olārikā vā sukhumam vā hinam vā panitam yam dūre
santike vā sabban viññāṇan netam mama neso hamasmi na meso attāti eva
metam yathābhūtam sammapannaya dathabban."

"Whatever viññāṇa, whether past, future or present; internal or external;

gross or fine; inferior or superior; far or near should be seen with own
knowledge, as they truly are, that 'This is not mine, This I am not, This is not
my self."

This is the exhortation to contemplate on consciousness under eleven heads

such as past, present etc analytically so as to bring out the anicca, dukkha,
anatta characteristics of consciousness.

We have already explained in part VI of these discourses that contemplating

on anicca is same as contemplating on 'This I am not'; contemplating on
dukkha is same as contemplating on 'This is not mine' and contemplating on
anatta and contemplating on 'This is not myself' are the same.

Of the four aggregates of nāma, it must be said that viññāṇa, consciousness

or mind is the most prominent. The mental concomitants such as desire,
hatred are described as mind in every day language; desiring mind, liking
mind, hating mind. In the Commentaries too expositions are given first on
mind; then only they are followed by cetasikās as their concomitants. Here
also we propose to elaborate on mind to a considerable extent.
The past Viññāṇa may be the mind which had existed in previous lives; it
may also be the mind which had occurred during the younger days or the
mind which had happened since then during all those intervening days,
months or years. Even if we take today, there was the mind which had arisen
prior to the present moment. Amongst all these possible types of past
viññāṇas that the mind of the past existences has not come over to the
present life, that it had ceased in those existences, should be very obvious to
those members of the Buddhist faith who have taken an interest in spiritual
matters.

But for those with strong attachment to Atta, it is not easy for such
knowledge and understanding to arise in them. Because these people with
Atta attachment hold to the view that viññāṇa, consciousness is Soul, Self, a
living entity. When the old body of past existences broke up and perished,
the viññāṇa of these past existences left the old body and transmigrated to
the new body of the present life. It has remained there since conception in
the mother's womb till the present time; will reside there till the time of
death when it will leave again to a fresh body in a new existence. This belief
has been fully described in the story of Sāti in part IV of this discourse.

HOW MIND ARISES IN SUCCESSIVE EXISTENCES

As the Yogī know by their own personal knowledge, mind is something that
does not last even for a second; it is incessantly arising and vanishing. How it
arises and vanishes had also been described in the processes of cognition on
page, ... of this book. As explained there, for each existence, at the approach
of death, Maranasanna vīthi consciousness arisen holding on to kamma, sign
of kamma or sign of destiny as object. This is how it arises; (Refer to page ...)
From the life continuum, Bhavaṅga consciousness arises the sense door
consciousness, the Avajjana citta, which apprehends the sensation. This citta
reflects on a good or bad action he has performed during his life time; or it
may be a sign or symbol associated with the good or bad action or symbol of
place in which he is destined to be reborn. After this citta has ceased holding
on to the said object, the active consciousness javana arises for five times.
As the cessation of javana consciousness, holding on to the same object still,
the registering consciousness of Tadālambana happens for two thought
moments, at the end of which Bhavaṅga consciousness appears lasting for
one or two thought moments. After that the consciousness or mind comes to
termination for that particular existence and therefore the last Bhavaṅga
citta is known as Cuti citta, death consciousness.

As soon as the cuti citta ceases, depending on the wholesome or

unwholesome kamma which manifested itself at the death's door, and
holding on to the objects that appeared just prior to death, the new
consciousness arises in the new existence. This consciousness is called the
relinking consciousness or patisandhe citta which forms a linkage with the
past existence. As this paṭisundhe citta ceases, a series of Bhavaṅga citta
arises. When visible forms, sounds etc., present themselves as objects at the
doors of eyes, ears etc., the series of Bhavaṅga citta cease and sense door
consciousness followed by sense consciousness such as eye consciousness,
ear consciousness etc., arise continuously. This is actually what is happening
when you see, hear, etc., According to this process of arising of
consciousness, mind appears one by one in a continuous series, fresh mind
arising then vanishing. The cuti citta of last existence had ceased then and
there. The consciousness of the present life is the new one that has arisen
afresh, conditioned by previous kamma. Every citta is fresh arising, not a
renewal of the old one.

Therefore, the Yogī, who watches the phenomenon of rise and fall, takes
note of a thought when it makes its appearance. When thus noted by him,
his thought, or the thinking mind at once disappears. Perceiving this
phenomenon, he concludes that death means the termination of the
continuity of mind after the last cuti citta has ceased. And new becoming
means, just like the present mind arising afresh all the time, the first arising
of a fresh series of mind in a new place in a new existence. And bhavaṅga
citta is the continuous arising, depending on its kammic force, of similar
fresh mind starting with the very first mind at the moment of conception.
The mind which knows the phenomenon of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting,
touching, thinking etc., is the mind that arises afresh from the life
continuum. In this way the Yogī knows how mind arises and perishes and
from this personal experiences he can make inferences about the death
consciousness, cuti citta, and relinking consciousness, patisandhe citta.

LAW OF DEPENDENT ORIGINATION IS KNOWN THROUGH KNOWLEDGE

OF ROUND OF KAMMA AND ROUND OF KAMMA RESULT

Here, knowing that fresh mind arises conditioned by kamma amounts to

knowing the Law of Dependent Origination through the knowledge of round
of kamma and round of kamma result. Therefore we find in Visuddhimagga:
"Having discerned the conditions of nāma, rūpa in this way (that there is no
doer, nor one who reaps the deed's results. just phenomena arising from
cause and effect rolling on by means of the round of kamma and round of
kamma result, and having abandoned uncertainty (Is there Soul, self? Why
has self arisen? -- pondering in this manner), about the three periods of time,
then all past, future and present Dhammas are understood by him in
accordance with knowledge of death and rebirth linking processes.

Here, in this manner of discernment, "by means of the round of kamma"

includes also causes such as avijjā, taṇhā, upādam and saṅkhāra. In
addition, by discerning the first rebirth linking consciousness that have
arisen in between in the course of one existence become known. Also by
knowing all the consciousness with respect to the present life, the
consciousness with respect to the past and future existences could also be
discerned. Knowing the mind is knowing the mental concomitants that
accompany the mind and also the material base on which mind is
dependent. Therefore Visuddhimagga has said, as quoted above, 'all past,
future and present Dhammas are understood by him.'

CONTEMPLATION OF MIND WITH REGARD TO THREE ASPECTS OF TIME

As Yogī knows in this way that starting from rebirth consciousness

continuous series of mind arises and vanishes, it is clear to him that the
mind of previous existences had ceased then and there and does not reach
this existence. It is clear also that the minds of the present existence cease
at the respective moments of their becoming. Therefore the Yogī is in a
position to discern all the past, future and present minds with his personal
knowledge. We shall recite how we discern them:

1. The consciousness of the past does no reach the present; it had ceased
then and there. It is therefore of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

2. The consciousness of the present life does not go over to the next
existence. It is ceasing and vanishing away presently and is therefore of the
nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

3. The consciousness of the future life will not reach the future of a much
later existence. It will cease and perish at the moment of its becoming and is
therefore of the nature of anicca, dukkha, anatta.

This is how consciousness is considered roughly with respect to three periods

of time. To the Yogī who keeps on noting the rise and fall of the abdomen, if
thoughts arise while thus noting, he notes the fact thus: 'thinking, thinking'.
In this way the thoughts vanish away. When he hears he notes, 'hearing,
hearing' and the ear consciousness disappears instantly. He does not think
like the ordinary person that he keeps on hearing for a long time. He finds
that he hears intermittently; hearing, disappearing, hearing, disappearing,
the ear consciousness vanishes in successive of sections.

Likewise when noting the touch consciousness, it is seen disappearing

quickly. When concentration is specially strong, the eye consciousness rises
and vanishes, rises and vanishes in quick succession. Nose consciousness
and taste consciousness should be considered in a similar away. The noting
mind is also perceived to be alternately noting and disappearing. In short,
with every noting, the object noted as well as the knowing mind keeps on
arising and vanishing is pairs.

To the Yogī who is thus perceiving the phenomena very clearly, the eye
consciousness does not reach the moment of noting, thinking, hearing; it
vanishes at the instant of seeing. Hence he realizes it is impermanent.
Similarly, noting mind, thinking mind, hearing mind do not reached moments
of noting, thinking and hearing. Hence, the Yogī realizes they are
impermanent. We shall recite how they are contemplated upon.

