The Great Discourse On Not-Self
(Anattalakkhana Sutta)

Translated From Burmese Into English By U Ko Lay (Zeyā Maung)

The original translation by U Ko Lay, first published by the Buddha Sasana Nuggaha Foundation in Rangoon, Myanmar, has been further edited in this edition. Some repetition has been deleted and many of the Pāli terms have been translated. The teachings remain very detailed and repetitive, however: they were primarily given as instructions for people undergoing an intensive course of meditation.

It is our hope that the publication of these books will help to further interest in the practice of meditation and Buddhist teachings in the West.

Foreword

Within the personality of every worldling, or puthujjana, moral defilements (kilesa), such as greed and attachment, proliferate. These kilesa fix onto the objects arising through the six sense-doors, such as beautiful sights. While attachment occurs in respect of all things that are pleasant and agreeable, attachment to attā, (the concept of) a "living entity," or "self," is not only fundamental but also most difficult to dispel.

Paccekabuddhas ("Silent Buddhas") are capable of eradicating their attachment to the concept of self unaided, through their own efforts and wisdom. However, they do not have the ability to eradicate this attachment in others. Only a person with the exceptional ability to convince others of the truth and virtue of the Four Noble Truths can, by so doing, wipe out these feelings of attachment in the hearts of others. Paccekabuddhas have no such knowledge or ability, that is why they become Paccekabuddhas. A Paccekabuddha enters Nibbāna alone. He is not omniscient and does not teach the Dhamma to others.

Supreme Buddhas, the Omniscient Ones, are endowed with greater intellectual capacity than Pacceka-buddhas. Like the Paccekabuddhas, the Supreme Buddhas truly realize the Four Noble Truths on their own initiative, but they can also teach those truths to others. That is why they are Supreme Buddhas, Fully Enlightened Ones.

The Lord Buddha delivered the First Sermon, concerning the Four Noble Truths, to the five ascetics. That sermon is called the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, the Great Discourse on the Setting in Motion of the Wheel of Dhamma, or Righteousness. This Great Discourse was the first teaching given by the Blessed One, and was delivered on the eve of Saturday, the full moon of July, exactly two months after His attainment of Supreme Enlightenment.

At the close of this First Sermon, Kondañña, the leader of the five ascetics, became a Stream Enterer (Sotāpanna). By attaining the stage of Stream Entry he removed all doubts about the truth of the Dhamma and the misconception of sakkāya, "self" or living entity. Nevertheless, self-pride (māna) still lingered in his mind. The remaining four ascetics had not yet realized the special Dhamma, "the awakening of higher consciousness."

As self-pride or personal ego still had its grip on Kondañña, and as Vappa and the other three of the Group of Five bhikkhus had not yet obtained the "pure and spotless Dhamma Eye," the Blessed One went on teaching and urged them to contemplate and note along the lines of vipassanā (insight meditation). After diligent meditation they all eventually reached the stage of Stream Enterer, thereby removing their attachment to self-view. Venerable Vappa gained progressive insight on the first waning day of July, Bhaddiya on the second day, Mahānāma on the third day, and Assaji on the fourth day.

The Lord Buddha then summoned the whole Group of Five bhikkhus and taught them His second sermon, setting forth the famous anattā (not-self) doctrine. It was on Thursday, the 5th waning day of July. On hearing the Anattalakkhana Sutta, all five attained Arahatship, by virtue of which they were entirely free from all human passions, including māna, conceit. The Anattalakkhana Sutta, as its name implies, clearly expounded the doctrine of "not-self' as opposed to the false view of "self".

The Anattalakkhana Sutta is not a lengthy piece. In the original book published by the Sixth Buddhist Council, it covered only one page. In the Sutta, there is no mention of meditation methods or techniques for contemplation. The teaching was more concerned with natural truth than practical methods. Hence it would be difficult for those unacquainted with the methods of vipassanā meditation to appreciate the reality of not-self described in this Sutta. It was possible for the five ascetics only because the sermon was delivered by the Lord Buddha himself, and because they -- the listening audience -- happened to be of keen intellect. These five had not only been endowed with mature experience since hearing the Dhammacakka Sutta, but had also reached the stage of Stream Enterer. Thus their speedy attainment of Arahatship.

During the lifetime of Lord Buddha, people with keen intellect and mature perfections (paramitā), like the Group of Five, achieved Path and Fruit (magga-phala) while listening to sermons by the Blessed One. Of course, these attainments were not gained without diligently practicing vipassanā meditation. The Special Dhamma was attained only because they had been able to devote themselves to ardent meditation, deep concentration and keen contemplation, and it was only those few with good knowledge or adequate past perfections who were capable of doing so. Many could not possibly contemplate and note with such great speed.

Despite this fact, there are idlers who will knowingly say: "If one understand the nature of not-self through the teachings, it is not necessary to practice. One can achieve Path and Fruit merely by listening to the teaching." With this kind of wishful thinking they place themselves on the plane of the Noble Ones. Such concepts being entertained by a class of lazy-bones, the number of people who have so become self-made Noble Ones through simply listening to sermons would not be few. The kind of knowledge of not-self gleaned from listening to sermons without practicing vipassanā meditation is not a true, personal realization, but mere book-knowledge. If Path and Fruit insight knowledge (magga-phala-ñāna) could be realized in this manner, almost every Buddhist who knows the doctrine of not-self could be considered an Arahat. However, as such people do not have the virtues of Arahats, it is obvious that they are not really Arahats. Bearing in mind such improper notions, the Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw has given precise and clear instructions in this great Anattalakkhana Sutta to put people on the right path.

The Anattalakkhana Sutta itself describes the nature and characteristics of not-self, but does not describe the meditation methods or techniques for contemplation and noting. This book, however, contains a full exposition of the methods of contemplation and explains in detail how not-self is reflected on, leading to the attainment of Nibbāna. The discourses were not taught willfully, without reference to the scriptural texts. Neither were they given without a foundation of personal experience in practical vipassanā meditation. They were expounded after acquiring personal experience and knowledge in meditation practice under the methodical instructions of a competent teacher, and after consultation with relevant Pāli Scriptures and Commentaries.

In his sermons, the Venerable Sayadaw, with his deep compassion, elaborated fully on the brief account of the Anattalakkhana Sutta given by the Lord Buddha. When the sermons were produced in typewritten copy, transcribed in full from the original tape recordings by U Thein Han, a retired judge, the manuscript was a lengthy piece comprising 420 pages.

U Thein Han presented that typewritten copy to the Venerable Sayadaw to seek permission for printing and publication. The Sayadaw gave his kind permission to print and publish it only after summarizing it into a compendium of 152 pages, instead of the original 420, lest the book should become too bulky in view of the shortage of printing paper.

Indeed, the Venerable Sayadaw is an adept at amplifying what is concise and shortening what is lengthy. He has not only abbreviated the lengthy version of the Anattalakkhana Sutta and the "Method of Vipassanā Meditation", but also his teaching on the Dhammacakka Sutta. In doing so, he has made them comprehensible to all who might prefer to read or hear the Dhamma in a concise form, thus serving as a boon to all.

Whenever he taught or wrote, the Venerable Sayadaw laid more emphasis on the true meaning rather than the principles of grammar. While the more literal translation of "Bārānasiyaṁ", as, "At Benares," is not incorrect, the Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw has translated it as "in the neighborhood of Benares", inasmuch as the Buddha resided temporarily in the Deer Park near the City of Benares (or rather in the province of Benares), in order to fall in line with the factual truth.

Although he gave more importance to the inherent meaning, the Venerable Sayadaw did not adhere to it at the expense of grammar, the importance of which he never failed to observe. In other words, he gave grammar the attention it deserved, but paramount importance was given to the actual meaning. Hence, his interpretations do not strictly follow the traditional method. After due consideration, he would stick to the truth of the meaning as he found it and express his candid opinion in writing.

The teaching of impermanence, suffering and not-self (anicca, dukkha and anattā) is very familiar to all Buddhists, and the words are never far from their lips. Whenever an accident happens, the words are casually muttered, quickly invoking mindfulness of the Dhamma. Such being the case, the teaching might be regarded as generally known and understood. It is undoubtedly known through hearsay or book knowledge, but in reality it is a difficult teaching to fully understand, despite its apparent simplicity. Of the three characteristics, the teaching on "anattā," not-self, is the most difficult and profound. It is for this reason that the Blessed One had to face serious opposition from such persons as Saccaka the Wanderer and Baka the Brahma, who entertained the opposite view of "self".

Prior to the Buddha's teachings, it was considered that self was inherently interwoven with rūpa (corporeality) and nāma (mentality). In opposition to this wrong belief, the Lord Buddha stated that corporeality and mentality are not self. It is most difficult to convincingly show "not-self" as it is in reality, since the concept of self has been firmly rooted in people through countless rounds of existence. If the teaching of not-self could be easily known, there would be no need for the appearance of a Buddha. Nor would it be necessary for the Buddha's disciples, like the Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw, to expound on and write commentaries on the Anattalakkhana Sutta at such great pains. The untiring efforts needed to elucidate this teaching stand witness to its profundity. Even among non-Buddhists, very few really understand what "self' or "attā" is, far less the teaching of "not-self." The worthy Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw has lucidly explained the doctrine in this Anattalakkhana Sutta to bring those who hold wrong conceptions back to the right path.

Once, when I first arrived at Wetlet Masoyein Monastery, the Venerable Sayadaw had gone to Wetlet town to deliver a sermon. While conversing with Sayadaw, I happened to ask him: "Might uccheda, the doctrine of extinction after death, and Nibbāna, which has a special feature, be construed as being the same?". To this, the Sayadaw replied, "Of course there is a difference. Nibbāna has its own quality and attribute. How could it not be special?" As the conversation ended abruptly, I had no chance to follow up with the question: "What is its special quality?" The Sayadaw might have forgotten this insignificant episode. However, when I was reading through this manuscript, I happened to recollect that conversation as I came upon the special explanation relating to uccheda and Nibbāna. On page 35 of this present text, a clarification is made of the difference between ucchedadiṭṭhi, the wrong belief that after death the existence of a being is completely annihilated, and Nibbāna. The believers of this false belief have erroneously thought that the annihilation of existence and Nibbāna are the same, but this is entirely wrong. The two are, in fact, entirely different.

Regarding ucchedadiṭṭhi, about the year 1971, I managed to convene a congregation for hearing sermons on the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta (the teaching on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness). I invited the Mahasi Dhammakatthikas U Samvara and U Zawtika to give my relatives and friends in my own native village the opportunity to hear some teachings. I had arranged for teachings to be given at Inchaung village, where many of my relatives were then residing. At this congregation, one Maung Kyi was present among the 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 one. It seemed that he had come over to join the congregation out of sheer courtesy, as he happened to be one of my relatives. U Samvara and the other teacher gave their sermons with his mental attitude in mind. Since the teachings had some sort of bearing on him, the audience of village folks was greatly interested.

As this man was asked to assume the role of attendant at the time of delivering the Dhamma, it was no wonder that people were interested, knowing him well as a person who held the wrong belief in "No Future Existence."

The next day, early in the morning, Maung Kyi appeared at a house where I had been invited for a meal offered by a donor. On that occasion, Maung Kyi told me "Sir, I accept the point of Dhamma touched upon by U Samvara last night, but please do not mistake it that I have become a convert, a believer in the doctrine of nāma (mind). Since you Buddhists believe in a next existence, your meritorious deeds are all performed out of your craving for existence. On our part, not having entertained with such a belief, we have no craving whatsoever for existence. We have extinguish all such clinging and attachment to existence". To this I remarked, "This would depend on one's view. According to Buddhism, desire and clinging to existence will only cease or be rooted out when one becomes an Arahat. Without being actually free of instinctive craving for existence, if one believes that existence is completely annihilated after death, one will go down to Niriya, the Nether World, in the next existence. With the false belief of uccheda stuck in ones mind on the eve of death, one would die with this consciousness. This is exactly in accordance with what the Lord Buddha has taught."

Although Maung Kyi had severed his ties with his "life existence", his wife, not being able to do so, started making preparations for ordaining her grown-up children as novices (sāmanera). Plunged in his bigotry, Maung Kyi said to his wife, "You need not do anything in my favor for my next existence. If you prefer to perform the ceremony of ordaining the children into priesthood, you may do so on your own. But when the sāmanera-to-be are escorted to the monastery, I cannot possibly take the role of benefactor by carrying the big begging bowl and the fan." In retaliation to this statement, his wife said, "Without a benefactor, I cannot lead the would-be-sāmanera. If you cannot act as a benefactor, I will have to hire someone to act as benefactor and carry on with the performance of the necessary religious rites". Having heard this, Maung Kyi, the great believer of Uccheda Doctrine, became very perturbed and fidgety, and not being able to tolerate or accept the presence of a hired benefactor in his place, was said to have been put in a dilemma. I heard of this incident from the lay devotees of the village.

I am fully confident that this great teaching on the Anattalakkhana Sutta, will, like the other teachings given by the illustrious Mahasi Sayadaw, enhance the treasure of faith and bring about much benefit to all the reading public.

-ooOoo-

Reverence To The Blessed One, The Exalted One, The Supremely Enlightened One

In the midst of the world holding fast to notions of self or soul the Buddha declared, "Attā, soul or living entity, is not a reality; it is only a conventional nomencla-ture. What really exists, in the ultimate sense, is a continuous flux of corporeal and mental processes, impersonal phenomena."

It is essential to thoroughly and comprehensively understand anattā, the doctrine of impersonality propounded by the Buddha. He first touched on the doctrine in his elaboration of the Four Noble Truths in the Dhammacakka Sutta. He touched on it again when he taught the Hemavata Sutta, explaining that "with the arising of the six sense bases, (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind) there arises a world, a being." Then the Buddha brought forth the doctrine of not-self explicitly and comprehensively in this Anattalakkhana Sutta.

The Sutta Introduction

The introduction to the Sutta was recorded by the Elders of the First Council in the Khandhavagga of the Saṁyutta Nikāya of the Pāli Canon, in these words:

"I, Ānanda, have heard thus," began the Venerable Ānanda, "At one time, the most Exalted One was staying in the Pleasance of Isipatana, the Deer Sanctuary, near the township of Varanasi."

The Dhammacakka Sutta, the First Discourse, was delivered on the evening of the full moon day of July, 2,552 years ago. At that time, only one of the Group of Five [*], Venerable Konḍañña, attained the first stage of Higher Knowledge and became a Sotāpanna, a Stream Enterer. Having fully penetrated into the Dhamma, with firmly established confidence and unshakable faith in the Buddha's Teaching, he sought and gained admission into the Order (Sangha).

[* The Group of Five were the five ascetics who had previously followed the Bodhisatta while he was practicing austerities and who later heard the First Discourse and became the Buddha's first monk disciples.]

The remaining four monks, the Venerables Vappa, Bhaddiya, Mahānāma and Assaji, had not yet achieved that Higher Knowledge, so the Blessed One urged them to devote themselves to 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 the monastery to attend to their progress and assist them in removing the obstacles, hindrances and impurities that arise in the course of meditation practice. Thus, instructed and guided by the Blessed One, and striving arduously and consistently, the Venerable Vappa attained the Path and Fruition on the first waning day of July; the Venerable Bhaddiya on the 2nd, the Venerable Mahānāma on the 3rd and the Venerable Assaji on the 4th respectively, and each of them became a Stream Enterer.

I have already dealt elaborately with the account of their attainments in the concluding portions of the discourses on the Dhammacakka Sutta [See The Great Discourse on the Wheel of Dhamma, by Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw, translated by U Ko Lay; Buddhadhamma Foundation.] I stated there that the four monks other than Konḍañña were not accomplished enough to attain the Higher Knowledge by just listening to the discourse, but had to strive for it, and that is why the Blessed One wanted them to devote themselves to the practice of the Dhamma. In view of this fact, I warned against being led astray by the mistaken and irresponsible doctrine that the status of Stream Enterer can be attained without the effort of vipassanā meditation, just by listening to a discourse.

The Commentaries say that after all five monks had become Stream Enterers and received ordination as members of the Buddha's Order, the Buddha taught them the Anattalakkhana Sutta on the 5th waning day of July. Thus, "at one time" in the introduction means the 5th waning day of July, while the Blessed One was still staying in the Deer Sanctuary near the town of Varanasi.

"At that time, when the Blessed One was staying in the Deer Sanctuary in the township of Varanasi, the Blessed One addressed the Group of Five monks, 'O monks,' and the Group of Five monks answered, 'Revered Sir.' Then the Blessed One taught thus:

The Buddha's Words: Beginning The Sutta

People in general see themselves and others as living entities, each with a soul, self or ego, called in Pāli attā, corresponding with the Sanskrit word ātman. Attā is also known as jīva, life; thus attā 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 the misconception or wrong belief in self (attādiṭṭhi).

Ordinary worldlings are not free from this wrong belief in self; the only difference from person to person lies in how firmly it is held and how plainly it manifests. The vipassanā meditator who is developing keen insight into the physical and mental processes, and contemplating the fact that there is no self or living entity, is free from that wrong notion of self, but only for the duration of his noting the arising and passing away of corporeality and mentality. The misconception of self is likely to return.

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 physical and mental constituents, either of one's own body or in the bodies of others, the Blessed One began the discourse with the statement, "Rūpaṁ bhikkhave anattā : Material form (rūpa) monks, is not self, soul or living entity."

Mistaking Body For Self

What is this material form which we wrongly conceive as self? The following material qualities form the foundation of a material form: the sensitive part of the eye which enables us to see objects; the sensitive part of the ear which enables us to hear sounds; the sensitive part of the nose which enables us to smell odors; the sensitive part of the tongue which enables us to sample tastes; the sensitive part of the body which enables us to feel touch; the "heart-base" (hadāya vatthu), that is, the seat of consciousness; and the material quality of the life-principle or vital force.

Careful consideration reveals that eye consciousness arises because of the sensory organ of the eye; and with eye consciousness comes the concept of a living entity or self. Similarly, because of the sensory organs of the ear, nose, tongue, and body we have the consciousness of hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. The heart base, the seat of consciousness, is responsible for thoughts and thinking, resulting in the notion of self or living entity. 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 sensory organs 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 has none of the sense organs that give rise to cognition. It could never be mistaken for a living being with a soul or a living entity. Likewise we do not conceive notions of a soul or a living entity with respect to a corpse, as there are no functional sensory organs within it. So long as the sensitive qualities exist, other material bodies which are their adjuncts and concomitants, such as sights, sounds, odors, the tangibility (of the earth [paṭhavī] , fire [tejo], and air [vāyo] elements), moistness and fluidity (of the element of cohesion [āpo]) felt by the sense of touch, and the material qualities of sex responsible for masculinity and femininity, are also wrongly conceived as self. Material qualities such as sight, sound and odor, which are concomitant with the sensory organs of the eye, ear and nose, are misconceived as soul or living entities when seen, heard and smelt. In short, the whole material world which coexists with sensory awareness is regarded in terms of living entities.

In common speech, too, the body which is compounded of the material qualities is spoken of as self. To talk this way is not wrong, it conforms to the convention of the world, but from the point of view of ultimate, absolute reality, none of the material substances of the body is self. They are merely aggregates of matter, or material qualities. That is why the Blessed One clearly and explicitly stated that "although people view the aggregates of material qualities as a living being, in reality they are not self, they are merely physical phenomena."

Exponents of the doctrine of self, however, who hold that their body is self, are bound to come up with the question, "Why is it not self?" The Blessed One provided the following explanation:

Why Body Is Not Self

Were the body the core of one's being, or self, it would not cause suffering, but actually the body does impose suffering in many ways. It does not remain youthful and vigorous, it grows old and decays, and it dies. Without the body, one would be free from the afflictions of going grey, becoming toothless, hunchbacked, deaf, near-sighted, wrinkled and infirm. It is the body that inflicts these sufferings.

Again, because of the body, one is troubled with pain -- eye diseases, ear diseases, toothache, backache, flatulence, feelings of heat, coldness, pain and itching -- and with diseases of the blood, skin, stomach or urine. These ailments arise because of the body. We suffer from hunger and thirst because of the body, and because of it we are subjected to attack by mosquitoes and other antagonists. Suffering in the miserable and woeful states is also due to the body. In short, one suffers from all these ailments and afflictions because of the body.

In addition, the body 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 be said, therefore, that the physical form inflicts suffering by causing death.

Thus we can reflect that if the physical form were self, it would not inflict on us the sufferings of old age, disease and death. One might cause suffering to others but not to oneself. If the body were self, it should not inflict suffering on itself by bringing about old age and so on.

Furthermore, even before the onset of old age, disease and death, the body is constantly subjecting us to many forms of distress. Even young people, who are relatively free from illness and enjoy good health, cannot remain long in any one of the body postures, such as sitting, standing or walking. They have to change postures very often. We have all experienced how hard it is to remain in any one 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 without moving. We are constantly having to change postures because of the feelings of heat or pain that arise in the limbs after a certain time in one position. All this distress arises because of the physical form; in other words, it is the body that is inflicting it.

Thus we may reflect that if the body were self, it would not impose these sufferings on us.

Furthermore, it is stated, "if the body were self it should be possible to say of it, 'let my body be thus, let my body not be thus'."

All beings would like to see their bodies always healthy and youthful in appearance, to keep them from old age, illness, decay and 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 into illness and disease and finally dissolution and death.

If the body were self it would not inflict suffering on us, and it should be possible to subject it to our will. While others may not be amenable to one's control, it should at least be possible to manage our own body as we desire. But the fact of the matter is that the body is not self. That is why it inflicts suffering on us and refuses to be controlled. The Blessed One continued to explain this fact.

Jīva Attā And Parama Attā

Believers in the doctrines of self say that self is of two kinds: jīva attā and parama attā. According to them, each individual creature, man, deva, or animal, has a self, an inner soul or substance called jīva attā, the life principle. This life principle is usually believed to be created by God, but some believers hold that these individual jīvā attā are small segments of the bigger attā of God.

Parama attā is the "Big Self" of God, who has created the world together with all its creatures. According to some, this Big Self permeates the whole world, but others say it lies in a Heavenly Abode. These ideas of small self and Big Self are all, of course, mere speculation. Nobody has met or seen the God which is the embodiment of the Big Self.

Belief in creation by God had existed long before the appearance of the enlightened Buddha. This is clear from the story of Baka the Brahma.

At one time, the Blessed One went to the realm of the Brahmas for the purpose of clearing up the wrong views held by the great Brahma Baka.

On arrival there, the great Brahma Baka welcomed the Blessed One to his realm, in praise of which he said, "Welcome, Venerable Gotama; your coming is good, although it has taken a long time. This Brahma land is permanent, stable, everlasting, perfect in every way. And no one dies or passes away from here."

For this statement, the Blessed One rebuked the Brahma Baka in these words: "Oh, Brahmas, how ignorant is Brahma Baka! In ignorance, he describes his imper-manent realm to be permanent and stable."

At this, one of the followers of Brahma Baka said indignantly,

"Monk Gotama, do not rebuke Brahma Baka, do not rebuke him. This Brahma Baka is the Great Brahma, chief of the Brahmas, Conqueror over All, Invincible; he sees all; he wields power and authority over every creature; he is the maker of the world, creator of the whole world, the noblest one; Assigner to each -- king, Brahmin, man, Deva, or animal -- his station in this world; accomplished in attainments, the Father of all past and future beings!"

Thus did he praise the virtues of Brahma Baka.

In the Brahmajāla Sutta, where the origin of the wrong view of permanency was explained, the Buddha gave a similar account of the Brahma.

Origin Of The Creation Belief

According to that Sutta, after a world system has passed away, there comes a time when a new world system begins evolving. The first Brahma who appears then thinks: "I am the Brahma, the Great Brahma, Conqueror Invincible, Seer of All, All-powerful, the Lord, the Maker, the Creator, the Noblest of All, Assigner to each his station, accomplished in attainments, the Father of all past and future beings."

The Brahmas who appear later also think that he is the Great Brahma. Of those Brahmas who pass away from the Brahma realm to be reborn in the human world, there are some who can recall their past existence in the Brahma realm. These people boldly announce that "the Great Brahma created the beings in the world. The Creator himself, the great Brahma, is permanent, eternal; the creatures he has created, however, do not last permanently; they pass away and die." These bold announcements, given on personal experience, are readily believed and accepted by those who hear them. The Blessed One explained that thus was the origination of the notion that "only the Creator of things is permanent, eternal."

From the passages we have just quoted, one can surmise that the so-called God who is said to have created all beings, the God who is said to be in Heaven, could be the great Brahma who first appeared in the realm of the Brahmas at the beginning of the world. We could also take it that the parama attā, the Big Self, is the self of that great Brahma. Then it becomes clear from the teachings of the Buddha that the parama attā, Big Self, of the great Brahma is basically the same as jīva attā, the life principle, of other beings; it is just a misconception of the continuous flux of material and mental processes. Actually, there is no such thing as self apart from the psycho-physical phenomena; it is a figment of the imagination.

Furthermore, the mental and physical properties of the great Brahma are, like the mental and physical properties of other beings, subject to the law of impermanence. When his life span becomes exhausted, the great Brahma also faces death and has to pass away. In reality, the great Brahma cannot have every wish fulfilled; he cannot maintain the physical properties of his body according to his wish. Therefore, the body of the great Brahma is also not self, anattā.

Attachment To Self

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. This is the view held by the annihilationists who maintain that there is nothing after death. The etemalists, however, believe that the individual soul remains undestroyed after death, living on in 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 is destroyed but the subtle body departs from it to enter into a new body. Thus it remains eternal and never perishes. This etemalist view, as described in their literature, has been reproduced in full in the Sub-Commentary to the Visuddhimagga.

I have given a detailed description of the various beliefs in self and their origination in order to present more clearly the concept of anattā, not-self. Among those who profess to be Buddhists, there are many who actually do believe in the existence of a soul or a living entity, even though they do not say so in so many words. They believe that at the moment of death life departs via the nose or mouth. When conception takes place in the womb, life enters through the mother's nose, her mouth or her abdomen. And from birth to death, the life principle remains steadfastly in the new body. All these views relate to a belief in the existence of a soul, a living entity.

In reality, death is simply the cessation of psycho-physical processes, the non-arising of new mentality and corporeality after the termination of the "death consciousness."

There is no such thing as a departing soul or living entity. A 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, consciousness holds on to either kamma, kamma nimitta (kamma-image) or gati nimitta (destination-image). Conditioned by these objects (held on to at the last moment of consciousness), a new consciousness arises at a new site in a new existence. This is called rebirth or re-linking consciousness, as it forms a link between the previous and the next existence. When the re-linking consciousness passes away, it is followed by the life-continuum (bhavanga) consciousness, which continues throughout life as prescribed by previous karmic energy. When sense-objects such as sights and sounds appear at the sense-doors, the bhavanga consciousness is replaced, for the respective moments, by eye-consciousness and ear-consciousness, as the case may be.

The arising of new consciousness in a new existence as conditioned by the kamma of past existences is conventionally called migration from an old existence to a new one, but in reality, there is no soul or living entity which transmigrates from one existence to another.

There are people who cannot grasp the concept of nonself because they do not understand the theory of self in detail as explained above. They think that if someone holds on to the shape and form of objects, it is clinging to self. For instance, to recognize a tree as a tree, a stone as a stone, a house as a house, or a monastery as a monastery, is, according to them, clinging to self. In their view, the truth of not-self is clearly grasped only when the concepts of shape and form are transcended and replaced by perception of ultimate truth.

In fact, merely perceiving forms and shapes does not amount to self-clinging. Neither does no longer perceiving shapes and forms mean that knowledge of not-self is established. Recognizing inanimate objects, such as trees, stones, houses or monasteries, is not clinging to the self-theory, it is merely apprehending in terms of conventional concepts.

Clinging to belief in self is assuming that sentient beings have an intrinsic self. When one assumes oneself to be a living soul, or others to be living entities, then one is attaching to the belief in self.

The Brahma beings of the immaterial realms (arūpa), having no material body, do not perceive themselves in conventional shapes and forms, but those Brahma beings that are unenlightened are not free from the distorted view of self. It is only when belief in the existence of a self is discarded, and one's own and other's bodies are perceived as merely psycho-physical phenomena, that knowledge of nonself arises, and it is essential to develop this true knowledge.

Four Kinds Of Self Clinging

There are four kinds of self clinging arising out of belief in self:

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

The Blessed One taught the Anattatakkhana Sutta particularly for removing this sāmi attā clinging. Now, as this Sutta was taught to the Group of Five, who had already become Stream Enterers, may it not be asked whether a Stream Enterer is still encumbered with self clinging?

At the stage of Stream Entry the fetters of personality-belief (sakkāyadiṭṭhi), doubt (vicikicchā), and adherence to rites and rituals (sīlabbataparāmasa) 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 conceit. (A Stream Enterer's conceit relates only to the genuine qualities and virtues he or she actually possesses, it is not false pride based on non-existing qualities and virtues). The Stream Enterer has, therefore, to continue with the practice of insight in order to remove the fetter of conceit. When insight knowledge (vipassanāñāna) is considerably developed, this I-conceit becomes attenuated and is partially removed by the Path of Once Returner (Sakadāgāmi); the Path of Non-Returner (Anāgāmi) further weakens it, but it is only the final Arahatta Path that completely eradicates the I-conceit. Thus we may take it that the Blessed One taught the Anattalakkhana Sutta in order to bring about total eradication of the I-conceit lingering in the Group of Five.

2) Nivāsī attā ("continuous self') clinging: belief that there is a living entity permanently residing in one's body.