1. The eye consciousness, ear consciousness, touch consciousness and

thinking mind etc., which appeared a moments ago do not reach the present
moments of seeing, hearing etc. They perished away and ceased and are,
therefore, of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

2. The eye consciousness, ear consciousness, touch consciousness and

thinking mind which are presently arising do not reach the next of seeing
hearing etc. They are vanishing and ceasing now and are, therefore, of the
nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

3. The eye consciousness, ear consciousness etc., which will arise in future
will not reach the moment next to that future instant. They will perish away
and are, therefore, of the nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.
Knowing in this way personally how consciousness arises and vanishes in
one's body, it came inferred that, just like the consciousnesses which have
been noted, all the consciousness which remain to be noted, consciousness
in other people, in the whole world, all consciousnesses are arising and
vanishing.

It can be concluded by inference that just as those consciousness which have

been noted and are found to be impermanent, consciousness in other people
will also be constantly ceasing and perishing. Those in the whole world too
will be ceasing and perishing. Therefore, all consciousnesses are of the
nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

We have considered all types of consciousnesses, but there remains

consideration of consciousnesses from some other aspects as internally,
externally etc.

CONSIDERATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS INTERNALLY AND EXTERNALLY

(4&5). The consciousness which already has an internal object does not
reach an external object; the consciousness which has external object does
not reach an internal object. While being fixed on the respective objects, the
consciousness perishes and ceases and is, therefore, of the nature of anicca,
dukkha and anatta.

CONSIDERATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS AS GROSS OR FINE

Angry mind is coarse; other types of mind are fine compared to it. Amongst
angry minds, that which is violent enough to commit murder, to torture
others, cause destruction to other's properties, to speak abusive, threatening
language is coarse; ordinary irritated mind is fine, subtle. Greedy mind is soft
compared to angry mind; but the greedy mind which is intense enough to
steal other's properties, to commit wrong acts, to use low, vulgar language is
coarse. Ordinary desire or wish is fine. Deluded mind (ignorant mind)
compared to greedy mind and angry mind is mild; but the ignorant mind
which finds fault with and shows disrespect to true Buddha, true Dhamma
and true Sanghā is coarse. Ordinary doubting mind, perplexed mind
(dispersed) is subtle. More subtle than all these Akusala cittas are the kusala
cittas. And amongst the kusala cittas, gladness and heartiness are coarse;
kusala citta which is unruffled and tranquil is fine.

The Yogī who is engaged in constant noting perceives, while noting the
arising and vanishing of coarse as well as fine minds, that the coarse mind
does not reach the moment of arising of fine mind and the fine mind does
not reach the moment of arising of the coarse mind. They vanish at the
respective moments of their arising.

CONTEMPLATION ON MIND

While the Yogī contemplating on the rise and fall, if the mind arises with lust,
he notes it as mind with lust, with desire. This is knowing the mind with lust
as it truly is, "sa rāgam vā cittam sa rāgam cittamti pajānāti," in accordance
with Satipaṭhāna Sutta. When noted thus, the mind with lust ceases and is
followed by a continuous stream of mind made up of kusala citta of noting
and the kiriyā citta, vipāka citta and kusala javana citta which are concerned
with ordinary acts of seeing, hearing etc. These kusala citta, kiriya citta and
vipāka citta are noted as they arise, seeing, hearing, touching, knowing etc.
This is knowing the mind without lust, kusala citta, kiriya citta, vipāka citta
and abyākata citta, as it truly is, in accordance with, "vitaragan vā cittam
vitaragan cittamti pajānāti" of Satipaṭhāna Sutta. Noting and knowing the
mind with lust as well as the mind without lust in this manner is
contemplation of the mind with mindfulness.

For your edification and general knowledge, we wish to touch upon the
exposition given in the Commentary. The Commentary defines the mind with
lust as eight kinds of consciousness accompanied by greed. This is then the
enumeration of lustful minds. Thus if the mind is lustful, it must be one of the
eight consciousness rooted in attachment. But, here, just considering that
eight kinds of consciousness rooted in attachment is known as saraga, mind
with lust, does not amount to the contemplation on mind with mindfulness.

Further vitaraga, mind without lust is defined as mundane kusala citta and
abyākata citta. In addition the commentary states that because it is the
object for consideration by Vipassanā ñāṇa, Supra mundane citta is not
classified as vitaraga, mind without lust, vitadosa, mind without ill-will etc.
Neither of the two kinds of consciousness is ill-will and the two rooted in
delusion is also classified as mind without lust.

At one time when we had no knowledge of meditation, we were assailed by

doubt why the consciousness rooted in ill-will and that rooted in delusion
were not classified as mind without lust. Only when we had acquired
knowledge through the practice of meditation did we realize and understand
how correct and natural was the Commentary exposition. Because, when the
mind with lust is contemplated on and noted, it at once ceases and in its
place arise only kusala citta, kiriya, vipāka and abyākata citta; it is not usual
for ill-will and delusion to arise then. Therefore at that time only the kusala
citta which is involved in noting or the vipāka abyākata, avijjana abyākata
citta involved in acts of seeing etc., and the kusala javana citta only are
contemplated on. Thus the definition of vitaraga, mind without lust, as
kusala abyākata citta is very natural and is in keeping with what the Yogīs
find through personal experiences.

When ill-will arises in the course of noting the rise and fall, that has to be
noted. The ill-will vanishes at once and in its place there arises kusala citta of
the act of noting the abyākata and kusala javana citta of acts of seeing etc.
The Yogī knows this mind without ill-will by noting it too. When the mind with
delusion, that is, doubtful mind, distracted mind appears, they are noted as
usual and they disappear. In its place there arise kusala citta of the act of
noting, the abyākata and kusala javana citta of acts of seeing etc. The Yogī
knows this mind without delusion, vitamoha, by noting.

Further when sloth and torpor make their appearance while noting the rise
and fall, these have to be noted as 'sloth', 'torpor'. These vanish away at
once and mindfulness arise in their place. This is noted by the Yogī before he
reverts to the rise and fall.

Again, while engaged in noting of rise and fall, if distraction and restlessness
appear, it is noted as 'distraction', 'restlessness', 'thinking', etc. When noted
thus, restlessness disappears, the mind remains still, tranquil, This state of
mind is also to be noted.

When the concentration is good and the mind rests still on the object under
contemplation, this quiet mind is also known automatically. When
restlessness appears then, it is noted and the mind becomes still again. All
these changes in the state of mind are heedfully noted; the mind which is
noted and contemplated on is called vimutta, free of defilements. The mind
which misses (remains) to be noted and contemplated upon is avimutta, not
free of defilements. The Yogī takes note of all these states of mind.

This is how mind is contemplated on as taught by the Blessed One in the

Satipaṭhāna Sutta. According to this mind contemplation practice, mind with
lust and desire, with ill-will, distracted mind, restless mind are all of coarse
variety. When free of those coarse mind, there arise in their place kusala
citta and abyākata citta which are fine minds. Therefore, the Yogī engaged in
watching the phenomena presently taking place perceives that the coarse
mind does not reach the moment of fine mind etc.

CONTEMPLATION AS GROSS OR FINE

(6&7). The coarse mind does not reach the moment of arising of the mind;
the fine mind does not reach the moment of arising of coarse mind. They
cease and vanish at the respective moments of their arising and are of the
nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

Classification of mind according to inferior and superior status is similar to

classification of inferior and superior saṅkhāras. We shall recite thus:

(8&9). The inferior akusala citta does not reach the moment of arising of
kusala abyākata citta; the superior kusala citta also does not reach the
moment of arising of the inferior akusala citta. They cease and vanish away
at the moments of their respective arising and are, therefore, of the nature
of anicca, dukkha and anatta. The kusala citta of charitableness does not
reach the moment of arising of kusala citta of moral precepts or of
meditation. The kusala citta of moral precepts of meditation does not reach
the moment of arising of kusala citta of charitableness. The kusala citta of
moral precepts does not reach the moment of arising of kusala citta of
meditation; and vice versa. The concentration meditation citta does not
reach the moment of insight meditation; the insight meditation citta also
does not reach the moment of concentration meditation. They all cease and
pass away at the respective moments of their arising.

The ordinary person not used to noting the phenomena of seeing, hearing
etc thinks that when he looks at a near object, after looking at a distant
object, the mind which sees the distant object comes closer and nearer to
him, when he looks at a distant object after seeing a near object, he thinks
the mind which sees the near object has gone away to a distance. Similarly
when a sound is heard from nearby while a distant sound is being heard, it is
presumed that the mind which hears the distant sound has moved nearer;
when a sound is heard from a distance while a nearby sound is being heard,
it is presumed that the mind which hears the nearby sound has moved away
to a distance. From smelling a distant smell, when internal odour is smelt, it
is thought the mind from afar has come nearer. While smelling odour of
one's body, when odour from outside is smelt, the mind which is nearby
appears to have gone afar.

While touching sensation is being felt at a distance, for instance, on the feet,
when another touching sensation is felt on one's breast or chest, the distant
sensation appears to have moved closer; and vice versa. While thinking of
distant object, one thinks of a nearby object and it appears that the distant
mind has come nearer; and vice versa. (From seeing a distant object, if a
nearby sound is heard, a nearby smell is smelt etc, it appears that the
distant seeing mind has moved nearer to become hearing mind or tasting
mind etc.,) In short, it is the general belief that there is only one permanent
mind; the same mind is believed to know every thing near and far.

The Yogī who notes every phenomenon of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting,
touching and thinking knows with his own knowledge that the mind from afar
does not come nearer; the mind close by also does not go afar. At respective
moments of their arising, they pass away. We shall recite thus:

(10&11). The mind that is conscious of acts of seeing, hearing, thinking etc.,
in the far distance does not come nearer; the mind that is conscious of acts
of seeing, hearing, thinking etc., near by does not go afar. At respective
moments of their arising, they all vanish away and, hence, are of the nature
of anicca, dukkha and anatta.

We have finished consideration of consciousness under eleven heads. We

shall recapitulate how these are contemplated on and bring our discourse to
a close.

"All consciousness, whether past, future or present internal or external gross

or fine, inferior or superior; far or near should be seen with own knowledge
as they truly are: 'This is not mine, This I am not, This is not my self.'

By virtue of having given respectful attention to this discourse on

Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, may you all attain and realize soon, the Nibbāna, by
means of the Path and Fruition of your own wish.

Sādhu! Sādhu! Sādhu!

End of the Seventh Part of the Discourse

On
The Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta.
Chapter 8
THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE ANATTALAKKHAṆA SUTTA

PART EIGHT

(Delivered on the full moon day and the 8th waxing day of Tawthalin, 1325
M.E.)

PREFACE

We have already delivered ten discourses on the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta and

covered seven parts of it. This eight part will mark the termination of this
series of discourses. The original Sutta is divided into four sections. The first
section deals with the Teaching that 'the five aggregates of rūpa, vedanā,
saññā, saṅkhāra and viññāṇa tend to afflict and are, therefore, not Self the
inner essence; being unmanageable and not subject to control is not Self,
the inner essence.'

The second part deals with the question 'Are the five aggregates permanent
or impermanent? Suffering or happiness?, and explains that it is not fitting to
regard that which is not permanent, suffering, subject to change as 'This is
mine, This I am, This is my self.'

In the third part, the five aggregates are classified and enumerated under
eleven heads and it is taught to contemplate on them as 'This is not mine,
This I am not, This is not my self (as anicca, dukkha, anatta).'

In the eighth part which we will deal with today, the Blessed One has taught
how, for the Yogī who is perceiving the nature of anicca, dukkha, anatta, the
knowledge of insight is developed step by step and how nibbinda ñāṇa is
developed leading to the attainment of the knowledge of the Path and
Fruition and final liberation as an Arahat.

HOW INSIGHT KNOWLEDGE IS DEVELOPED

(THE LAST PORTION OF THE SUTTA)

"Evam passam, Bhikkhave, sutavā ariyasāvako, rūpasamimpi nibbindati

vedanāyapi nibbindati saññāyapi nibbindati saṅkhāresupi nibbindati
viññāṇasamimpi nibbindati."

'Bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple, seeing thus, gets wearied of matter,
gets wearied of feeling, gets wearied of perception, gets wearied of mental
formations, gets wearied of consciousness.'

In this way, the Blessed One taught how nibbinda ñāṇa, knowledge of things
as disgusting is developed, 'Seeing thus,' in the above passage means
seeing, anicca, dukkha and anatta as instructed. He becomes the instructed
disciple fully quipped with knowledge from hearing as well as knowledge
from personal experience.

He has learnt from hearing that, in order to perceiving the nature of anicca,
dukkha and anatta in the five aggregates of rūpa, vedanā, saññā, saṅkhara
and viññāṇa, one has to take note of every act of seeing, hearing, smelling,
tasting, touching, thinking. He has also heard about the fact that one has to
contemplate on the five group of grasping of just nāma, rūpa and that
knowing by taking note is nāma. He has also learnt from hearing about cause
and effect, about the nature of incessant arising and vanishing,
impermanence and insubstantiality. All of this constitutes knowledge
acquired from hearing, hearsay or learning. The Yogīs are accomplished in
this form of knowledge even before they are engaged in meditation.

Then while taking note of rising, falling, bending, stretching, moving,

extending, pressing, feeling hard, coarse, soft, smooth, hot, cold, seeing,
hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, the Yogī realizes that the objects he is
taking note are rūpas and knowing these objects is nāma; that there are only
this rūpa and nāma. When he takes note of eye consciousness, ear
consciousness, is nāma and the location of this consciousness, is rūpa; that
there are only these two. Our audience here knows in this way too. This is
the knowledge acquired through personal experience.

Further, when he wants to bend, he bends; he want to stretch, stretches; he

wants to go, he goes. Noting all these, he comes to realize that he bends
because he wants to, he stretches because he wants to, goes because he
wants to; there is no living entity making him to bend, stretch or go. There is
only respective causes for each of the result produced. This is also
knowledge from personal experience.

When he fails to take note of the phenomena, he can not see them as they
really are; he develops liking for them; from liking comes craving for them.
Because he craves for them, he has to put in efforts to gain them, thereby
producing kusala and akusala kammas. In consequence of these kammas,
there are new becomings. In this way, he comes to understand the Law of
dependent Origination concerning the cause and effects of phenomena.

Again, both the objects of rūpa, vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra and viññāṇa and
the knowing mind keep on arising afresh and perishing. He, therefore, knows
rightly, as the Blessed One had instructed, that they are of the nature of
anicca, dukkha and anatta.

As stated above, various kinds of knowledge beginning with that of

differentiation between nāma and rūpa, right up to knowledge about their
nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta are all gained by personal experience,
not from hearing or learning. We dare say that the present audience has
many members who are equipped with such personal knowledge. Thus we
say that the person who can perceive the true nature of anicca, dukkha and
anatta through personal experience is one who is well instructed, equipped
with both the knowledge of hearing or learning and the knowledge from
personal experience. It goes without saying that the Group of five Bhikkhus,
present at the time of discourse on the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, being
Sotāpanas, are fully equipped with both types of knowledge and are,
therefore, fully instructed.

The disciple of the Blessed One who is thus fully instructed can perceive,
with his own knowledge, the five aggregates of rūpa, vedanā, saññā,
saṅkhāra and viññāṇa as they manifest themselves at every moment of
seeing, hearing, touching, knowing to be of the nature of anicca, dukkha and
anatta. The Yogī who can perceive in this way soon reaches the stage of
Udayabbaya ñāṇa which discerns the rapid arising and dissolution of rūpa
and nāma. According to Vasuddhi Magga, when that stage is reached, the
Yogī witnesses strange lights and aura; he experiences an unprecedented
happiness, intense joy (pīti) and quietude. He also experiences lightness in
body and mind, softness and gentleness, vigour and uprightness. He thus
feels indescribably pleasant and fine in body and mind. This mindfulness is
so perfect that it may be said that there is nothing he is not mindful of;
intellectually so keen and sharp that it seems there is nothing he cannot
comprehend. His religious fervour increases and his faith and devotion in the
Buddha, Dhamma and Sanghā grows, unprecedentedly clear and bright.

But all these strange developments have to be noted and rejected. When
they are noted and rejected thus, this stage of knowledge is passed and the
next stage is reached with appearance of the Bhaṅga ñāṇa. At the time,
object of meditation and meditating mind are perceived to be disintegrating,
perishing pair by pair. For instance, when the rising is noted, the rising
vanishes as well as the noting mind. Each act of rising is discerned to be
vanishing in successive separate disappearances. This is discerned at every
moment of noting. It even appears that the object of meditation perishes
away first, and noting of it seems to come later. This is of course, what
actually happens. When arising of thought is contemplated on, the noting
mind arises only after that thought has disappeared. The same thing
happens whilst noting other objects. The noting takes place only after the
object to be noted has disappeared. But when the knowledge is not yet fully
developed, the object to be noted seems to disappear simultaneously with
the knowing mind. This is in accord with the Sutta teaching that only the
present moment is contemplated on.