Most people believe that they exist permanently as living beings from the moment of birth to the time of death. This is nivāsī-attā clinging. Some hold that nothing remains after death; this is the wrong view of' annihilationism. Yet others believe in the wrong view of eternalism, which maintains that the living entity in the body remains undestroyed after death and continues to reside in a new body in a new existence. It was with clinging to the I-conceit in mind that the Blessed One taught the Anattalakkhana Sutta. That is to say, to eradicate the I-conceit which still remained fettering the Group of Five monks and other Noble Ones; and to remove the two wrong views (of self sakkāyadiṭṭhi', and attachment to rites and rituals sīlabbataparāmāsa) as well as the I-conceit of ordinary common worldlings.

So long as we cling to the belief that there is a permanent living entity or a soul, we hold that our body is amenable to our control. The Anattalakkhana Sutta was delivered to remove not only the sāmi attā clinging but also the nivāsī attā clinging. Once the sāmi attā clinging is removed, other types of self clinging and wrong views are simultaneously eradicated.

3) Kāraka attā ("active agent self") clinging: belief that there is a living entity, a soul, that effects every action, physical, vocal and mental.

This kāraka attā clinging is more concerned with sankhārakkhandha, the aggregate of volitional formations. We shall deal with it more fully when we come to the aggregate of volitional formations.

4) Vedaka attā ("experiencing self") clinging: belief that it is self which feels sensations, pleasant or unpleasant. This form of clinging is concerned with the vedanak-khandha, the aggregate of feelings, which we will take up fully in the next chapter.

That the aggregate of materiality is not self or a living entity has been adequately expounded, but it still remains to explain how meditators practicing vipassanā meditation come to perceive the nonself and uncontrollable nature of the body.

Contemplation Of Nonself In Relation To The Body

I have accordingly instructed beginners in the practice of vipassanā to start with observing the rising and falling of the abdomen. However, this exercise of noting the rising and falling alone is not all that has to be done in vipassanā meditation. While noting the rising and falling of the abdomen, any thoughts that may occur must also be noted. When feeling stiff, hot, cold or painful, the meditator 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 "rising, stepping forward, dropping." If possible, all physical activities, even the opening and shutting of the eyelids, should come under close observation. When there is nothing particular to take note of, the meditator's attention should revert to the rising and falling movements of the abdomen. This is 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 may arise in the meditator to change postures in order to relieve the pain and sensations of heat which are developing in his arms and legs. The meditator should take note of these desires as they arise but should remain still, not immediately yielding to the temptation to stretch the limbs. He should put up with the discomfort as long as he can. If the desire to stretch arises once again, he should take note of it as before without changing posture. Only when the pain becomes unbearable should he slowly stretch out his arms and legs, at the same time noting these actions carefully as "stretching, stretching."

During each session of meditation, frequent change of posture becomes necessary due to the discomfort of aches and pains. With this repeated adjusting of posture, the oppressive nature of the physical body becomes apparent. Despite the meditator's inclination to remain still, quietly seated, without changing position for one or two hours, it becomes evident that he cannot do so. Then realization comes that the body with its constant oppression is not self, soul or living entity, but mere physical phenomena occurring in accordance with conditions. This realization is knowledge of contemplation of not-self.

One cannot remain very long either seated, lying down or standing. Thus realization comes too that the body never gives us what we want and is unmanageable. Being uncontrollable, it is not self, but a mere physical phenomenon that is faring in accordance with its own conditions. This realization, too, is knowledge of contemplation of not-self.

Again, being repeatedly disturbed by having to answer the calls of nature, it becomes apparent that the body is oppressive, unmanageable, not amenable to one's will. Being unmanageable, it is not self. While contem-plating on the behavior of the physical form, its true oppressive nature is exposed when bodily filth such as nasal mucus, saliva, phlegm, tears, and sweat ooze out of the body. One cannot maintain cleanliness as one desires because of this uncontrollable nature of the body. It is, therefore, obviously not self. In addition, the body oppresses by inflicting hunger, thirst, old age and disease on us. These afflictions are obvious truths even to a casual observer, but there is a likelihood of the notion of self persisting in one who observes casually. It is only through heedful noting that the body is exposed as mere physical phenomena, not a self or living entity.

Thus in the course of heedfully noting all bodily actions and perceiving how the body afflicts, is unmanageable and ungovernable, the realization arises through personal experience: "Although the physical form of 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 will, it is unmanageable, not self. I have been mistaken all along in taking it to be my self." This is true knowledge of the contemplation of nonself.

There are three kinds of feeling:

1. Sukha vedanā -- pleasant feeling.

2. Dukkha vedanā -- unpleasant feeling.

3. Upekkhā vedanā -- equanimous feeling, neither pleasant nor painful. Generally, equanimous or neutral feeling is not noticed, only the pleasurable and unpleasant feelings.

It is a pleasure to feel the touch of a cool breeze or cold water when the weather is scorching hot; it feels so cozy to be wrapped up in warm, woolen blankets during a cold spell; one feels so comfortable after stretching the limbs or changing positions to relieve stiffness. All these comfortable feelings, through contact with pleasant objects, are sukha vedanā, pleasurable feelings, which sentient beings assume to be self, "I feel pleasant, I feel comfortable" and go in pursuit of.

Unpleasant feelings that arise on coming into contact with unpleasant objects, such as heat, tiredness in the limbs, discomfort due to intense cold, and itchiness, are classified as dukkha vedanā, unpleasant sensations. These are also assumed to be self: "I feel painful, I feel hot, I feel itchy, I feel unpleasant." Therefore, sentient beings try hard to avoid contact with these unpleasant objects.

What I have just described relates to the pleasant and unpleasant feelings in the physical body. There are also states of mind. Thoughts on pleasant objects give rise to happiness and gladness, sukha vedanā; thinking about things which cause dejection, despondency, despair, sadness, grief, fear and so on, gives rise to unhappiness, dukkha vedanā. Dwelling on ordinary everyday affairs gives rise to neutral, equanimous feeling, upekkhā vedanā.

These are the three kinds of feelings that are related to thoughts or imaginations. While in such states of mind, sentient beings assume these feelings to be self, "I am feeling glad; I am despondent; I am feeling neither happy nor unhappy, I am feeling indifferent."

When pleasant objects are seen, heard, smelt or tasted, pleasurable feelings arise. These are also regarded as self: "I feel good, I feel happy." Thus people go in pursuit of the good things of life, visiting places of entertainment, using fragrant flowers and perfumes, and going to any length and trouble to satisfy their gustatory demands.

When unpleasant objects are seen, heard, smelt or tasted, unpleasant feelings arise. These are also assumed to be self; people try, therefore, to have nothing to do with unpleasant objects.

The ordinary, everyday scenes which we see and hear, indifferent sense objects, excite neither a feeling of pleasure nor unpleasantness. This is neutral feeling, which is also assumed to be self. People are never content with this medial condition of neither pleasantness nor unpleasantness, and so they strive hard to attain the state of pleasantness, to enjoy pleasurable feelings.

A Discrepancy Between Abhidhamma And Suttas

According to the teachings of the Abhidhamma, there is neither pleasant nor unpleasant feeling at the moment of seeing, hearing, smelling, or tasting, just equanimous feeling. But in the Suttas there are discourses which describe how all these feelings, pleasant, unpleasant and neutral, arise at all the sense doors, and there are discourses exhorting us to contemplate these feelings at the moment of seeing and hearing so as to comprehend their true nature.

The Sub-Commentary of the Visuddhimagga explains how pleasant, unpleasant and neutral feelings become evident at the moment of seeing and hearing in these words:

"Although it is said that eye consciousness is accompanied by equanimity, the resultant effect of an unwholesome act is unpleasant in nature, it cannot be pleasant. Likewise, although it is stated that the resultant effect of a wholesome act is equanimity, it is pleasant in nature. All moral acts bear good, pleasant results."

This explanation is most appropriate and can be verified through practical experience. When a beautiful object is sighted, the feeling of pleasantness is evident even as the object is being seen. When a terrifying, repulsive, or hateful object is sighted, the feeling of horror or aversion is quite evident, too, even while seeing the object. 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; an extremely loud sound may inflict unbearable pain on the hearer. The resultant effect is distinct also in smelling: a pleasant sensation arises in the nose as soon as a fragrant aroma is smelt, whereas a foul, putrid smell may cause immediate nausea, headache or other ills. A whiff of a poisonous odor 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 medicines is very unpleasant and disagreeable. A poisonous substance will cause intense suffering and may even result in death.

"Thus, although it is stated that eye-consciousness is accompanied by indifference, the unwholesome resultant equanimity which experiences disagreeable objects is in the nature of suffering, and the wholesome resultant equanimity which experiences agreeable objects has the nature of happiness." These comments from the Sub-Commentary are most appropriate. We find therefore the Suttas mention that all three types of feeling may be excited at the moment of sensory awareness. Alternatively, as it is possible for any of the three feelings to arise at the moment of javana, impulsion consciousness, during the eye-door thought process (cakkhudvāra vithī), the Suttas mention all three types of feeling being excited during sensory awareness.

Mistaking Feeling For Self

Therefore, enjoyment of sense-objects, pleasant or unpleasant, every time they are seen, heard, touched or 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 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 attā clinging with respect to feeling, known as vedaka attā, the belief that it is self or soul who enjoys pleasant and unpleasant feelings.

This is how every ordinary worldling clings on to the notion of self. In Indian literature, vedanā is described as self or having the attributes of a self, but in Burma this notion does not seem to have been put down in writing. All the same, there is the clinging to the belief that, on happy occasions, "It is I who enjoys pleasant things," and 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 heat or cold. They feel neither happy nor sad under pleasant or unpleasant circumstances. Animate objects, sentient beings, on the other hand, suffer or rejoice according to pleasant or unpleasant circumstances. We assume, therefore, that sentient beings must be endowed with an animating spirit, a living entity, and it is this living entity which enjoys on moments of pleasure or suffers on occasions of distress.

In reality, feeling is not self, not living entity, but merely a phenomenon that arises and vanishes as conditioned by circumstances. Therefore, the Buddha declared first and foremost the truth: "Monks, feeling is not self." Then he continued to explain why:

True, if feeling were self, it would not cause distress, because it is not usual for beings to inflict suffering on themselves, and it should be possible to manage feeling as one wishes. These results should all follow from the supposition "if feeling were self." If feeling did not tend to afflict, if our feelings were always pleasant as we desire and never unpleasant, then we could regard feelings to be truly self.

This hypothetical statement, "if feeling were self," is a device to make us pause and consider whether feeling afflicts us or not, and whether it can always be managed as we desire. On careful examination, it will become obvious that feeling is almost always afflicting us and that it arises not in accordance with our desires, but with its own conditioning circumstances.

You can see from your own personal experience how feeling afflicts you; that you cannot have things your way by always enjoying pleasant sights, sounds, and smells, pleasant foods and pleasant bodily feelings. You will have discovered that unpleasant feelings outweigh the pleasant ones. The reason one cannot have feeling as one wishes is because it is not self or one's inner substance. The Blessed one continued to explain why feeling is not self:

Although it is evident that feeling is oppressive and ungovernable, there are people with strong attachment to belief in self and intense craving, tanhā, who, trusting in pleasurable sensations, cling to feeling 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 Feeling Inflicts Suffering

There has to be constant accommodation and adjustment to maintain ourselves comfortably. We suffer the discomfort of stiffness, cramp, heat and pain when we are confined to one position for long, unless we make the necessary adjustments in our bodily postures to relieve the pain. The oppressive nature of feeling is evident even in the eye, which needs constant accommodation by blinking and closing. Without these adjustments, tiredness in the eye becomes unbearable. Other organs of the body need similar accommodation. Even with constant adjustment, under certain circumstances feeling is likely to inflict severe suffering and may lead to serious ailment or even death. There have been many cases of sick people, unable to bear their pain any longer, seeking relief through suicide.

Physical pains and suffering are not inflicted entirely by feeling; the physical form (rūpa) also contributes its share, being the original source of troubles. Thus, in the previous chapter on the suffering caused by the body, I described different types of feelings, and these may also be regarded as afflictions brought about by the vedanakkhandha.

Mental distress and suffering, on the other hand, are afflictions caused solely by vedanā without the aid of rūpa. When loved ones, parents, husbands, wives, sons and daughters die, feeling inflicts sorrow and grief. Loss of wealth and property may produce intense mental suffering, and that may in turn result in death. Frustration and discontent owing to failure to solve life's problems, separation from associates and friends, and unfulfilled hopes and desires, are other forms of oppression inflicted by feeling. Even pleasant feelings, which are very comforting while they last, eventually prove to be a source of distress. When they disappear after their brief sojourn one is left with lingering memories and yearning. One has to be constantly trying to maintain pleasant, happy states. Thus people go in pursuit of pleasant states even at the risk of their lives. If they happen to use illegal and immoral means in their pursuits, retribution is bound to overtake them, either in this lifetime or in the states of woe. Thus it is that apparently pleasant sensations, sukha vedanā, also inflict pain and distress.

Upekkha vedanā, equanimous feeling, like pleasant feeling, produces comfort and happiness. And like pleasant feeling, it requires constant effort to maintain, which of course entails tiredness and trouble. Both pleasant and neutral feeling are short-lived. Being of fleeting nature, they require constant labor for their maintenance, and this involves continuous striving, which is sankhāra dukkha, suffering due to conditioned things. This is just a brief indication of the oppressive nature of all three kinds of feelings.

If there were no feeling there would be no experience of pain or pleasure, either physically or mentally; there would be freedom from suffering. Consider for instance a log, a post, a stone or a lump of earth: having no feeling, they do not suffer. Even when hacked, beaten, crushed or burned they are unaffected.

The continuum of corporeality and mentality which are associated with feeling is, however, afflicted with suffering in many ways.

Thus it is plain that feeling is not self, not inner substance.

How Feeling Is Unmanageable

Feeling is unmanageable and not amenable to one's will. Just notice how we cannot manage to see and hear only what is pleasant or taste and smell only what is delicious and sweet. Even when, with great effort and labor, we pick out only what is most desirable to see, hear, taste or smell, these objects do not last. We can enjoy them only for a short while before they vanish. Thus we cannot manage or maintain a state in which pleasant and desirable things will remain permanently as we wish. When pleasant sense objects vanish, they are replaced by undesirable objects which, of course, cause suffering. We have already explained that unpleasant sounds are more oppressive than unpleasant sights; undesirable smells worse than undesirable sounds and undesirable tastes far worse still. Further, toxic substances may even cause death. Worst of all are unpleasant sensations of touch: when injured by accidents, weapons, or fire or afflicted by disease, the suffering which ensues is always very painful; it may be so intense as to cause wailing or even death. These are unpleasant feelings which cannot be forbidden from happening. That which is unmanageable is surely not self. Feeling is thus not self, and it is not proper to cling to it as self, one's inner substance.