Perceiving the continuous process of dissolution happening rapidly, one

come to know that death may come along at any time and this is a
dangerous, terrible state of affairs. This is knowledge of dangerousness or
terror, Bhaya ñāṇa. When it is seen as dangerous the understanding arises
(of fearful things) as baneful, blameworthy. This is ādinava ñāṇa. The Yogī no
longer finds delight in these baneful aggregates of rūpa and nāma. He finds
them detestable, disgusting, which is Nibbidā ñāṇa. The Blessed One was
referring to this state of mind when he said, 'Rūpasmim pi nibbindati ... He
gets wearied of rūpa ...'

Before the knowledge is developed on to this stage of Nibbidā ñāṇa, a

person is feeling quite satisfied and happy with his physical form of the
present existence; satisfied and happy with the expectation of human
physical form or celestial physical form in the future existence. He craves for
and looks forward to, with great expectation, happiness of human existence,
celestial existence, with beautiful body, healthy body. With the arising of this
knowledge, he does not feel happy any more. The so-called happiness of
human life is made up of incessantly arising and perishing body and mind.
He also visualizes that the so-called happiness in a celestial being is similarly
constituted of instantly perishing nāma and rūpa, for which he has developed
detestation and disgust. It is just like the fisherman holding a dangerous
snake, thinking it to be the fish he had caught. But once he realized that he
had in his hand a dangerous snake instead of a fish, he became alarmed and
detested with it, badly wanting to get rid of it, to release his hold on it. This
illustration was described fully in our discourse on the Sīlavanta Sutta.

Furthermore, before the advent of the Nibbidā ñāṇa, he takes delight in all
the vedanās, sensations, he is enjoying now; yearns for the pleasurable
sensations of the human or celestial worlds in the future existences. He
takes delight in the good saññās, perceptions, he is blessed with now; he
longs for and happy with the thought of having good perceptions in future
existences. He takes delight in thoughts and actions of the present life and
thoughts and actions in future existences. Some even pray how they would
like to be reborn as a human being and what they would like to do when
reborn as such. Some indulge and rejoice in day-dreaming and ideation now
and look forward to doing similarly in coming existences. But when Nibbidā
ñāṇa is developed, he sees the ever rising and perishing vedanā, saññā,
saṅkhāra and viññāṇa as they truly are and he feels a distaste for them. Just
as they are fast perishing away now, whether reborn as a human being or
celestial being, the vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra and viññāṇa will always be
disintegrating fast. Considering thus, he feels dispassionate towards all these
formations (aggregates), and is dissatisfied with them. It is essential that he
becomes genuinely dissatisfied and disgusted with them.

Only when genuine disgust and distaste is developed towards them, that
knowledge as regards the wish to escape from them, to discard them, arises
and he continues on striving to really get rid of them. It is then that
saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa will appear and when that ñāṇa is fully developed,
Nibbāna can be realized through attainment of the knowledge of the Noble
Path and Fruition, to become real Sotāpam, Sagadāgam, Anāgam and
Arahat. Thus it is very essential to really strive hard for the development of
genuine Nibbidā ñāṇa. It is for this reason that the Blessed One had taught.

NIBBINDA ÑĀṆA DEVELOPED WHEN ANICCA IS SEEN

"Sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā, yadā paññā ya passati, Atha nibbindati dukkhe, esa
maggo visuddhiyā."

"All compounded things, which arises as conditioned by kamma, mind,

seasonal variations and food, are transient. When one comprehends this
truth by vipassanā ñāṇa, then does one get dissatisfied and disgusted with
all this suffering (all the compounded things of nāma and rūpa ). This
dissatisfaction and disgust is the true and right path to purity, to Nibbāna,
free from all defilements and sufferings.

The Yogī who takes note of every act of seeing, hearing, touching, knowing
as it arises perceives only the phenomenon which is rapidly rising and
vanishing. He knows, therefore, things as they truly are -- all transient and
impermanent. With this knowledge of impermanence, comes the realization
that there is nothing delightful and pleasant in the present mind and body:
the future mind and body having the same nature of impermanence will also
be undelightful and unpleasant. He, therefore, develops distaste and disgust
for all the nāma and rūpas from which he wants to be free. And he strives for
the liberation by continuing with his meditation. Thereby saṅkhārupakkhā
ñāṇa appears and Nibbāna is realized through the Noble Path. Therefore, the
Blessed One taught that Vippassanā which sees only dissatisfaction and
disgust is the true path to Nibbāna.

NIBBINDA ÑĀṆA DEVELOPED WHEN DUKKHA IS SEEN

"Sabbe saṅkhāra dukkhāti; yadā paññā ya passati, Atha nibbindati dukkhe,

esa maggo visuddhiyā."

"All compounded things, which arise as conditioned by kamma, mind,

seasonal variations and food, are suffering. When one comprehends this
truth --

A certain person has interpreted the word 'saṅkhāra' in this verse to mean
the concomitant cetanā, which produces wholesome and unwholesome
actions. Thus according to him, the unwholesome acts of charity, keeping
precepts etc are all saṅkhāras and hence suffering. Practicing concentration
meditation, insight meditation too are saṅkhāra. All types of action are thus
productive of suffering. So in order to attain the Peace of Nibbāna, engage in
no activity. Keep the mind as it is." Thus he was misrepresenting
(misinterpreting) the teaching to suit his purpose. He has disciples who,
accepting his views, are spreading his wrong teaching.

As a matter of fact, the 'saṅkhāra' of this verse is not intended to convey the
meaning of kusala, akusala saṅkhāra which arise out of ignorance. Here
saṅkhāras mean simply the nāmas and rūpas which arise as conditioned by
kamma, mind, seasonal variations and food. Again, the nāmas, rūpas do not
include the supra-mundane path and fruition consciousness and mental
concomitants which form the object of Vipassanā meditation. Only the
mundane rūpas nāmas, which come under the three classes of spheres
(Sense sphere, form sphere and formless sphere) is meant here, the same as
the saṅkhāra of the previous verse. Thus all nāmas, rūpas which manifest
themselves at every moment of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching,
thinking are incessantly arising and vanishing and transient. Because of
impermanence, it is suffering. This is what is meant here.

"All compounded things which arise as conditioned by kamma, mind,

seasonal variations and food are suffering. When one comprehends this truth
by knowledge of Vipassanā as bhaṅga ñāṇa is being developed, then one
does get dissatisfied and disgusted with all this suffering; this dissatisfaction
and disgust is the true and right path to purity, to Nibbāna, free from all
defilements and sufferings."

The Yogī perceives that all the nāmas, rūpas which manifest themselves at
the moment of seeing, hearing etc., are undergoing instant dissolution and
are, therefore, transient. Because they are impermanent and liable to be
faced with death (to disintegrate) any moment, the Yogī perceives them as
dreadful suffering. For some Yogīs, unpleasant sensations such as feeling
stiff, hot, painful, itchy etc., keep on manifesting themselves on various parts
of the body. At every manifesting, these sensations are noted, thereby
enabling the Yogī to perceive the whole body as a mass of suffering. This is
in accordance with the Teaching 'Dukkhamaddakkhi sallato' which says that
vipassanā ñāṇa perceives the body as a mass of suffering caused by piercing
thorns or spikes.

It may be asked 'what difference is there between the unbearable pain

experienced by an ordinary person and that experienced by the meditator.
The difference lies in the fact that the ordinary person feels the pain, 'I feel
unbearable pain. I am suffering.'

But the Yogī knows this unpleasant feeling without any atta clinging,
perceiving it as just a phenomenon of unpleasantness, rising afresh again
and again, and perishing away instantly. This is vipassanā ñāṇa, knowledge
of insight, without any atta clinging.