So far I have described only those feelings experienced in the human world. The feelings of the four nether worlds are far more excruciating. Animals such as cattle, buffaloes, chickens and pigs have to face torment almost all the time, with no one to assist them or guard them against these afflictions. The petas (hungry ghosts) have to suffer more than the animals, but the denizens of hell, the Niriya states, suffer the most. We cannot afford to remain smug in the thought that these four nether worlds have nothing to do with us. Until and unless we have attained the stage of the Noble Ones, there is always the possibility of having to face the suffering of the lower worlds.

Thus, as feeling tends to affliction in every existence, it cannot be regarded as self or the inner core of existence, and it is not possible to prevent unpleasant feeling from arising. Undesirable feelings arise inevitably of their own accord. Mental distress, which we do not wish to arise, makes its appearance all the same. This all goes to show the uncontrollable nature of feeling. Each being has to contend with feeling which cannot be controlled, and hence, cannot be self or one's own inner substance.

As stated in the Canonical text, the feelings which are felt in one's own body tend to cause affliction and are not amenable to control. Hence it is very clear that feeling is not self, not one's inner substance. Nevertheless, ordinary worldlings cling to the belief: "It is I who suffers after experiencing happiness; it is I who enjoys, as circumstances favor, after going through distress." It is not easy to completely eradicate clinging to belief in self. The ingrained belief in feeling as self is abandoned only through personal realization of feeling's true nature, which can be brought about by contemplation in accordance with Satipaṭṭhāna Vipassanā practice, or the Middle Way, as instructed by the Blessed One. We will now deal with how this self-clinging can be discarded by contemplation on feeling.

Contemplation Of Feelings

A brief description of vipassanā meditation has been given in the first chapter. The meditator who keeps note of rising, falling, sitting and so on as described therein will come to notice in time uncomfortable sensations such as pain, stiffness and heat. He must concentrate on these different feelings as they arise by noting, "pain, pain," "stiffness, stiffness," "heat, heat," whatever the case may be. During the initial period when concentration is not yet strong, these distressing sensations may get more and more intense, but the meditator must put up with the pain and discomfort as long as possible and keep on noting the sensations as they arise. As his concentration gets strengthened, the discomforting pains will gradually lose their intensity and begin to fade away. With very deep concentration they will suddenly vanish, as if removed by hand, even while they are being noted, never again to come back and trouble the meditator. We see examples of such cessation of feeling in the story of the Bojjhanga Sutta, in which the Venerable Mahā Kassapa and others were relieved of illnesses by listening to teachings on the Factors of Enlightenment (Bojjhanga).

However, prior to the advent of strong concentration, the meditator will find that painful sensations in one place disappear only to arise in another form at another site. When the new sensation is heedfully noted, it vanishes to be replaced in turn by another form of sensation in yet another place. When distressing feelings have been seen repeatedly appearing and vanishing in this way for a considerable time, personal realization comes to the meditator that "feeling is always oppressive. Unpleasant feeling cannot be prevented from arising; it is uncontrollable. Both pleasant and unpleasant feelings are not self, not one's inner substance." This is the true knowledge of contemplation on nonself.

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

When the meditator reaches the stage of udayabbaya ñāna, knowledge of the arising and falling of compounded things, he notices that his meditation practice of noting phenomena is proceeding with ease and comfort un-accompanied by pain or suffering. This is manifestation of an especially pleasant feeling, which cannot be maintained for long, however much the meditator wishes it. When his concentration wanes and becomes weakened, that pleasant feeling vanishes and may not arise again in spite of his yearning for it. Then it dawns upon him that feeling is not subjected to one's will and is ungovernable, and so it is not self or inner essence. The meditator then realizes through personal experience the nonself nature of feeling.

He also vividly sees the nonself nature of feeling because of its dissolution on each occasion of noting. In the initial stages of meditating, the meditator suffers from physical pain of stiffness, itching, or heat. Occasionally, he suffers the mental distress of disappointment, dejection, fear or repugnance. He should keep on noting these unpleasant feelings. He will come to know that while unpleasant feelings are manifesting, pleasant sensations do not arise.

On some occasions, however, the meditator experiences very pleasant sensations in the course of meditation, both physical and mental. When he thinks of happy incidents, for instance, happy feelings are evoked. He should keep on noting the pleasant feelings as they arise. He will come to know then that while pleasant feelings are manifesting, unpleasant sensations do not arise.

On the whole, however, the meditator is mostly engaged in noting the origination and dissolution of ordinary corporeal and mental processes, such as the rise and fall of the abdomen, which excite neither painful nor pleasant sensations.

The meditator notes these occasions in which only neutral feeling is evident. He knows, therefore, that when equanimous feeling arises, both painful and pleasant feelings are absent. With this personal knowledge comes the realization that feeling makes a momentary appearance, only to quickly vanish, hence it is transitory and not self, not a permanent ego.

At this juncture, I would like to include a description of the Dīghanakha Sutta, as it affords a good illustration of how such realization comes about. We must, however, first begin with an account of how the Venerable Sārīputta, who played a major role in that Sutta, attained to higher knowledge.

The Venerable Sārīputta's Search For Higher Knowledge

Two young men, Upatissa and Kolita, who were later to become known as the Venerables Sārīputta and Moggallāna (two of the Buddha's foremost disciples), became wandering ascetics under the great teacher Sañjaya, with a view to seek the un-aging, the un-decaying and the Deathless [i.e., Nibbāna]. They learned all that had to be taught by the great Sañjaya in a few days' time and came to realize that there was no substance in his teaching. Consequently the two of them left the great teacher and roamed about the entire Middle Country in further search of Truth.

Finding it nowhere, 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, while he was going on alms round. Upatissa followed him closely to his eating place after the round. He prepared a seat for the monk and

offered him drinking water, then asked him about his Master and his Teaching. The Venerable Assaji 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 said, he knew only 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 gave the wanderer Upatissa this short summary of the Buddha's Teaching:

"There are these dhammas (dukkha sacca; the truth of suffering) which have arisen because of certain causes (samudaya sacca; the truth of the cause of suffering): our Master, the Perfect One, has told about these causes. And there is this state (Nibbāna) where all these Dhammas 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 Samana."

This is the short account of the teaching given by the Venerable Assaji. Quite brief: "All dhammas arise because of causes. Our Master has taught about the causes." But this condensed teaching was sufficient for the wanderer Upatissa to see the light of Dhamma and attain the knowledge of the first Path and Fruition and become a Stream Enterer. A very speedy achievement, I must say. I find that present-day meditators show no remarkable progress after meditating for a whole day and night. Only after seven days of hard work do they begin to get a glimpse of the corporeal and mental processes and the nature of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and insub- stantiality. Most meditators take about a month and a half to reach the stage which may be called the knowledge of the First Path and Fruition. It may be two and half months to three months before others can be said 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 developed meditation almost to the stage of the Path and Fruition throughout his previous existences. He could have achieved the knowledge of the Path and Fruition in those past existences, but he had made a vow to become a chief Disciple of a Buddha. In this last existence (when his vow would be fulfilled), propelled by the momentum of Vipassanā practices of his previous existences, he made speedy progress through the sequence of Vipassanā ñānas to attain the knowledge of the First Path and Fruition. Although the teaching was brief, it contained an illuminating message for development of insight knowledge.

Prior to 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. It is not simply conditions arisen dependent on causes, but has been in permanent existence." Venerable Assaji's statement said that there is no such permanent entity; there is only the truth of suffering, corporeality and mentality, which are the result of the workings of craving (tanhā) and clinging (upādāna), the truth of the origin of suffering. These resultant effects of the cause of suffering are none other than the corporeality and mentality of one's own person which are involved in the acts of seeing, hearing and so on.

Upatissa realized at once that all that had been manifesting in sense awareness since the time of his birth was simply a process of incessantly arising and ceasing corporeality and mentality. They arose as a result of craving and clinging to life and existence. It should be noted that Upatissa developed insight knowledge by taking note of the phenomenon of change even as he was receiving the message from the Venerable Assaji, and in consequence instantly attained the knowledge of the Path and Fruition.

Having become a Stream Enterer, Upatissa asked the Venerable Assaji where the Blessed One was then staying. Before the monk departed, Upatissa informed him that he would be going to see the Buddha. He then went back to his friend, Kolita, who, noticing his composed features and clear countenance, asked him, "Well, friend, is it possible that you have found the Deathless?" Upatissa declared 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, Kolita also instantly became a Stream Enterer.

The two of them then decided to go to the Blessed One. But first they went to the great teacher Sañjaya and invited him to go with them. Sañjaya declined their invitation, saying, "You go along. I have no wish to go. From being a big storage tank, I can't become a small carrying pot, becoming a disciple to others." The two friends reminded him, "The Blessed One is a truly Enlightened One. People will go to him instead." To this, Sañjaya replied, "Have no worry on that account. There are more fools in this world than wise people. The wise will go to the Samana Gotama. The fools, who form the majority, will come to me. You go along as you wish."

Nowadays, there are many imposters and bogus religious teachers who hold views similar to that of this wanderer Sañjaya. People should be wary of such teachers.

Then Upatissa and Kolita went with two hundred and fifty wanderers, who were their followers, to the Blessed One. After listening to the discourse given by the Blessed One, the two hundred and fifty followers became Arahats. The two leaders, with their two hundred and fifty Arahat followers, then requested admission to the Order, and the Blessed One gave them the Ehi bhikkhu ordination, saying, "Come, monk." From that time the wanderer Upatissa became known as the Elder Sāriputta, and the wanderer Kolita, the Elder Mahā Moggallāna.

Having been thus ordained, they continued with the practice of meditation. The Elder Moggallāna attained Arahatship within seven days of ordination. The Elder Sāriputta was, however, still practicing vipassanā meditation, employing the anupada dhamma method of meditation (reviewing and analyzing all levels of consciousness step by step with insight) up to the full moon day of February (two weeks after his ordination).

On that full moon day, the wanderer Dīghanakha, who had stayed behind with the teacher Sañjaya, thought to himself "Whenever my uncle, Upatissa, went to see other religious teachers, he always came back soon. But on this visit to Samana Gotama he has been gone for a whole fortnight, and there is no news of him. What if I followed him to find out if there is any substance (in Buddha Gotama's Teaching)?" So he set out to where the Venerable Sāriputta was staying to inquire about the Buddha's Teaching.

Dīghanakha Sutta

On that day, at that time, the Blessed One was staying in the Sukarakhātā Cave in the Vultures' Peak. The Venerable Sāriputta was standing behind the Blessed One, gently waving a fan. The wanderer Dīghanakha 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 fresh becoming; in other words, in the belief that a new existence arises after passing away from the present one. But since he said he had no liking for anything, it amounted to declaring that he did not like his own belief either. Therefore the Blessed One asked him: "Have you also no liking for this view of yours: 'I have no liking for any'?"

To this, Dīghanakha gave an ambiguous reply: "Even if I had a liking for this view of mine, it would all be the same." This is typical of those who, holding on to wrong views, equivocate when they realize that what they believe in or have said is wrong.

In order to bring out the wanderer's view, 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 (uccheda) is close to non-craving, to non-fetter, to non-relishing, non-accepting, non-holding tight, and non-clinging." Upon this Dīghanakha remarked, "Master Gotama commends my view; Master Gotama commends my view."

However the Blessed One was merely explaining the true virtues and faults of the views of the eternalists and annihilationists. The eternalists abhor and avoid unmeritorious (akusala) acts in order to avoid the evil consequences in coming existences. They engage 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. Even those who have professedly embraced Buddhism find it difficult to accept that there is no self, no living entity, only a continuous process of corporeality and mentality. For Arahats, having completely eradicated clinging and craving, there is no fresh arising of corporeality and mentality in a new existence after Parinibbāna. The process of corporeality and mentality comes to a complete cessation. The eternalists would like to believe that after Parinibbāna, the Arahats continue to exist in special forms of corporeality and mentality.

The Commentary has this to say on the subject:

"The eternalists know that there is a present life and an afterlife. They know there are resultant good or bad effects consequent on good or bad deeds. They undertake meritorious deeds and shrink from bad deeds, but they relish and take delight in pleasures which could give rise to fresh existences. Even when they encounter the Blessed One or his disciples, they find it hard to abandon their beliefs. So it may be said of the eternalist belief that, although its faults are not grave, it is hard to give up.

"On the other hand, annihilationists do not know that there is passage to the human world from other existences and that there is an afterlife. They do not know that there are resultant good or bad consequences to good or bad deeds. They do not engage in meritorious actions. They have no fear of bad deeds. They do not relish or take delight in pleasures which could give rise to fresh existences (because they do not believe in afterlife), but when they enter the presence of the Blessed One or his disciples, they can abandon their belief immediately. Thus, with regard to the annihilationist belief, it may be said that its faults are grave but it is easy to give up."

Dīghanakha could not grasp the motive behind the Blessed One's statement. He assumed that the Blessed One was commending him for his view that there is nothing after death, that is why he said, "Master Gotama commends 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 annihilationist 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 summarize what the Blessed One said, it was explained: "When one holds fast to any one of the above views, there is a likelihood of clashing with the other two. And when there is clash, there are disputes, which lead to quarrels. And when there are quarrels, there is harm." Therefore the Blessed One urged that all 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. The Buddhist view does not infer the transfer of self, living entity, from one existence to another. It means only the arising of new corporeality and mentality in a new existence, depending on previous kamma. The eternalists believe that it is the self that migrates to a new existence. The two views are, therefore, clearly different.

Again, the question may arise whether the Buddhist teaching of cessation of corporeality and mentality after the Parinibbāna of Arahats and the non-arrival in a new existence is not the same as the annihilationist view, which maintains that nothing remains after death. Here, too, there is no similarity. According to the annihilationists, a living entity exists before death and disappears after death. No special effort is needed to make it disappear; it makes its own "exit".

In addition, materialists think that there is suffering only before death. This clinging to the notion of suffering or enjoyment before death is clinging to self. In Buddhist teachings, the Arahat has, before Parinibbāna, no sense of self, and sees only a continuous process of corporeality and mentality. Suffering and happiness are the natural manifestations of feeling, which happen recurrently. After Parinibbāna, the continuous process of corporeality and mentality comes to cessation in an Arahat. This cessation does not come about on its own, but by virtue of the Noble Path, in which kilesa and kamma, which are responsible for the arising of corporeality and mentality, are eradicated. When the cause of their becoming disappears, no new corporeality and mentality arise. Thus there is a world of difference between cessation after Parinibbāna described in Buddhist teachings and the cessation envisaged by the annihilationists.