When perceived either as dreadful suffering because of impermanence or as

a mass of unbearable suffering, there is no delight in the compounded
things, the heap of suffering but disgust in them. There is dissatisfaction and
weariness with regard to the present nāmas and rūpa as well as with those
of the future .. a total distaste and disliking for all nāmas, rūpas. This is
development of Nibbindā ñāṇa. When this ñāṇa is developed thus, there
arises the wish to discard the nāmas, rūpas, to get free of them. He
continues on with the work of meditation in order to achieve the freedom. In
time, while endeavouring on, saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa arises and Nibbāna is
realized, by means of the knowledge of the Ariya Path. Therefore, the
Blessed One had described the vipassanā ñāṇa, which considers all
saṅkhāras as suffering and is disgusted with them, as the Path to Nibbāna.

In a similar manner, the Blessed One taught how they perceived as Non-self
and therefore, regarded with disgust and dislike.

NIBBINDA ÑĀṆA DEVELOPED WHEN ANATTA IS SEEN

"Sabbe Dhammā anattāti; yadā paññā ya passati, Atha nibbindati dukkhe,

esa maggo visuddhiyā."

Here Dhamma in this verse has the same purpose as saṅkhāra of the above
two verse, and means mundane nāma and rūpa as perceived by vipassanā
ñāṇa. Anatta is Dhamma and Dhamma, phenomenon, thus means anatta. In
order to bring out more clearly the meaning of saṅkhāras which are non-self,
anatta, the word Dhamma is employed here. This is the explanation given in
the commentary and we believe it is quite appropriate and acceptable. But
there are other views which hold that the Dhamma is purposely used here to
include the supra mundane Path. Fruition and unconditioned Nibbāna as
well. We believe this interpretation is not quite tenable. The ordinary person
perceives the saṅkhāras such as acts to seeing, hearing etc., as permanent,
pleasant, whereas the Yogī sees these saṅkhāras as transient, and suffering.
Likewise what the ordinary person regards as self, namely the mundane
rūpas and nāmas, the Yogī sees them as non-self, anatta. The Yogī need not
and cannot perceive the supra-mundane things, which could not have been
his objects of contemplation and for which he could have no attachments.
Thus it must be taken that Dhamma here means just mundane saṅkhāras,
nāmas and rūpas which can form the objects of Vipassanā contemplation.

"All mundane nāmas, rūpas such as acts of seeing, hearing, etc., are not
Self, not living entity. When one comprehends this truth by Vipassanā
contemplation when reaching the stage of Bhaṅga ñāṇa, then does one get
dissatisfied and disgusted with all this suffering; this dissatisfaction and
disgust is the true and right path to purity, to Nibbāna, free from all
defilements and sufferings."

Because the ordinary person believes the nāma, rūpa represented by acts of
seeing, hearing etc., to be self, living entity, they take delight in them and
feels happy about them. But the Yogī sees in them only phenomena of
incessant arising and perishing and realize, therefore, they are not self, atta,
mere process of phenomena. As explained in this Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta,
because they tend to afflict, they are seen to be not atta, and being not
subjected to one's control, one's will, not-self, not atta. Thus the Yogī takes
no more delight and finds pleasure in these nāmas and rūpas. There arises
the wish to discard them, to get free of them. He continues on with the work
of meditation in order to achieve the freedom. In time, while endeavouring
on Saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa arises and Nibbāna is realized by means of the
knowledge of the Ariya Path. Therefore, the Blessed One had described the
vipassanā ñāṇa, which considers all sṇakhāras of nāmas and rūpas as
anatta, non-self and is disgusted with them, as the Path to Nibbāna.

The three stanzas, where it is taught that Nibbinda ñāṇa appears when
dislike and distaste for the saṅkhāras are developed and that this Nibbinda
ñāṇa is the true and right path to Nibbāna, should be carefully noted. Unless
the saṅkhāras represented by nāma and rūpa are seen by one's own
experience as incessantly arising and disintegrating instantly, the true
vipassanā ñāṇa which perceives them as anicca, dukkha and anatta is not
really developed. And without the development of genuine knowledge of
anicca, dukkha and anatta, the Nibbinda ñāṇa which find distaste and dislike
for the sufferings of nāma and rūpa saṅkhāras will not arise. And in the
absence of this knowledge of Nibbinda ñāṇa it is impossible to realize
Nibbāna. Only with personal knowledge of the nature of anicca, dukkha and
anatta, will weariness develop on the saṅkhāras and nibbinda ñāṇa, appear.
And it is only after the appearance of this Nibbinda ñāṇa will come the
knowledge of the Path and Fruition followed by the realization of Nibbāna.
This must be definitely understood and noted. It is for this reason that the
Blessed One had stated in this sutta. "Evam passam, Bhikkhave, sutavā ariya
sāvako, rūpasmimpi nibbindati etc." ... There are many Suttas in which
similar Teaching was given by the Buddha. Let us recapitulate on this point:

"Bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple seeing thus (seeing rūpa, vedanā,
saññā, saṅkhāras viññāṇa as 'This is not mine, This I am not, This is not my
self') get wearied of matter, gets wearied of feeling, gets wearied of
perception, gets wearied of consciousness.
DEFINITION OF NIBBINDA ÑĀṆA

In the above Pāḷi Text, 'Seeing thus' is a summarised statement of

development of knowledge of Vipassanā up to the stage of Bhaṅga ñāṇa.
And with the words 'wearied of ...' development of vipassanā ñāṇa form
Bhaṅga, Ādīnva, Nibbinda right up to Vuthāna gāmini, is very concisely
described. Thus in the commentary to Mūlapaṇṇāsa, we find this exposition:

"Nibbindati ti. Ettha ca nibbidāti vuthānagāminī vipassanā adhippetā."

"Nibbindati ti ... to feel weainess means feeling bored, feeling displeased,

unhappy. To explain further, the words 'Nibbidāti etc' should be taken to
mean the Vipassanā which reaches right up to Ariya Path known as
Vutthāna.

In the Patismbbidāmagga and Visuddhimagga, Nibbinda ñāṇa is enumerated

under seven heads of successive stages of development, namely, Bhaṅga
ñāṇa, ādīnava. Nibbinda, muncitukamyatā ñāṇa, Patisaṅkhāra,
Saṅkhārupakkhā and Vutthāna gāminī vipassanā ñāṇa. We have so far
explained up to the stage of Nibbinda. We shall now continue on with the
rest.

GENUINE DESIRE FOR NIBBĀNA OR SEMBLANCE OF IT

When the Yogī finds only rapid dissolution and disintegration, at every
instance of contemplation, he becomes wearied of and displeased with the
aggregates of nāma, rūpa manifested in the acts of seeing, hearing etc.
Then, he does not wish to hold onto those nāmas and rūpas; rather he wants
to abandon them. He realizes only in the absence of these incessantly rising
and perishing nāma and rūpas will there be Peace. This is the development
(arising) of wish for true, genuine Nibbāna. Formerly, imagining Nibbāna to
be something like a great metropolis, the wish to reach there arose then with
a hope of permanent enjoyment of all that the heart desires. This is not
desire for genuine Nibbāna, but only for mundane type of happiness. Those
who have not really seen the dangers and faults of nāma and rūpa only wish
for enjoyment of mundane type of bliss. They cannot have the idea of
complete cessation of all nāma, rūpa, including every form of enjoyment.

THE NIBBANIC BLISS

At one time, the Venerable Sāriputta was uttering, "This Nibbāna is blissful;
this Nibbāna is blissful". Then a certain young Bhikkhu by the name of
Lāludāyī asked him "The Venerable Sāriputta, there is no sensation in
Nibbāna; So nothing to experience, is it not? Then what is blissful in Nibbāna
where there is no sensation?" He raised this point not understanding fully
well that Nibbāna is void of all nāmas and rūpas and therefore void of
sensation too. The Venerable Sāriputta's reply to this argument was, "The
fact that there is no sensation to experience is itself blissful." True it is that
peace and tranquility is more blissful than any sensation which is felt to be
pleasant, delightful. This is true bliss. A sensation is regarded to be blissful,
delightful because of liking for it, craving for it. Without liking for it, no
sensation can be regarded to be delightful. A moment's consideration will
prove this point. A tasty food appears delightful and delicious whilst there is
liking for it craving for it. When one is not feeling well, with no appetite, or
when one has eaten well and is already full, the same tasty food will no
longer look appealing. If forced to eat it, there can be no enjoyment in eating
it; it will not be regarded as something good and delicious, but rather as
terrible and suffering. Take another example .. a beautiful sight, a pleasant
sound. How long can one keep on looking at a beautiful sight, listen to a
pleasant sound. How many hours, days, months, years? The interest in them
cannot last continuously even 24 hours, after which there will appear
actually distaste and dislike for them. To have to continue on looking at that
sight or listening to that sound will become a terrible suffering then. It is
clear, therefore, that to be without any liking or craving, to be without
sensation (feeling) is to be blissful. A detailed account on this a subject has
been given in our discourse on "Concerning Nibbāna."