A further question may be asked: "Just as the eternalists dispute with the annihilationists, is there not the possibility of disputes between those who believe in nonself and those who hold on to the notion of self?" Teaching about Right View is not disputing, it is promoting knowledge and truth for the benefit of others. That there is only a continuous process of change from old to new corporeality and mentality, no permanent self, is the doctrine of nonself, which is Right View. For those who hold the Right View of nonself, 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 explaining that the three wrong views of eternalism, annihilationism, and partial eternalism should be abolished, the Blessed One went on to advise giving up clinging to the material body:

"Aggivessana [Dīghanakha's clan name], this material body of ours is made up of the four great primary elements, sprung from the blood and sperm of our parents, and built up by food such as rice and bread. Being subject to impermanence, it has to be maintained by massage and anointing; even when sustained thus, it still dissolves and disintegrates. It should be regarded as impermanent, suffering, a disease, a spike, an abscess, an evil, an ailment; as alien, as destructible, as void of self. When it is regarded so, there is abandonment of craving and clinging to it."

Having thus talked on the nature of corporeality, rūpa, the Blessed One continued with the teaching on the nature of mentality, nāma.

"Aggivessana, there are three kinds of feeling in our physical makeup: pleasant, painful and neither painful nor pleasant feeling. When a person experiences any one of the feelings, he does not experience the other two. Since each feeling arises singly, it should be understood that it is impermanent, conditionally formed (sankhata), dependently originated (Paṭiccasamuppāda), subject to exhaustion and dissolution (khaya, vaya), fading and ceasing (virāga, nirodha)." (It should be noted that by these words the Blessed One showed how, by contemplating on feeling, one comes to know its arising depending on circumstances and its immediate exhaustion, fading and dissolution.)

Meditators who are taking note of the corporeal and mental phenomena starting from the rise and fall of the abdomen, as I have instructed, should also concentrate on feelings and take note of them as "painful, painful" when a painful feeling arises; "unhappy, unhappy" when an unhappy feeling appears; "pleasant, pleasant," when a pleasant feeling arises; and "happy, happy" when feeling happy. When the sensation is not vividly pleasant or painful, attention should be directed on the body or on whichever mental state is prominent.

While thus heedfully observing feelings, the pleasant or painful feelings will be perceived clearly, arising recurrently and instantly vanishing, like raindrops falling on a person walking in the rain and then disappearing. Just like external raindrops, the inner "raindrops" appear as if they have fallen on the body from an external source. When this phenomenon is clearly seen, realization comes to the meditator that these feelings are impermanent, imperfect because of incessant arising and ceasing, and not self, having no substantiality. As a consequence of such realization, there develops the sense of weariness and dispassion, which the Blessed One continued to explain:

Weariness Through Contemplating Feeling

"Aggivessana, when the meditator sees the three forms of feeling as impermanent, he becomes wearied of pleasant feeling, of unpleasant feeling, and of feeling that is neither painful nor pleasant."

These words should be specially borne in mind. The purpose of insight (vipassanā) meditation is to develop nibbidā ñāna, the knowledge of disenchantment, a sense of weariness. Only when the phenomenon of incessant arising and ceasing has been personally seen and experienced can the nature of impermanence be fully and thoroughly grasped and the sense of disenchantment developed.

Note that in this Dīghanakha Sutta, no mention is made of detailed observation of the separate components of body.

The body must be contemplated as an aggregate. From the words quoted above, it is clear that it is possible to develop a sense of weariness without contemplating on separate components of the body as described in the Abhidhamma.

Furthermore, in connection with the contemplation on mentality, only the three components of feeling are mentioned. Nothing was said of other mental components, such as consciousness and mental formations. It is clear here, too, that a sense of weariness can be developed simply by taking note of the three feelings at the moment of their arising. It must be noted, however, that it is not just painful feeling, but all the three kinds of feeling that should be contemplated, because all three manifest.

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 disenchantment.

The Path And Fruition Arising Through Disenchantment

When weariness has been developed, or because of weariness (disenchantment), the meditator's lust (craving) fades away. In other words, he becomes passion-free and the knowledge of the Noble Path arises. By virtue of knowledge of the Noble Path, which causes the destruction of craving, he is liberated. 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 has been done, there is no more of this to come."

In these words, the Blessed One described how Arahatship was attained and knowledge of retrospection developed. Then he continued to explain that the liberated person, after attaining Arahatship, does not get involved in quarrels or disputes.

"Aggivessana, the monk who is thus liberated from taints (āsava) disputes with no-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 anyone because he has come to know the truth and talks only about the truth."

The Puppha Sutta of the Khandhavagga, in the Saṁyutta Nikāya, has this to say:

"Monks, I do not dispute with the world, it is the world that disputes with me. Monks, one who is in the habit of speaking the truth does not engage in arguments or disputes with anyone in the world. In other words, as he speaks the truth, it cannot be said of him that he is argumentative."

Arahatship Of The Venerable Sāriputta

While the Blessed One was explaining to the wanderer Dīghanakha how the three feelings should be contemplated, and how through such contemplation Arahatship may be gained, the Venerable Sāriputta was standing behind him, fanning him. When he heard the discourse on the three feelings, the Venerable Sāriputta, already a Stream Enterer, gained the highest knowledge of Arahatship, even as he was fanning the Blessed One.

In the Anupada Sutta, his attainment of Arahatship is described thus: The Venerable Sāriputta went into the first jhāna, second jhāna and so on through all the jhānas of form and the formless jhānas. As he came out of each jhāna, he contemplated its nature, and by such contemplation he became an Arahat on the fifteenth day of meditation.

In another Sutta the Venerable Sāriputta himself explained that he attained Arahatship through contemplating the corporeal and mental processes going on inside him.

The three Suttas may be reconciled by assuming that the Venerable Sāriputta had gone into jhāna while listening to the discourse on the three feelings, and, on coming out of the jhānas, had contemplated on the feelings of the jhānic stages and consequently attained the higher Path and Fruition.

His nephew, the wanderer Dīghanakha, became a Stream Enterer while listening to the discourse. It must be understood here that he did so by virtue of insight developed by contemplating the feelings which arose in him while listening to it.

At the end of the Discourse, the Blessed One came down from the Vultures' Peak and convened a meeting of his disciples. The Venerable Sāriputta, knowing of the meeting through reflective insight, made his way to the Veḷuvana Monastery by means of psychic powers.

The distinguishing features of this congregation of disciples were:

1. It was held on the full-moon day of February, when the constellation of the lion comes into prominence.

2. The monks attending the conference came uninvited, on their own initiative.

3. All the attending monks were Arahats endowed with the six abhiññā, super knowledges.

4. All the monks had received the "Ehi bhikkhu" ordination.

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

We have digressed from the original discourse on Anattalakkhana Sutta by including the Dīghanakha Sutta in our discussions. I shall end the discourse today by recapitulating the passage which says that feeling is not self.

Perception And Volitional Formations

Perception 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.

Whenever an object is seen, heard, touched, or known, we usually think, "It is I who perceives; this object is 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 and such a place. The same applies to audible objects and other forms of sensory awareness. This process of perception or memory is wrongly held to be a personal feat: "It is I who remembers, my memory is excellent." The Blessed One explains here that this view is wrong, that there is nothing individual or personal in the process of remembering, just insubstantial phenomena; it is not self.

Explaining how perception is not self, the Buddha continued:

Were perceptions a living entity, our inner substance, there would be no reason for them to inflict and oppress us -- it is not normal for beings to cause themselves harm and injury -- and it should be possible to manage that only good things are perceived and remembered. But since perception is oppressing and does not yield to one's wish, it is not self.

Perception has its good aspects. Cognition of the characteristics of objects is certainly very useful. So is retentive memory: remembering facts and retaining what has been acquired from learning is a good function of perception. However, recalling to mind what is sad, sorrowful, disgusting, or horrible form bad aspects of perception, which are stressful and therefore oppressing. Some people suffer from haunting memories of departed loved ones, sons, daughters, husbands or wives, or of financial calamities that have befallen them. These lingering memories bring about constant sorrow and consternation; only when such memories fade away is one relieved of the suffering.

Thus saññā, perception, the function of recognition and remembering, is truly oppressing. So long as perception is bringing back memories of bereavement and financial loss, so long will sorrow and lamentation cause intense suffering, even resulting in death. This is how perception oppresses by recalling to mind sad past experiences.

Suddenly recalling some repulsive object during meal time is bound to impair one's appetite. The memory of a dead body seen earlier in the day may disturb one's sleep at night. Some people fantasize about dangerous situations and anticipate them with great anxiety. This is how perception oppresses by bringing back distressing mental objects.

It is not self because its appearance is dependent on conditions.

Perception cannot be manipulated as we wish by recalling only those experiences which are beneficial and profitable, and suppressing those which will cause distress and suffering. It is unmanageable, ungovernable, and thus not self, not a living entity, but simply insubstantial phenomena dependent on causes and conditions.

Perception in one's own person, as stated in the text, is oppressing, unmanageable, not subject to one's will. It is obvious, therefore, that perception is not one's self, one's inner core or a living entity. But people in general find, on recalling past experiences, that there are some which are retained in memory and conclude that "It is I who has stored these experiences in mind; it is I 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, that there is one individual, the self, who stores up and recalls past experiences. This wrong belief arises because of lack of heedful noting at the moment of sensory activity and because of the fact that the real nature of the phenomena is not yet known by vipassanā insight.

When constant arising and ceasing of the phenomena of sensory awareness is seen as it truly is through vipassanā insight, realization dawns that perception is also a natural phenomenon, constantly arising and ceasing.

Here it may be asked: in view of the impermanent nature of perception, how does recollection take place? The retentive power of preceding perceptions is passed on to succeeding perceptions. As this retentive power increases on being inherited by the succeeding generations of perception, some people become equipped with the faculty of recalling past lives. This is how the perception in the life-continuum or death-consciousness of the past life ceases but arises again, with reinforced powers of recall, as the birth consciousness and life-continuum of the present life.

It is because of this handing over of "retentive power" by the previous perception to the succeeding one 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 experiences of days gone by may sometimes resurface. As his concentration gets stronger, a meditator engaged in Satipaṭṭhānā medita-tion may find memories of episodes from early childhood arising. The meditator should dispose of them by noting them as they appear. Remorse over past mistakes and faults may lead to worry and restlessness in the course of meditation, and these may become a great hindrance to progress in the development of concentration and vipassanā insight. They should be discarded by taking note of them. Thus, perception which recalls past incidents and produces worry and fret is oppressing. For this reason, too, it may be taken that perception is not self.

As explained in the previous discourse, there are four ways of clinging to self, and perception is concerned with three of them: sāmi attā, nivāsī attā and kāraka attā.

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 attā clinging, that is, the belief that there is a self that controls the process of remembering. This sāmi attā clinging is rejected by the Anattalakkhana Sutta, which states that it is not possible to say of perception, "Let perception be thus, let perception be not thus."

Thinking there is a continuous self ever present in the body, who carries out the task of remembering things, is nivāsī attā. This type of clinging can be discarded by taking note of every mental phenomenon which arises. By doing so, one perceives personally that memories keep appearing and instantly vanishing. 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 are only recurrent phenomena renewing themselves by incessant arising and ceasing. This realization drives home the fact that there is no permanent self or living entity residing in one's body which does the task of remembering or recollecting.

Thinking it is I or self which is doing the action of remembering or recollecting is kāraka attā clinging, and this may also be removed by meditative noting. When perception of sights or sounds takes place, the meditator observes their arising and vanishing. Seeing that perception of sight or sound is always arising and vanishing, there comes the realization that perception is merely a recurrent mental phenomenon and not the action of any abiding self or inner substance. And in accordance with the Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, it cannot be managed in such a way that only pleasant, wholesome memories persist and unpleasant, unwholesome memories fade away. Since it is thus ungovernable and uncontrollable, realization comes to the meditator that perception is not self or living entity, but merely a natural process dependent on conditions, incessantly renewing itself and vanishing. The Anatta-lakkhana Sutta was taught by the Blessed One specifically for the purpose of removing the attā clinging through such personal realization of the true nature of the khandhas.

Here the question may arise: what is the difference between the mundane functions of perception, such as memory, and the recollective powers of sati, or mindfulness, as described in the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta? There is a world of difference between the two; in fact it may be said that they are diametrically opposed to each other in purpose and objective. Perception perceives for retaining sense objects for future recall; it may take in the form, shape or condition of the object observed. Meditative note-taking according to the Satipaṭṭhāna method is concerned just with the passing events of mental and corporeal phenomena, so as to realize their impermanence, unsatis-factoriness and insubstantiality.

"Monks, volitional formations (sankhārā) are not self."

Here, it should be noted that sankhāras are of two kinds: conditioned things and conditioning things. Conditioned things are those aggregates that have arisen through such causes as kamma (volitional activity), mind, climate (seasonal conditions) and nutriments.

Immediately after the rebirth consciousness, mental and corporeal phenomena spring up as kamma resultants. Vipāka (kamma resultant) types of consciousness and their concomitants and the heart-base (hadāya vatthu) together with kamma-produced physical properties such is eye, ear, nose, tongue and body, spring up in this way. They are all conditioned things, resultant effects of kammic activities, and they are called resultant sankhāras as conditioned by kamma.

Likewise, mind-produced physical properties, such as the movements of bending, stretching, moving, going, standing, sitting, talking, and smiling, are called resultant sankhāras. Because they are born of thoughts, they are resultant sankhāras conditioned by mind.

Mind and its concomitants are mutually conditioned and conditioning. We thus have sankhāras as causal agents as well as sankhāras as resultants.

Physical properties produced by climatic conditions are resultant sankhāras conditioned by climatic conditions. Physical properties that arise through intake of nutriment are resultant sankhāras conditioned by nutriments.

Finally, all succeeding mental states and all their concomitants are resultant sankhāras, dependent on the preceding mental conditions and their concomitants for their arising. All such aggregates which arise because of kamma, mind, seasonal conditions and nutriment are resultant sankhāras, conditioned things. This is summarized in the famous formula:

All conditioned things are impermanent; all conditioned things are suffering, dukkha.

These are corporeal and mental aggregates which manifest during the cognition of sense impressions, the five groups of grasping which must be realized by vipassanā insight as impermanent, unsatisfactory and insubstantial. In the above formula the Blessed One states 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. During this observation, as concentration gets strengthened, one becomes aware that the aggregates are incessantly arising and vanishing. In accordance with the Commentary statements, hutvā abhāvato -- "it is impermanent because having arisen it perishes"-- and udayabbaya paṭipīḷanato -- "it is fearsome because it is oppressed by constant arising and perishing." This is the contemplation that conforms to the words of the Blessed One.

There are people who are damaging the Buddha's Dispensation by teaching in a way the exact opposite of what the Buddha taught. In the above formula -- sabbe sankhāra anicca -- they teach sankhāra to mean not "conditioned things" as explained above, but "activities." Thus, according to them, the above formula means "All activities are suffering." Hence they admonish against any kind of activity, such as giving alms, keeping precepts and practicing meditation. These activities, they say, will produce only dukkha. They advise keeping the mind as it is. Such teachings are readily accepted by uninstructed people who are not keen to put effort into meditation practice, but it is obvious to anyone, even with a limited knowledge of the teaching, that such teachings are against the words of the Buddha. Accepting such teachings 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 cause for some concern.

In the Pali text, sabbe sankhāra dukkhā, sankhāra means "conditioned things," resultants of determining conditions, not "conditioning things," "activities" or "efforts." All sankhāras as conditioned things are to be contemplated as impermanent and suffering. It is wrong to interpret sankhāra here as meritorious activities. What is required is to carefully note and observe all the conditioned aggregates in one's own body until their real nature is seen and dispassion developed over them.

Sankhāra In The Context Of This Sutta

The sankhāra described so far, conditioned things produced by kamma, mind, seasonal changes and nutriment, are not the sankhāra referred to in this Sutta. In the context of this Sutta, sankhāra refers to conditioning things, one of the five aggregates, namely, the volitional formations or mental activities which produce kamma.

The Khandhavagga of the Saṁyutta Nikāya gives the following definition: that which brings about physical, vocal and mental activities is sankhāra (of sankhārak-khandha). Of the five aggregates, the aggregate 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 movements of the volitional formations are expressed in the material body, which then appears to be doing the action. The aggregate of feelings (vedanā) experiences feelings, pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. It cannot of itself produce any effective action. Neither can the aggregate of perception, which merely recognizes or remembers things, like a clerk in an office making a record for future reference. The aggregate of consciousness just knows that a sight is seen, a sound is heard, and so on. It is not capable of causing any action. It is the aggregate of sankhāra which is responsible for physical, vocal or mental actions, such as walking, standing, sitting, lying down, bending, stretching, moving, smiling, talking, thinking, looking, or listening. The wish to go, stand, sit or sleep is a function of sankhāra. All three kinds of activities, physical, vocal, and mental, are instigated and organized by sankhāra.

To think that all these activities are carried out by one's self is to hold the wrong view of self in the sankhāra and is known as kāraka attā (agent self) clinging.

To think that the self which performs all activities resides permanently as a living entity in one's body is to cling to the wrong view of nivāsī attā (continuous self).

Thinking that this self, the living entity in one's body, can act according to its wishes, that its actions are subject to one's will, is sāmi attā (controlling self) clinging.

Volitional formations are clung to by all three modes of clinging. In reality, however, there is no self, no living entity to cling to, there are merely natural processes faring according to their own conditions and circumstances. The Blessed One taught that the functioning of sankhāras is not the action of a living entity. From the viewpoint of the common person, there seems to be a living entity that executes the actions of going, standing, and sitting, but the Blessed One refuted this belief by stating:

Sankhāras are the mental states headed by cetanā, volition. There are fifty-two kinds of mental states. With the exception of feeling and perception, the remaining fifty constitute the aggregate of volitional formations, sankhārakkhandha. In Sutta discourses, only cetanā, volition, is specified as representing the sankhāra activities, but according to the Abhidhamma, we have other volitional formations that can produce kamma, such as attention (manasikāra), initial application of thought (vitakka), sustained application (vicāra), zest (pīti), greed (lobha), hatred (dosa), delusion (moha), non-greed, non-hatred, and non-delusion. These fifty kinds of volitional formations are responsible for all kinds of activities, such as going, standing, sitting, sleeping, bending, stretching, smiling, and speaking. These actions, as well as mental activities such as thinking, visual-consciousness, and auditory-conscious-ness, are carried out and directed by sankhāra.

How Volitional Formations Oppress

The Blessed One urged us to reflect in this way: were volitional formations self they would not oppress. Actually they do oppress in many ways. When we do things out of desire or greed, we become exhausted and distressed. When we say things which should not be said, we are embarrassed. If we commit criminal offences, we get punished. We burn ourselves with longing, losing our appetite and sleep. When we commit evil deeds, such as stealing or telling lies, we land in woeful states and undergo intense misery.

Likewise, volition accompanied by hate motivates vocal and physical actions which produce distress and suffering. Volition accompanied by delusion, conceit and wrong views also leads to distress and suffering in the present life and in the states of woe. These are the ways in which volitional formations oppress. Were volitional formations self, they would not be oppressive in this manner.

Were volitional formations self it should be possible to arrange and organize them in such a way that only wholesome activities bringing beneficial results were carried out, not those which would cause harm. Actually it is not possible to manage these activities as one wishes. We may find ourselves involved in activities we should not do, saying things we should not say, or thinking thoughts we should not think. In this way it can be seen that volitional formations are not amenable to control and are therefore not self. In order to see this clearly, the Blessed One said:

Volitional formations are, therefore, not self, insubstantial, faring in accordance with causes and conditions. Accordingly, they are oppressing; how they are oppressing has been described above. Through bad companions, through the defective guidance of poor teachers and through wrong attitudes of mind, we do, say and think things we should not do, say, or think about. In mundane affairs, we may get involved in blameworthy, illegal activities and indulge in bad habits such as drinking, drug-taking or gambling. Also because of greed or anger, we vocalize things which should not be spoken about. These activities result in destruction of property, punishment by legal authorities and loss of friends and associates. From the spiritual and moral standpoint, bad deeds such as killing and telling lies produce bad results, even leading to the misery of the woeful states. Thus, volitional formations oppress by producing bad kammic effects.

Here I would like to recount a story of how an unwholesome volitional activity of slandering resulted in dire distress.

The Story Of The Spiked Peta

At one time the Venerable Lakkhana and the Venerable Moggallāna were coming down from the Vultures' Peak to go for alms food. On their way down, the Venerable Moggallāna saw a peta by means of his Divine Eye. The peta had needles piercing and passing through its body. Some entered into its head and emerged from its mouth, some entered into the mouth and came out from the chest, some entered from the chest and came out through the stomach, some pierced through the stomach and came out by the thigh, some came in by the thighs and out through the legs, some entered into the legs and came out through the feet.

The peta was running about in intense pain, but the needles followed him and pierced his body wherever he went. On seeing his plight, the Venerable Moggallāna reflected that he had become divested of all kammic effects that could land him in such an existence. Pleased with the thought of self-liberation, he smiled to himself, and this was duly noticed by his companion, the Venerable Lakkhana, who asked him the reason for his smile.

The Venerable Lakkhana was not developed enough to see petas, and would have disbelieved the story and cast doubt on Moggallāna's words, so the Venerable Moggallāna did not tell him then what he had seen, but told him to ask about it again when they got to the presence of the Blessed One.

After finishing the meal, they went to the Buddha, and the Venerable Lakkhana asked once again why the Venerable Moggallāna had smiled as they came down from the Vultures' Peak. The Venerable Moggallāna said then that he saw a peta being tormented by piercing needles and he smiled on reflecting that he had become free from such unwholesome volitional activities as had landed the peta in his predicament.

Then the Blessed One praised him, "My disciple is well equipped with the Divine Eye. I saw this peta on the eve of my enlightenment while seated on the throne of wisdom, but since there was no witness, I have not said a word about it. Now that I have the Venerable Moggallāna to corroborate the story, I shall tell about him."

The Blessed One recounted that while in human existence, that being had committed the grievous misdeed of slandering, for which unwholesome kamma he had to undergo intense suffering in the nether worlds for many lakhs of years. Having come up from that abode, he had become this peta to suffer for the remaining portion of the resultant sankhāras.

The peta was invisible to ordinary vision, that is why Venerable Lakkhana did not see him. The needles that pierced the peta did not fall upon other beings, only on that peta. This is an example of how oppressing volitional formations can be.

There were other petas visible to the Venerable Moggallāna, such as the cattle slaughterer who had become a peta chased by vultures, crows, and eagles, who attacked him with their beaks; the bird hunter who had become a peta in the shape of a piece of meat, pestered by vultures, crows and eagles, and who wailed as he fled from his assailants; a former sheep slaughterer who had no skin covering his body -- a bloody, messy lump of flesh -- he was also a target of attack by vultures, crows and eagles; a peta who had previously been a pig slaughterer who had knives and two edged swords falling upon him and cutting him up; a hunter who had spears piercing him. They were all running about wildly, shrieking and wailing. The Venerable Moggallāna also saw petas who were suffering because of other unwholesome volitional formations, such as torturing others and committing adultery. They serve as further examples of the oppressive nature of unwholesome sankhāras.

The denizens of the lower worlds and creatures of the animal world are undergoing suffering because of unwholesome volitional formations which they have done in the past. In this human world, miseries due to the difficulties of earning a living, disease and maltreatment by others have their origin in past unwholesome volitional formations. These volitional formations oppress because they are not self, not one's inner core.

It is not possible to manage volitional formations so that unwholesome ones are prevented from arising and only the wholesome ones appear. This can be experienced personally by meditators: they want to develop only the volitional formations pertaining to meditation, but they find, especially in the beginning, undesirable distractions making their appearance. Under the guidance of greed, various thoughts suggesting different procedures for meditation practice are continually arising. Other thoughts under the guidance of aversion and conceit, to practice this way or that, arise. The meditators must discard these distracting thoughts by noting "liking," "desiring," "thinking" and so on. As stated above, all these volitional activities tend to afflict, they are unmanageable, therefore they are not self, not one's inner core; they are insubstantial phenomena, dependent on conditions. They may be likened to the rain, the sun or the wind. We have no control over the rain. Although we may wish for it, we will not get it unless such conditions as clouds, humidity, and wind elements permit. When the conditions are right, we get rain even if we do not want it. Likewise with the sun: when the sun is covered by clouds, there is no sunshine, no matter how much we may wish for it. In the absence of cloud cover, the sun shines brightly whether we want it or not. The wind blows only when atmospheric conditions are right. When conditions are not favorable, 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. Volitional formations are internal phenomena over which we also have no control. They fare in accordance with conditions and are, therefore, not self.

How Realization Of Not-Self Comes About

For the meditator constantly taking note of corporeal and mental phenomena, it becomes very obvious how volitional formations are uncontrollable and not amenable to one's will. While contemplating on the movements of the abdomen and bodily motions, noting "rising," "falling," "sitting," "touching," if 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. Cetanā is giving silent instructions, "Now, change the posture, change the posture." The meditator may want to continue noting without changing posture, but because of the insistent urgings of cetanā, he does change. This is an unwanted volitional formation.

Likewise, while noting feelings of pain, heat or itchiness, posture is changed at the direction of ungovernable volitional formations.

Again, during the course of meditating, sensual thoughts may appear. These are volitional formations which the meditator does not wish for, and they must be banished by vigilant noting. Volitional formations may urge the meditator to go and talk to someone, to look around or do some work. These are all undesirable volitional formations which arise all the same whether one likes it or not.

They are examples of the unmanageable, uncontrollable nature of volitional formations. They should not be welcomed, but discarded by heedful noting.

To think that there is a manageable, controllable self is to adhere to sāmi attā clinging. The meditator who takes note of the processes of corporeality and mentality as they take place clearly perceives that what one desires does not happen, and what is not desired does happen. In this way he removes the sāmi attā clinging. As he observes the processes of origination and dissolution taking place in quick succession, and sees that which is cherished dissolving, sāmi attā clinging is abandoned. Nothing is seen to remain stable; everything is dissolving, perishing. In this way, nivāsī attā clinging, the belief in the permanent existence of self or inner substance, is also banished.

Then the meditator perceives that events take place only when various factors come together to fulfil the necessary conditions for their happening. Take, for instance, the arising of eye-consciousness. There must be the eye, an object of sight and sufficient light. Then there must be the intention to look. When there is eye and a clearly visible object of sight, the act of seeing is bound to ensue. Likewise a sound is heard only when there is ear, sound, unobstructed space and intention of inclining the mind to hearing. When there is ear and a clearly audible sound, an act of hearing will surely take place. An act of touching will take place when there is an object, the body, bodily impression and intention to touch.

Seeing that respective resultant events of seeing, hearing, and touching take place only when corresponding factors necessary for their arising have come together, the meditator realizes that there is no self or living entity which is causing the seeing, hearing or touching. He thus banishes the kāraka attā clinging which holds there is self or living entity masterminding or overseeing activities. In order to remove this kāraka attā clinging, the Blessed One taught that sankhāra, volitional formations, are not self.

I have now dealt fairly comprehensively with the exposition on volitional formations not being self, and shall end the discourse here for today.

Consciousness

By consciousness is meant eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, touch-consciousness and mind-consciousness. These six kinds of consciousness are held to be self, a living entity: "It is I who sees; I see." "It is I who hears; I hear." In this way, all six kinds of sense consciousness are attributed to one single self. This kind of clinging is easy to understand: objects which are devoid of cognition, such as logs of wood, lumps of earth, or stones, are regarded as inanimate; only those objects invested with faculties of cognition are regarded as animate, as living entities. It is not surprising that eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness and so on are taken to be self, but in fact they are not self, they are not living entities. The Blessed One declared that consciousness is not self, and explained why as follows:

Between mind (citta) and the fifty-two kinds of mental concomitants (cetasika), most people are acquainted with mind.

Burmese people talk about citta, mind, but they rarely speak of the concomitants such as phassa (sense contact) 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." Not only human beings but even Devas and other creatures cling to the belief that consciousness is self. However, conscious-ness is assuredly not self; not being self, it has a tendency to oppress.

How Conciousness Oppresses

Consciousness oppresses when seeing what is repulsive and horrible, when hearing unpleasant sound, unpleasant speech, when smelling foul, offensive odors, when tasting bad food, when feeling uncomfortable sensations of touch, when thinking of depressing, sad or fearful mental objects.

All beings like to dwell on pleasant sights, but they are forced to face horrible and repulsive sights as circumstances dictate. For unfortunate people, the majority of what is seen is made up of undesirable objects. This is how eye consciousness tends to oppress. In spite of their wishing to hear sweet sounds and sweet words, circumstances may compel them to listen to unpleasant sounds. Stricken with misfortune, they may be subjected to fearful noises, threats, and abuse. This is the way ear-consciousness is oppressing. Again, all beings like to enjoy nice, clean smells, but they have to also put up with foul, fetid odors. This is how nose-consciousness oppresses.

The oppressions by eye, ear and nose consciousness are not very apparent in the human world, whereas in the animal world, the world of petas and the hell realms, the oppressive nature of these kinds of consciousness is very vivid. Creatures in the animal world are almost constantly seeing horrible objects or hearing dreadful sounds, and those existing in filth have to smell putrid, foul odors all the time. It goes without saying that petas and beings in the Hell realms will fare worse than animals. They are constantly submerged in distress, seeing bad sights, hearing bad sounds, and smelling bad odors. In some Hell realms, everything seen, heard, smelt, tasted, touched and thought about is unpleasant; there exists nothing pleasant at all. Beings in such realms are subjected to oppression all the time by the six kinds of consciousness.

All people like to enjoy good tastes, 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. Human beings like to feel only pleasant sensations; but when circumstances do not allow, they have to put up with undesirable experiences, say, for instance, when they are suffering from an illness. At such times their suffering may be so oppressive that they yearn for instant death to get release from it. It is far worse, of course, in the four nether worlds.