LOOKING FORWARD TO NIBBĀNA

The Yogī who is developing the Nibbinda ñāṇa truly perceives the baneful
aspects of nāma, rūpa and has become weary of and disgusted with them.
He knows that in Nibbāna, where there is no nāma, rūpa, no sensation, lies
real peace and, therefore, longs for it. This is, like scanning the distance from
a lookout post, looking forward to Nibbāna by means of muncitukamyatā
ñāṇa, knowledge of liberation. As the will to attain real Nibbāna and desire to
liberate himself from the ills of nāma and rūpa develop, he makes further
striving. With this doubling of effort, he gains patisaṅkhā ñāṇa, (knowledge
of reflecting on what has been contemplated) which comprehends the nature
of anicca, dukkha and anatta more deeply than previously. Especially more
pronounced and distinct is the understanding of the nature and
characteristics of suffering, ills. When patisaṅkhā ñāṇa gains in strength and
maturity, he gains saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa, knowledge of developing
equanimity towards all conditioned things, the nāmas and rūpas.

This is a general description of how, starting from sammāsana ñāṇa, the

series of vipassanā ñāṇa gradually develop step by step in a Neyya
individual. With the noble persons such as Sotāpana, within a few moments
after the start of meditation, they may attain to the stage of saṅkhārupakkhā
ñāṇa. There is no doubt that the five Bhikkhus listening to the discourse on
the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta reached this stage instantly.

THE SIX CHARACTERISTICS OF SAṄKHĀRUPAKKHĀ ÑĀṆA

(1) FREE FROM FEAR AND DELIGHT

Saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa is distinguished by six characteristics. The first

characteristic is maintenance of equanimity unmoved by fear or
unpleasurableness as stated in Visudhimagga 'Bhayañca nandiñca
vippahāya sabba saṅkhāresu udasino. ' How has this equanimity come
about? At the stage of Bhaya ñāṇa, he has contemplated on the fearsome
danger and the knowledge developed thereby is characterized by fear. At
this stage of saṅkhārupakhā ñāṇa, all signs of fear have disappeared. At the
stage of ādīnava, he regards all things as baneful; at the stage of nibbinda,
all things are distasteful and disgusting to him. He develops desire to discard
all the aggregates, to escape from all these at the muncitukamyatā stage.
When he reaches the stage of saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa, all these
characteristics of lower ñāṇa, namely, seeing banefulness, feeling distaste
and disgust, desire to escape and putting in extra ordinary efforts have
disappeared. The quotation "Bhayañca vippahāya ... abandoning fear". from
Visuddhimagga is referring to the progress in knowledge which is free from
fear. In accordance with this, it must be regarded that with the
disappearance of fear, the other characteristics such as seeing banefulness,
feeling disgust, desire to escape, extraordinary efforts etc., have also
disappeared.

Furthermore, at the stage of Udayabbaya ñāṇa the Yogī has developed

intense rapture and thrill, feeling highly exultant, Saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa is a
development superior to Udayabbaya ñāṇa nevertheless, at the
saṅkhārupakkhā stage, all these thrills and exultations are absent.
Therefore, Visuddhimagga says; 'Nandiñca vippahāya ... abandoning
delights.' He has abandoned the exultations and delighting in thrills and
pleasures; he dwells contemplating on all the saṅkhāras as manifested in
seeing, hearing etc., with complete equanimity. There is no longer great
exuberance of gladness, happiness, delight such as that had occurred at the
stage of Udayabbaya ñāṇa.

This is absence of fear or delight with respect to practice of Dhamma. With

regard to mundane affairs too, it becomes plain how Yogī becomes free from
fear and delight. When worrying news of worldly affairs and with respect to
one's every day life, reaches the Yogī who has attained the saṅkhārupakkha
stage of development, he remains unperturbed, not much moved by worry,
anxiety or fear. He remains unperturbed too when he meets with gladdening
things, not moved much by exultation, rejoicing or delight. These are then
freedom from fear and delights in worldly matters.

(2) EQUANIMITY BETWEEN PLEASANT AND UNPLEASENT

The second characteristic is balanced attitude of mind, not feeling glad over
pleasant things nor sad and depressed by distressing state of affairs. He can
view things, both pleasant and unpleasant, impartially and with equanimity.
The Pāḷi text quoted here is;

"cakkhunā rūpam disvā neva sumano hotī na dummano,

upekkhāko viharati, sato sampajano ..."

"Having seen the visible form with own eyes, Yogī remains unaffected by it,
neither feeling glad nor unhappy over it, "However beautiful or attractive the
sight is, the Yogī does not feel excited and jubilant over it; however ugly or
repulsive the sight is, he remains unperturbed. He maintains an equanimous
attitude, being mindful and knowing rightly."

Taking note of everything, pleasant or unpleasant when seen, and knowing

its reality with reference to its nature of anicca, dukkha, anatta and
developing neither (attachment) liking or aversion for it, he views the
phenomena with impartiality. He observes with detached mind just to know
the phenomenon of seeing which is perishing every moment. The Yogī who
has attained the stage of saṅkhārupākkhā ñāṇa understands through
personal experience how this observation may take place. This is how
phenomenon of seeing is observed with equanimous attitude of mind.

The some thing holds true for all acts of hearing, smelling, knowing,
touching, thinking where observation is made with equanimity just to know
the phenomena of hearing etc.. This ability to watch the happening at the six
doors of senses with unperturbed equanimity is known as chalangupekkhā, a
special virtue of the Arahats. But the ordinary worldling who had attained to
the stage of saṅkhārupakha ñāṇa can also become accomplished in a similar
manner. According to the Commentary to the Aṅguttara, the Yogī who has
advanced to the stage of Udayabbhaya ñāṇa can become equipped with this
same virtue as an Arahat. But the accomplishment is not very prominent at
this stage; it becomes more distinct at the Bhaṅga stage. But at he
Saṅkhārupakkhā stage this virtue becomes well pronounced. Thus the Yogī
who has reached this stage of development, sharing some of the virtues of
an Arahat, deserves high esteem and respect of ordinary persons. Even if
unknown and unesteemed by others, the Yogī himself, knowing personally
his own virtue, should be well pleased and gratified with his own progress
and development.

(3) EFFORTLESS CONTEMPLATION

The third characteristic is effortlessness in contemplation. "Saṅkhāra

vicinane majjhattam hutvā ..." says the Visuddhi magga Text. "Taking a
neutral attitude with regard to the practice of contemplation." This is
supported and explained in its sub-commentary which says that "just as
mental equilibrium is maintained in the matter of saṅkhāras as objects of
contemplation, so also a neutral balance attitude should be taken with
regard to practice of contemplation on them. "At the lower stages of
development, the Yogī has to make great efforts for the appearance of the
object for contemplation on them. At the stage of saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa, no
special effort is needed for the appearance of objects for contemplation and
there is no special endeavor to have them contemplated on. The objects
appear of their own accord one by one, followed by effortless contemplation
on them. Act of contemplation has become a smooth, easy process. These
are the three characteristics concerning with equanimity and balanced
conditions.

We shall next go on to the three special characteristics of the

saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa.

(4) IT LASTS LONG

At the lower stages, it has not been an easy matter to keep the mind fixed
on a certain object even for half an hour or one hour. At the saṅkhārupakkhā
level, the concentration remains constant and steady for one hour, two
hours, three hours. Such is within the experience for one hour, two hours,
three hours. Such is within the experience of many of our Yogīs. It is within
the experience of many of our Yogīs. It is for this characteristics of
saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa that it is defined by Patisambhidāmagga as ñāṇa that
lasts well. And the sub-commentary to the Visuddhimagga explains that it
means "one long continuous process of development." Only when it lasts
long it can be said to last well.

(5) BECOMES MORE SUBTLE WITH PASSING OF TIME

The fifth characteristic is getting finer and subtler just like sifting flour on the
edge of a tray, as stated in the Visuddhimagga. The saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa
from the moment of arising is subtle, but as time passes, it becomes still
finer, finer and subtler, which phenomenon is within the experience of many
of our Yogīs.

(6) THE ATTENTION IS NOT DISPERSED

The last characteristic is that of non-dispersion. At the lower levels, the

concentration is not strong, the mind is dispersed over many objects. But at
the level of saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa, the mind is almost completely not
scattered or diffused at all. Not to say of other extraneous objects, even the
objects appropriate for contemplation, the mind refuses to take them. While
at the Bhaṅga ñāṇa level, mind is made to scatter over the various parts of
the body and thus sensation of touch is felt on the whole of the body. At this
stage, however, dispersing the mind becomes difficult: it remains fixed only
on a few a objects usually contemplated on. Thus from observing the whole
body, the mind retracts and converges only on four objects .. just knowing in
sequence, rising, falling, sitting and touching. Of these four objects, the
sitting body may disappear leaving only three postures to be noted. Then the
rising and falling will fade away, leaving only the touching. This cognition of
touching may disappear altogether, leaving just the knowing mind being
noted as 'knowing, knowing.' At such time when reflection is made on
objects in which one is specially interested, it will be found that the mind
does not stay long on these objects. It reverts back to the usual objects of
contemplation. Thus it is said to be void of dispersion of concentration. The
Visuddhimagga description is 'Patiliyati, patikutati, na sampasāriyati': "It
retreats, retracts, and recoils; it does not spread out".

These are three signs or characteristics of saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa which

should be experienced personally by oneself. When these characteristic
signs are not yet experienced, one can decide for oneself that one has not
yet developed up to this ñāṇa.

DEVELOPMENT OF VUTTHĀNAGĀMINĪ VIPASSANĀ

When the saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa, with these six characteristics, has become
fully perfected, there appears a special kind of knowledge which seems to be
fast moving; it looks as if it comes running with some speed. This special
kind of cognition is known as vutthānagāmini vipassanā. Vutthāna means
rising, gearing up from some place. Vipassanā ñāṇa is that which dwells on
the continued process of incessantly arising and perishing of formations
(nāma and rūpa). With each note of observation, it falls on this continuous
process of ceaseless nāma and rūpa. From that stage, when ariyamagga
ñāṇa is developed, its object becomes the cessation of the phenomena of
nāma and rūpa. This means that it rises, object gets up from the continuous
stream of nāma, rūpa and its becomes the Nibbāna. For this reason of
getting up from the object of the continuous stream of nāma, rūpa, the
ariyamagga is known as vutthāna. When the fast moving Vipassanā comes
to an end, the ariyamagga otherwise vutthāna achieves the realization of
Nibbāna. Thus the special Vipassanā appears to have gone over to the
ariyamagga, having risen from the saṅkhāras which it has had as its objects
previously; hence its name vuthānagāminī, having risen from the saṅkhāras
and gone over to the ariyamagga.

This Vutthāna gāminī vipassanā arises while taking note of one of the six
consciousness, mind consciousness, touch consciousness etc., which become
manifest at that particular moment. While the Yogī contemplates on the
rapidly perishing phenomena, he perceives the nature of impermanence; or
he perceives the nature of unsatisfactoriness; or the nature of non-self,
insubstantiality. This vutthānagāminī rises for at least two or three times;
sometimes it may repeat itself four, five or even ten times. As described in
the literature, at the last moment of vuthāngāminī, three thought moments
parikamma (preparation), upacāra (approximation) and anuloma
(adaptation) of functional javana appears, followed by one special moment of
Kāmāvacara moral javana which takes as its object the Nibbāna where
nāma, rūpa, saṅkhāras cease. After that javana, arises the Ariyamagga,
which plunges into the object of Nibbāna, void of nāma, rūpa, cessation of all
saṅkhāras. Immediately after magga javana arises the Ariya phala javana for
two or three times. Its object is the same as that of the Ariyamagga. With the
occurrence of the Ariya magga and phala javanas, the ordinary common
worldling attains the status of a Sotāpanna; a Sotāpanna that of a
Sagadāgam; a Sagadāgam that of an Anāgam; and an Anāgam finally
becomes an Arahat.

The Kāmāvacara moral javana which takes Nibbāna as its object is known as
Gotrabhū, the javana consciousness which overcomes the lineage of the
ordinary common worldling. The Pātisambhida Magga defines Gotrabhū as
follows:

"Rising from the objects of saṅkhāras which have the nature of becoming
has the tendency to plunge headlong towards the object of Nibbāna, free
from becoming and is, therefore, called Gotrabhū." Or, "Getting up from the
object of continuous process of arising of nāma and rūpas, and plunging
headlong towards the object of Nibbāna free from the continuous process of
becoming."

This is how Gotrabhū consciousness rushes along towards the object of

Nibbāna. The Ariyamagga also descends into Nibbāna towards which the
Gotrabhū consciousness is inclined and rushes along.

The Milinda-paññā describes: "The mind of the Yogī who is

contemplating and taking note, one phenomenon after another, step by step,
overcomes the continuous stream of nāma and rūpa, which is flowing
uninterruptedly, and plunges into the state or condition where the flowing
stream of nāma and rūpa comes to cessation."

At first the Yogī has been completing, one noting after another and step by
step on the ever rising phenomena of nāma and rūpa as manifested in acts
of thinking, touching, hearing, seeing etc. He perceives only the continuous
stream of the phenomena of nāma and rūpa which do not appear to come to
an end at all. Whilst he is thus contemplating on the never ending
phenomena of the nāma and rūpa and reflecting on their nature of anicca,
dukkha, and anatta, there comes a time immediately after the last moment
(parikamma, upacāra, and anuloma) of reflection, when the consciousness
suddenly inclines towards and descends into the state where all the objects
of contemplation and the contemplating mind come to complete cessation.
The inclining is bending towards Gotrabhū consciousness whereas the
descending is the realization of Nibbāna by mean of Ariya Path and Fruition.
"Oh, great King, the Yogī having practiced meditation in a correct manner,
and plunging into where there is termination, cessation of the phenomena of
nāma and rūpa, is said to have realized the Nibbāna."

This is the textual account of how Vutthānagāmini vipassanā is realized and

the Path and Fruition are also realized. Yogīs have found this account to be in
conformity with what they have personally experienced.

How the texts and experience conform: The Yogī generally begins by
observing the consciousness of touch, thinking etc., and acts of hearing,
seeing etc., in short, contemplating on the nature of the five groups of
grasping. As stated earlier, the Yogī constantly notes, at the Bhaṅga ñāṇa
stage, the rapid dissolution of the nāma, rūpa phenomena and finds them to
be dreadful, terrible. This leads him to regard them as baneful, disgusting.
Then wishing to be free of them, he strives harder still till he reaches the
stage of saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa when he views all things with equanimity.
When this saṅkhārupakhā ñāṇa is fully perfected, there arise in him very fast
moving and very distinct vutthamagāminī and anuloma ñāṇas, and the Yogī
descends into a state of complete void and cessation of all objects of
contemplation as well as acts of contemplation. This is the realization of
Nibbāna by means of the Ariya Path and Fruition. Such realization elevates
an ordinary common worldling into the state of a Sotāpana; a Sotāpana into
that of a Sagadāgam; a Sagadāgam into that of an Anāgam and finally an
Anāgam into an Arahat. The Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta gives the following
description of such transformations. (developments).

FROM DISTASTE, DISGUST TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF ARIYA PATH AND

FRUITION

"Nibbindan virajjati viragā vimuccāti"

"Being wearied, he becomes passion free and the Ariya path is developed. In
this freedom from passion and the Ariya path being developed, he is
emancipated from Asava kilesā defilements."

The Yogī develops from the stage of sammasana to that of Bhaṅga by

contemplating in the nature of anicca, dukkha, and anatta of phenomena.
The Blessed One was referring to this development by the words 'Evam
passam, -- Seeing thus' in the above text. The stage from Bhaṅga to
saṅkhārupakkhā and anuloma was described as 'Nibbindati feeling wearied
or disgusted.' Then comes, 'Nibbindan virajjatī, viraga vimuccati' 'when
disgusted, get wearied, when wearied, become free from passion; when free
from passion, become emancipated,' to describe the development of the
knowledge of the Path and Fruition. A very concise description, perfectly
matching with the practical experience of the Yogīs.

HOW THE EXPERIENCE AND DESCRIPTION MATCH

When saṅkhārupakkhā ñāṇa gets strengthened, extraordinary knowledge

appears very rapidly. The Yogī whose development in feeling of disgust is not
yet strong enough to abandon the nāma and rūpa is overtaken by anxiety,
"What is going to happen? Am I about to die?" As anxiety appears, the
concentration gets weakened. But when the feeling of disgust is intense,
there is no occasion for anxiety to arises and the Yogī contemplates on
effortlessly, smoothly. Soon he descends into the condition where there is
freedom from passion and attachment and the complete cessation of all
nāmas, rūpas, saṅkhāras. This is then emancipation from defilements, taints
(āsavas) which should become free at this stage.