Human beings would like to have lives that are always carefree, but circumstances do not let them live that way. 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 throughout their lives. They are victims of oppression by mind consciousness.

Consciousness is not subject to one's will. Arising as determined by circumstances, it is unmanageable and uncontrollable. Although one may wish for a pleasant sight, in the absence of pleasant objects one cannot see one. On the contrary, when there are unpleasant objects around, and when the eyes are kept open, it is unpleasant sights which are seen. 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 sounds, in the absence of pleasant objects of sound they cannot be heard. Hence the necessity to keep oneself provided with a radio or a cassette recorder to produce pleasant sound and voices when desired. Reluctant as we are to hear undesirable sounds, when there are such sounds, inevitably they will come to our ears. Ear-consciousness is thus unmanageable, arising of itself, depending on conditions.

In a similar manner, although we like to enjoy sweet aromas, if such smells are not present, our wishes will not be fulfilled. Hence people provide themselves with scents, perfumes and flowers. However unwilling we may be to breathe in bad smells, when foul smells exist around us, we have to suffer from them. They may even cause physical illnesses, such as headache. This is how nose-consciousness is not amenable to will, arising of itself in accordance with causes and conditions.

Although we wish to enjoy good tastes, 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, uncontrollably and unmanageably.

Touch consciousness can be pleasant only when there are pleasant objects such as fine clothing, comfortable bedding and good seating. Constant effort has to be made to acquire inanimate and animate objects for delightful sensations of touch. When it is extremely hot or cold, or when we are pricked by thorns, or injured by fire or weapons, or when we are taken with severe illness, we have to suffer, however reluctantly, from the effects of undesirable touch-consciousness. Thus touch-consciousness is obviously uncontrollable, arising on its own in accordance with causes and conditions.

Everyone wants a happy, joyous, and contented life, but it can come about only when we are provided with sufficient wealth and means. Hence the necessity to constantly endeavor to maintain such a way of life. While thus seeking our means of a comfortable, joyous life-style, thoughts about difficulties in everyday life, about loved ones, husbands and children who have died, about financial and business problems, about old age and debility, may arise to mar our happiness. This is how mind consciousness arises unmanageably and uncontrollably.

Causal Arising

We have used the expression "in accordance with causes and conditions." The phrase refers to how circumstantial and conditional causes produce certain results; it means also that good causes will give good results, bad causes will end up in bad results. No results can be brought about merely by desire. A given result will arise from a given set of causes, whether one likes it or not. Results are produced from respective causes and they are uncontrollable and unmanageable. It is obvious, therefore, that they are not self, not one's inner substance. The Blessed One therefore stated that mind consciousness is not self, because it is not amenable to one's will.

The Blessed One taught this way to enable us to get rid of the sāmi attā clinging, which holds that there is a self inside one's person which can be controlled and managed at will. When sāmi attā clinging is removed, nivāsī attā clinging, the belief in a permanent self residing in one's person, is simultaneously banished. When it is realized that consciousness results only from conditioning causes and that it soon disappears, it becomes obvious that there is no such thing as a 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 are ear and sound; smell-consciousness can only arise when there are nose and odor; tongue-consciousness can arise only when there are tongue and taste; body-consciousness only when there are body and tactile object; and mental consciousness, only when there are mind and mental object. When these conditional causes for their respective results are known, the notion of a permanent entity, nivāsī attā clinging, is discarded.

The meditator who is taking note of corporeal and mental phenomena as they occur will perceive clearly that consciousness is constantly arising and vanishing, depending on conditions. Thus the meditator clearly understands that there is no self or living entity which brings about the act of seeing. He realizes that there is only eye-consciousness which arises when the right conditions prevail. In this way, the meditator abandons the kāraka attā clinging, the belief that all actions, physical, vocal and mental, are being done by a self.

For those who cannot perceive the true nature of consciousness as it really is, consciousness is held fast in the form of the notions of sāmi attā, nivāsī attā, or kāraka attā. It appears that the aggregate of consciousness is more firmly attached to than the other aggregates. These days we call it soul or living entity. In everyday language, consciousness is more commonly talked about as self than feeling, perception and volitional formations, even though they are mental concomitants. People talk as if it is the mind that feels sensations, that recognizes things or causes actions.

The Story Of The Bhikkhu Sāti

At the time of the Blessed One there was a disciple named Sāti who mistook consciousness to be self, and clung to the wrong view of self. The monk Sāti declared that he had understood and grasped what the Buddha had taught thus:

"It is this same consciousness that has been transmigrating and wandering about from existence to existence, no other."

This was his understanding of the Buddha's teaching. He based his views on the Jātaka stories such as King Vessantara, Chaddan the elephant king, and Bhūridatta the Nāga king, who were said to be some of the Buddha's previous existences. In his last existence as Buddha, there were no material aggregates of King Vessantara, nor of the elephant king or the Nāga king, but Sāti believed that the consciousness of the last existence as Buddha was the same that had existed previously as King Vessantara, the elephant king and the Nāga king; it had remained undestroyed, enduring, and stable throughout the rounds of existence. This was how he understood and transmitted the Buddha's teaching. His belief was simply nivāsī attā, clinging to consciousness as a continuous self.

The learned disciples of the Buddha tried to explain to him that his view was wrong, but Sāti remained adamant, believing that he knew the Dhamma better than the other monks. It is not easy to point out the true Dhamma to those holding wrong views. They are apt to look down on their well-wishers as antiquated and behind the times, unlike their leader who innovates a new interpretation. As a matter of fact, anyone claiming to be of Buddhist faith should ponder well to see whether his or her views are in accordance with the teaching of the Buddha. If we hold onto views which do not accord with the Buddha's teaching, we are then outside the dispensation.

Having failed to persuade Sāti to abandon his wrong views, some of the monks went and reported the matter to the Blessed One, who then sent for Sāti. When asked by the Blessed One, Sāti repeated his views: "Based on the Jātaka stories as recounted by the Blessed One, I see that the present consciousness is the same as that one which had existed in previous 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, "Lord, consciousness is that which expresses, which feels, which experiences the fruits of good and bad deeds (now here, now there) in this existence, in that existence."

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

Sāti, however, refused to give up that view. Dogmatic views are frightening. Sāti was a monk, a 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. Nowadays, too, there are some "religious teachers" teaching that there is no need to keep the five precepts or to practice meditation. They say it is enough just to understand the teaching. When wellintentioned learned people try to point out the true teaching to such "teachers," 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 around 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 The True Dhamma

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. Morality may be fulfilled to a certain extent by avoidance of evil deeds in pursuance of the first teaching, but one does not become established in the morality of the Noble Path by mere practice of abstinence. That is accomplished only through the practice of vipassanā meditation till the stage of access concentration or absorption concentration.

Some people talk disparagingly of concentration meditation. The Blessed One himself, however, recom-mended cultivation of concentration meditation. The concentration of jhāna is an ideal basis for the development of vipassanā meditation. If even access concentration is not attainable, one has to work for the momentary concentration of vipassanā meditation. Once it is attained, the vipassanā insights will become developed in their own sequence till the Noble Path is accomplished.

In the Buddha's dispensation, the most essential task is to acquire the wholesome merits of vipassanā concentration and vipassanā insight, since Noble Path and Fruition is unattainable without them. 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 hear of "new teachings" which go against these first and second teachings of the Buddha. The proponents of such teachings say, "The unwholesome defilements (akusala kilesa) do not exist permanently; consequently, no effort is needed to dispel them. Likewise no effort is needed to perform good deeds, keep precepts or practice concentration and insight meditation. All these efforts are futile and only produce suffering." It must be understood that all these new teachings are diametrically opposed to the true teaching of the Buddha.

3. Sacitta pariyodapanaṁ -- To keep one's mind pure. The Path must be developed through practice of vipassanā. 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 statement is in full agreement with the Pāli texts. Nevertheless, there are those who are doing harm to the dispensation by discouraging the practice of keeping precepts, developing concentration and vipassanā meditation, saying they are futile actions which will land one only in suffering. "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 (morality, concentration, and wisdom cultivation) is to despoil the Buddha's dispensation. It is impossible to keep one's mind pure without the practice of concentration and insight meditation. Consciousness is by nature insubstantial, uncontrollable and unmanageable. To assert that mind can be kept as one wishes without the help of meditation is to refute the Anattalakkhana Sutta, which states that it is not possible to say of consciousness, "Let consciousness be thus, let it not be thus." This is worth thinking about.

The last sentence in this concise statement of the Teaching says: Etaṁ Buddhāna sāsanaṁ. "These three --namely, avoidance of evils, promotion of all that is good, keeping the mind pure are the Teachings of all the Buddhas." The Buddhist Dispensation essentially constitutes these three factors. For the Dispensation to endure, to prosper, one must avoid all evil deeds as far as possible and 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 practicing meditation and exhort others to do likewise. It is thus for the purpose of safeguarding the teaching and promoting its prosperity that we have to point out the wrong teaching and explain to people how they have deviated from the right one.

We have digressed somewhat from Sāti's story by mentioning the dangers to the Dispensation from wrong teachings. To continue with the story: When Sāti adamantly held to his wrong views, the Blessed One addressed the monks:

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

"No, Lord. We have heard only that consciousness arises from 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 and is named according to the 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 odors a consciousness arises and it is called nose consciousness; on account of the tongue and tastes 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. just as a fire that burns on account of wood is called a wood fire, and one that burns on account of bamboo splinter, grass, cow dung, paddy husk, or refuse, is called a bamboo fire, a grass fire, a cow dung fire, a paddy husk fire or a refuse fire, just so is consciousness named according to how it is conditioned."

In the Sutta concerning Sāti's view, the Blessed One also gave a comprehensive treatment of the Law of Dependent Origination, but I have no time to go into it here. I shall confine myself to dealing more fully with the simile of fire.

A forest fire might originate from burning of refuse or dried leaves. If there is constant fuel supply and no one to extinguish the fire, it will rage on for miles around. It might seem that the same fire continues 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 a leaf fire. Among leaf fires, the fire that burns one leaf is not the same as the one that burns another.

In just the same way, eye consciousness and ear consciousness, which normally appear to be one and the same consciousness, are seen by careful observation to be distinct, separate consciousnesses arising dependent on conditions. When we consider just one form of consciousness, such as eye-consciousness, we will find different consciousness arising from different colors, such as white and black. Narrowing down to just one color, such as white, the vigilant meditator who has advanced to the stage of udayabbaya ñāna and bhanga ñāna, will see, in the seemingly continuous and single consciousness of white color, preceding consciousness 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 and the most pronounced distinction between each consciousness is involved in the phenomenon of touching.

When feeling pain, careful noting as "pain, pain" enables one to distinctly see each consciousness of pain, moment by moment as it arises. Similarly, mental consciousness of thought and ideas can be noted separately as each consciousness arises.

If any thought or idea intrudes while noting rising and falling of the abdomen, it should be noted as it arises. Usually the intruding thought or idea ceases as soon as its arising is noted, but if thoughts persistently arise conditioned by the same mental objects, they should be observed appearing turn by turn in sequence. When the attention moves over to another mental object, the arising of separate consciousness is very distinct.

When the meditator can perceive the arising of each distinct consciousness with each separate noting, he comes to realize personally the impermanent nature of conscious-ness, its stressful nature due to constant arising and vanishing, and its insubstantiality because of its subjection to uncontrollable and unmanageable conditions. It is most important to gain such personal realization.

Having explained fully how the five aggregates are not self, I would like to provide further illustrations on the subject. They are extracts from the Phenapinḍupama Sutta of the Khandhavagga, Saṁyutta Nikāya:

Phenapinḍupamaṁ rūpaṁ vedanā pubbuḷūpamā
Marīcikūpamā saññā sankhārā kadalūpamā
Māyūpamañca viññānaṁ desitādiccabandhunā.

Material Form Likened To Froth

Material form, rūpa, is like the froth which we see floating about in creeks and waterways, made up of air bubbles entrapped in droplets of water. These 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, but when carefully observed, it turns out to be insubstantial, useless for any purpose.

Likewise, the human body, complete with head, trunk, hands and feet, in male or female form, appears to be substantial. It seems permanent, it looks beautiful, seemingly a living entity. But when subjected to mental analysis, the body turns out to be just like a mass of froth -- insubstantial, a mere conglomeration of thirty-two unclean parts such as head-hair, body-hair, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, muscle, and bone. On further detailed analysis, it is found to be a conglomeration of minute subatomic particles, invisible to the naked eye. It may be likened to a big pile of sand made up of minute individual sand particles. Alternatively, we may take the example of flour consisting of minute individual grains of rice or wheat powder. When soaked with water it turns into dough, a substantial mass which can be made quite big by using large amounts of flour. This substantial dough may be shaped into a figure of a man of massive size but it is not one solid mass, it is a conglomeration of fine grains of rice or wheat powder. Similarly, the body is not one solid mass but made up of small particles of matter massed together in one big heap -just like the mass of froth, it is devoid of inner substance.

There is no permanent core, no beautiful substance, 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 (paṭhavi) 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 and 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 odor also forms a constituent part of the body. The human body can therefore be sensed by its odor; remove that too and nothing remains by which the human body may be recognized or identified.

We see things because we have the sensory organ of eye; without it the body cannot see anything, it is blind. We also have the sensory organ of ear which enables us to hear; the sensory organ of nose which enables us to recognize smell; the sensory organ of tongue which enables us to recognize taste; and the nervous system of the body with which we receive the sensation of touch. All these small but useful constituent material qualities congregate to assume the form and shape of a human body, and all contribute to its utility. Without them, the human body would have no utilitarian value. As a matter of fact, without these constituent parts the human form as such cannot exist.

As stated above, if these constituent parts are pulverized or disintegrated, the human body will no longer exist. All that remains would be fine particles of matter. Furthermore, these sensitive material qualities, such as eye and visual objects, do not exist permanently, they are always arising and vanishing, the new replacing the old. Thus this body is like a lump or mass of froth, a conglomeration of insubstantial material qualities.

When examining and analyzing the body, one should start from where phenomena most clearly manifest. When walking, the material qualities of extension and motion are most prominent. Therefore, in accordance with the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta -- gacchanto vā gacchāmīti pajānāti --"When going, he knows 'I am going', -- the meditator should take note, "going, going", "raising", "stepping out", "dropping". While standing, the meditator should note, "standing, standing", while sitting, "sitting, sitting" "touching, touching", "rising", "falling", and so on. When the limbs are seen, it should be noted as "seeing, seeing," when body odors are smelt, "smelling, smelling," when limbs are moved and stretched, "stretching, stretching", "moving", "changing". Carefully noting in this way, the concentration gets stronger and the meditator realizes that an act of going consists of desire to go, followed by motion and expansion. Acts of standing and sitting are made up of desire to stand or sit followed by a series of motions and expansions. 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 instantly pass away. The limbs, hands and feet, the head and the shape of the body are no longer felt and recognized as such. They appear merely as recurrent physical processes, incessantly arising and passing away. At that stage, the meditator comes to understand by himself how the body is like a mass of froth.