When descending without any attachment into where there is cessation, by

means of the first Path (sotāpattimagga), the Yogī becomes liberated from
defilements of false views (Diṭṭhi āsava); from ignorance which is associated
with doubts and skepticism, and from gross form of sense-desires which may
lead to the regions of Apāya. This is emancipation by virtue of Sotāpatti
Fruition which is the resultant to the Sotāpatti Path.

When descending to where there is cessation by means of the second Path,

Sagadāmimagga, there is freedom from the gross types of sense desires.
When descending to where there is cessation by mans of third Path, the
Anāgam magga, one becomes free from subtle types of sense-desires as well
as from similarly fine types of ignorance. With arahattamagga ñāṇa, there is
the liberation from all kinds and types of defilements. This is in accordance
with the statement "virāga vimuccāti." When free from passions and
descending to where there is cessation, there arises emancipation by virtue
of Fruition which is the result of the Path. This emancipation is perceived
vividly by process of reflection.

REFLECTION BY AN ARAHAT

The process of reflection by an Arahat is described in the concluding words

of the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta:

"Vimuttasmin vimuttanīti ñāṇam hoti 'khīnā jāti vusitam brahmacāriyam

katam karaniyam nāparam ittatthāyā'ti pajānāti."

"When emancipated, the knowledge arise on reflection that freedom from

defilements has been achieved. And he knows "Birth is exhausted; lived in
the holy life (of contemplation and meditation); what has to be done has
been done; there is nothing more to be done." He knows thus by reflection.

This is how an Arahat reflects back on his attainments. Here it may be asked,
How does he know that birth is exhausted? So long as there is wrong view
and illusion with regard to the nāma, rūpa aggregates and attachment to
them taking them to be permanent, satisfactory, self and living entity, there
will be renewal of becoming in the cycle of existence. When one become free
of wrong views and illusions, he is free of attachment too. The Arahat knows
on reflection he is free of view and illusion with regard to the aggregates and
that he has no more attachments for them. Therefore, he perceives and
concludes that birth is exhausted for him. This is reflecting on the
defilements which have been discarded and exhausted.

Here the holy life means the practice of sīla, samādhī, and paññā. But
keeping the precepts only, or developing the jhānic concentration only, will
not achieve the purpose of attaining the highest goals. The purpose is
achieved only by taking note of the phenomena of nāma and rūpa as it
occurs until attainment of the Path and Fruition. Therefore, it must be taken
to mean by 'the holy life is lived' meditation has been practised to reach the
highest goal.

"What has to be done" means practicing meditation so as to comprehend

fully and well the four Noble Truths. By practicing meditation until
attainments of arahattamagga, this task is accomplished. Even after having
seen personally the nature of cessation by means of the three lower maggas
and having known the Truth of suffering which is the same as knowing the
nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta, certain illusions such as illusions of
perception and illusion of mind consciousness still remain to be eradicated.
Because of thus illusions, there is still delighting and craving believing them
to be pleasurable and enjoyable. The origin of craving has not yet been
abandoned. So even for the Anāgam there is still fresh becoming. At the
stage of Arahattamagga, the Truth of suffering (nature of anicca, dukkha and
anatta) is fully and well comprehended. All the illusions of perception and
consciousness are eradicated. Since there is no more illusions, there is no
misconceptions about delighting in enjoyable pleasure, no opportunity for
samudaya tanhā to arise; it is completely eradicated, The task of knowing
the Four Noble Truths is fully accomplished. That is why it is reflected that
there is nothing more to be done.

In this account of reflection by an Arahat, there is no mention of reflection on

the Path, Fruition, Nibbāna and the defilements directly and separately. But
it should be taken that they are reflected on first, followed by reflection on
others. Thus it should be taken that the reflection on 'Holy life is lived; what
has to be done is done' came as continuation after the Path, Fruition and
Nibbāna have been reflected on. "The mind is free; birth is exhausted" is
reflected on, only after the reflection on the defilements which have been
removed, eradicated. Accounts of reflection by the Sotāpam, the Sagadāgam
and the Anāgam are given in our discourses on Sīlavanta.

RECAPITULATION

"Being wearied he becomes passion free and Ariya Path arises. When there
is freedom from the passion and the Path has arisen, he is emancipated from
the bonds of defilements. With the emancipation comes the reflection that
the mind has become free. And he knows 'Birth is exhausted; the holy life is
lived; what has to be done is done; there is nothing more of this becoming."
The Venerable Theras who recited the Sutta at the Council had recorded the
following terminal passage:

"Idamavoca Bhagavā attamanā pañcavaggiyā Bhikkhu Bhagavato bāsitam

abhinandun. Imasmin ca pana veyā karanasmin bhaññamāne
pañcavaggiyānam Bhikkhunam ānupādāya āsavehi cittāni vimuccim suti."

"Thus the Blessed One said,' (Rūpam Bhikkhave anatta -- P -- nāparam

itattathāya ti pajānāti) to teach this Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta to the group of
five Bhikkhus so that they should attain Arahatship. Pleased, the group of
five Bhikkhus were delighted with the exposition of the Blessed One.
Moreover, as this exposition was being spoken (or just at the end of this
discourse), the mind of the group of the five Bhikhus were free of
attachments and become emancipated from defilements.

Sādhu! Sādhu! Sādhu!

Amongst the group of five Bhikkhus, the Venerable Kondañña became a

Sotāpana on the first watch of the full moon of Wāso while listening to the
discourse on Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta. He must have continued on
with the contemplation and meditation. But he had not attained Arahatship
before he heard the discourse on Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta. Venerable Vappa
became Sotāpana on the first waning day of Wāso, the Venerable Bhaddiya
on the second, the Venerable Mahānam on the third and the Venerable
Assaji on the fourth waning day of Wāso respectively. All five of them
Sotāpanas at the time, while listening to this discourse on the
Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, contemplated on the five aggregates as "This is not
mine, This I am not, This is not my self;" just of the nature of anicca, dukkha
and anatta. They attained to the three higher stages of knowledge, step by
step and became Arahats. According to the commentary to the
Patisammbhidā, they gained Arahatship just at the end of the discourse by
reflecting on the Teaching.

It was in the year 103 of the grate Era, Counting back from this year 1325 of
M.E., it was 2552 years ago. That year, on the fifth waning day of Wāso after
the discourse on the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta was ended, there had appeared
six Arahats including the Blessed One in the human world. It arouses great
devotional piety by visualizing this scene at the deer sanctuary near
Vārānasi, how the Blessed One was teaching the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta and
how the group of five Bhikkhus while giving respectful attention to the
discourse attained to the Arahatship, the cessation of all defilements. Let us
try to visualize this scene.

HOMAGE TO THE SIX ARAHATS

Two thousand five hundred and fifty two years ago, on the fifth waning day
of Wāso, the Blessed One gave the discourse on the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta to
the group of five Bhikkhus. Listening to the discourse and contemplating on
the Teaching, all the five Bhikkhus became free from defilements and
attained to Arahatship. We pay our reverential homage with raised hands,
palms together to the all Enlightened One and the group of five Bhikkhus
who had become the first Six Arahats, completely free from defilements, at
the beginning of the Buddha's Dispensation.

We have been giving these discourses for twelve times during the past
twelve weeks and covered the whole of the Sutta. We will now bring to a
close this series of lectures on Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta.

THE CONCLUDING PRAYER

May you all good people in the audience, by virtue of having given respectful
attention to this discourse on the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta, be able to
contemplate as instructed in this Sutta on the five aggregates of rūpa,
vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra and viññāṇa; And noting them at each moment of
manifestation of seeing, hearing etc., as 'This is not mine, This I am not, This
is not myself;' and perceiving them with own knowledge, rightly and well as
incessantly rising and perishing and, therefore, of the nature of anicca,
dukkha and anatta, be able to attain soon through the Path and Fruition, the
Nibbāna., the end of all sufferings.

Sādhu! Sādhu! Sādhu!

End of the Eight Part of the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta

This is the end of the whole Sutta On

The Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta

Translated by
U KO LAY (ZEYĀ MAUNG)