Feeling Likened To A Bubble

Feeling is likened to an air bubble. When rain drops fall on the water surface, little pockets of air become trapped in the surrounding wall of water, forming minute bubbles. Children produce similar bubbles in play, by blowing softly through a blow pipe. The conglomeration of these minute bubbles forms a mass of froth.

These bubbles are formed as rain drops fall on the surface of the water only to vanish instantly. Feeling, the experience of sensations, is likened to bubbles because of its nature of incessant arising and perishing. This is in conformity with what meditators experience, but at variance with what ordinary people assume. The ordinary person's view, on looking long at a beautiful object, is that the pleasant sight remains for a long time. When an unpleasant sight has been seen for some time, they also see it as long lasting. Neutral objects, neither pleasant nor unpleasant, are also thought to last long, to remain permanently. In a similar manner, whatever is pleasant or unpleasant to hear is believed to be enduring. Painful feelings, in particular, are thought to remain for days, months or years. Thus, the ordinary person's view of feeling is not quite what really happens. Feeling quickly vanishes like a bubble. To personally realize this truth, one must constantly observe the psycho-physical process happening inside the body.

While ardently observing the psycho-physical process, the meditator's perception will progress to the stages of udayabbaya and bhanga ñānā, seeing that whatever is pleasant or unpleasant to see, hear, or smell vanishes instantly. The passing away of painful feeling is especially vivid. When the painful feeling is observed as "painful, painful", it is seen to perish with each noting. At the stage of sammasana ñāna painful feeling becomes more vividly and more frequently noticed. At each noting, the pain from each place of observation vanishes, now from one place, then from another, as if instantly removed by hand.

Thus for the meditator whose concentration is strong, a pleasant sight vanishes as soon as it is noted. But since there is eye and visual object, the sight is seen again. Every time it is seen, it is noted and quickly vanishes. The same process takes place with unpleasant objects and neither pleasant nor unpleasant objects. Disappearance of pleasant, unpleasant and neither pleasant nor unpleasant sensations of sound with each noting is more distinct. Sensations of smell also disappear when noted. Taste sensations are specially vivid to the meditator: the delicious taste he feels while chewing the food keeps on vanishing and arising with each act of noting. Pleasant, unpleasant and neither pleasant nor unpleasant sensations of touch, too, arise and vanish when noted in this way.

Similarly, feelings of unhappiness, sorrow, sadness, happiness and gladness will be seen, when subjected to heedful noting, to vanish quickly. Thus feelings are just like bubbles, ephemeral and untrustworthy -- impermanent, suffering and not-self.

Sense Perception Likened To A Mirage

Sense perception, the apprehension of sense-objects as reality, is likened to a mirage. A mirage is an optical illusion caused by atmospheric conditions. It commonly appears as images of sheets of water or houses in the hot gases that rise from the earth in the midday sun of the last month of the summer. Mirages are optical illusions. Wild beasts such as deer roam about in the summer heat in search of water. Seeing what appears to be a body of water in the distance, they run towards it only to find a dry tract: 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 (perception) deceives people into thinking that whatever is seen, heard, touched or known is a human being, a man or a woman. With their illusory perceptions of what is seen, heard, touched or known, people become involved in multiple activities concerning them, just like the deer 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 nonexistent objects, one must take heedful note of all material and mental phenomena as they occur. As concentration improves, it is seen that in every phenomenon there are only the material object 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 while they are being noted.

Thus what was formerly held by saññā to be enduring, permanent, an individual, a being, a man, a woman, or a self, is now seen as a deception, an optical illusion, like a mirage. The meditator realizes that in reality it is merely a process of incessant arising and vanishing, impermanent, suffering and not-self.

Sankhāra Likened To A Plantain Tree

Volitional formations are likened to a plantain trunk. A plantain trunk looks like an ordinary tree, with a solid, hard core, but when cut up and examined, it is found to be made up of layers of fibrous material with no substantial, inner core. Volitional formations are like the plantain trunk, void of inner substance. They consist of fifty kinds of mental concomitants, headed by cetanā, volition. The outstanding members of this group are sense-contact (phassa), attention (manasikāra), one-pointedness of mind (ekaggatā), initial application of mind (vitakka), sustained application of mind (vicāra), effort (viriya), greed (lobha), hatred (dosa), delusion (moha) conceit (māna), wrong view (diṭṭhi), doubts (vicikicchā), non-greed, non-hatred, non-delusion, faith (saddhā), mindfulness (sati), loving kindness (mettā), compassion (karunā), and sympathetic joy (muditā): all are mental concomitants forming sankhāra. Cetanā, responsible for all volitional activities (physical, vocal and mental), is its leading member. There are many volitional formations and, being involved in all activities, they are very prominent. Thus volitional formations are mainly responsible for the attā clinging to the notion of self as an active agent.

Volitional formations appear to possess a hard core or inner substance, but in reality they are devoid of such inner substance. The meditator can see this reality by constantly taking note of corporeal and mental phenomena. While walking, for instance, the meditator notes "walking, walking", and "raising", "stepping", "dropping". As concentration becomes stronger he comes to notice the arising of the desire to walk or take a step. This desire is also observed to arise and vanish. Although desire to go is usually described as "having a mind to go, " it is actually volitional formations under the guidance of cetanā that motivates the action of going. Urged on by cetanā, the act of walking, involving raising, stepping and 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" -- which is clinging to self. Now that the desire to go is seen to be impermanent, the knowledge appears that there is no self, only phenomena. The desires to bend, to stretch, to move, or to change position are also seen in this true light. In addition, the efforts put in to fulfil these desires are also momentary volitional formations. It is realized that they are void of essence, not self, mere fleeting phenomena.

Further it is seen that when thinking, vitakka, investigation, vicāra, and effort, viriya, are noted as they arise, they vanish instantly. Thus they are also devoid of essence. As greed and aversion make their appearance, they are noted as "wanting", "liking", "anger", and they soon disappear, establishing the fact that they are also not self, having no essence or hard core. When faith, loving- kindness and compassion arise they are noted as they are. They vanish instantly and are therefore insubstantial, void of essence, not self. This analytical knowledge brings home the fact that volitional formations are like a plantain trunk, which, when cut open and examined layer by layer, has no solid, inner core.

Consciousness Likened To A Conjurer's Trick

Becoming conscious of something is like producing a conjuror's trick. When seeing an object, a person ordinarily knows that he sees a man or a woman; he also knows that "I see; it is I who sees." 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." Smelling an odor, he knows. "This is the smell of such and such a person," "I smell;" when eating, he knows, "This food 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, "I think, it is I who thinks." To know, to become conscious of things in this manner is not knowing things as they truly are. judged from the standpoint of the ultimate truth it is knowing wrongly. Such wrong knowledge is not brought about by the five viññānas, namely, eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue consciousness, and body consciousness. These five viññāna cognize only what is ultimately true, namely visible sight, sound, smell, taste and bodily feeling, not as the misconceptions of man or woman. But misconceptions, such as of man or woman, are liable to occur at the end of a full process of cognition (citta vithī), when reflection takes place with the arising of mind consciousness (mano viññāna).

I shall briefly explain the process of cognition with respect to seeing and the process of reflection. If the eye has caught sight of visible form, the flow of bhavanga is interrupted, to be followed immediately by pañca-dvāravajjana (advertence through one of the five senses; in this case cakkhudvārāvajjana: apprehension through the eye door), the consciousness that turns to and considers the sensation. Immediately afterwards the pure eye consciousness arises (cakkhuviññāna), the first cognition of the sensation of sight. As yet there is no reflection about it in conventional terms such as man or woman. As that consciousness ceases, it is followed by recipient consciousness, sampaṭicchana, a moment of reception of the object seen. After its cessation comes the investigating consciousness, santīrana, the momentary examination of the object so received. After this comes the stage of determining whether the object seen is pleasant or not with the determining consciousness, known as voṭṭhāpana. When this consciousness ceases, there arises the impulsive or active consciousness called javana, seven times in rapid succession. With the cessation of the last javana, comes the registering consciousness, tadālambana, which is repeated twice on the object of attention. At the expiration of this registering consciousness, the process of cognition is complete and there follows a series of bhavanga, passive states of mind like that in deep sleep.

To recapitulate: the consciousness that arises from the bhavanga state is the mind door consciousness (āvajjana); it is followed by eye consciousness and recipient consciousness (sampaṭicchana). Then comes the investigat-ing consciousness (santīrana), followed by the determining consciousness (voṭṭhāpana). Then follows the impulsions (javana consciousness) seven times in rapid succession; then the registering consciousness (tadālambana) appears twice in succession. Thus, every time a sight is seen, from the appearance of the sense-door consciousness to the cessation of the last tadālambana, there are altogether fourteen thought moments in a normal process of cognition. If the impression of the object is not very strong, it survives only as far as the consciousness in its javana stage. When a person is 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 voṭṭhāpana, 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 the javana stage, it abruptly ends after two or three thought moments of voṭṭhāpana and sinks back to the bhavanga 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 sense doors should not proceed to javana state.

[* Reference is to a story in the Dhammapada Commentary. It tells of a senior learned bhikkhu who takes teaching from a young, enlightened novice. The novice gives the analogy of a man catching a lizard that has gone into a termite mound with five holes in it. In order to catch the lizard, the man must close off five of the holes and wait at the only remaining hole to catch the lizard. In the same way, the meditator "closes off' (that is, restrains) the five senses and puts all his attention on the mind door.]

As stated above, in the process of cognition through the eye door, the object is only the ultimate visible sight, not the conceptual form of a man or a woman. After running the complete process, the mind sinks down to the bhavanga, which runs its course for some moments. Then the process of cognition through the mind door, manodvāravithī, arises through reflection on whatever has been seen. Arising from bhavanga, the mind door apprehending consciousness, manodvārāvajjana, appears, followed by the javana process which runs for seven moments and the tadālambana consciousness which lasts for two moments. The whole course, therefore, runs for ten thought moments after which it sinks down to bhavanga level again. In this thought process, the (mental) object is just a reflection on the sight that has been seen, it is not yet based on any wrong concept of previous 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, say. When the process is repeated for the third time, it is the concept of name (of man and woman) that has become the object. From then onwards, every time there is a reflection on what has been experienced previously, the object is always simply a concept: "I see a man". "I see a woman". This is how consciousness plays conjuring tricks and substitutes concepts for realities.

Summary

1. In the first process of cognition of sight, consciousness registers only the ultimate reality of visual object.

2. In the first round of reflection on the visual object, there is still consciousness of what has actually been seen, namely the sight. No misconception has appeared yet. If heedful noting is done at this stage, wrong concepts cannot arise and cognition will rest only on the ultimate object.

3. In the second round of reflection, the concepts of form and shape (features) of visual object begin to appear.

4. In the third round of reflection, the concept of identity of visual object has appeared. Likewise in the process of cognition of sound, odor, taste and touch, the same sequence of transition from consciousness of reality to consciousness of concept takes place.

When consciousness of sight and sound arises, or when the first round of reflection on what has been seen or heard takes place, if careful noting (as "seeing," "hearing," "smelling," "tasting," "touching" or "thinking") is done instantly, wrong concepts cannot arise. The consciousness will rest on the reality of what is actually cognized. Keeping consciousness with reality is the raison d'Åtre for taking note of sensory awareness at the instant it arises. If note is taken as "seeing, seeing" while an object is being seen, the process of cognition will cease just with the fact of seeing, and the subsequent process of cognition of concepts acquired through reflection cannot take place. In accordance with the teaching diṭṭhe diṭṭhamattaṁ bhavissati, "just seeing at the time of seeing" consciousness of seeing ends its course there.

There follows the analytical knowledge of the unknowing matter, such as eyes and sounds, of the body and the knowing mind which is consciousness of the objects. There is also knowledge that seeing and noting recurrently arise and vanish. Realization comes that there is only impermanence, suffering and not-self.

Similarly with what is heard, smelt, tasted, touched or thought about: constant noting of these phenomena will reveal the difference between physical and mental properties, and their impermanent, stressful and not-self nature. Realization comes to the meditator: "Previously, because there was no taking note of the phenomena, wrong concepts were believed to be reality; the conjuring tricks were accepted as reality. Now that the phenomena are noted as they are, there is no perception of any self, there is only incessant arising and ceasing."

When seeing an object, the eye consciousness vanishes immediately 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 ceasing. Likewise with hearing, touching, and thinking. There is no substantial hearing. With each act of hearing, the ear consciousness arises and instantly vanishes. There is no sustained touching: at each act of touching, the touch consciousness arises and instantly vanishes. There is no sustained thinking; with each act of thinking, the mind consciousness arises and instantly vanishes.

Therefore everything is impermanent. Arising is always followed by cessation; there is nothing reliable, trustworthy, only terror and suffering. Everything happens as conditioned by causes and conditions, not as one wishes: all things are not self. It is obvious from this Phenapinḍupama Sutta that the five aggregates are void of permanent substance, or any wholesome, pleasant inner core which is subservient to one's will. They are not self, they are insubstantial.

I have amplified these points sufficiently, and shall end the discourse here today.

Seeing Selflessness

All the physical and mental components of the five aggregates are not self. That they are not self becomes evident through their characteristics. The Commentary describes these characteristics as follows: Not being amenable to one's will is a characteristic of nonself. In this Sutta this characteristic is expressed in the terms: "It is not possible to say of form, 'Let my body be thus.'" Further in this Sutta we find the expression, " ... it tends to afflict..." Affliction or oppression should thus be taken as another characteristic of not-self. There is a query in the Sutta, "Is it fitting to consider as a self that which is subject to change?" Thus, constant change and alteration is another characteristic of nonself. When these characteristics are observed as they occur, the knowledge develops that the corporeal and mental aggregates are not self but mere phenomena.

Such knowledge is called anattānupassanā ñāna, knowledge developed by contemplation on the characteristics of nonself.

The name Anattatakkhana is given to this Sutta since it deals with the characteristics of non-self.

The Difficulty Of Understanding Not-Self

"The characteristics of impermanence and suffering are easy to understand, but the characteristic of nonself is hard to comprehend," states the Sammohavinodanī. According to that Commentary, such exclamations as "Oh, impermanent, transient," readily come to mind when a pot is accidentally dropped and broken. Again, when afflicted with boils or sores or pricked by thorns, we readily murmur, "Oh what pain, what suffering." In this way the characteristics of impermanence and unsatisfactoriness are clearly visible and easily understood. But just as an object lying in the dark is hard to explain to others, the characteristic of nonself is not easily understood.

The characteristics of impermanence and unsatisfac-toriness are well known both inside and outside the Buddhist teaching, but the characteristic of not-self is known only in the Buddhist Dispensation. Wise hermits outside of the Dispensation, such as Sarabanga, could teach only about the nature of impermanence and suffering; the doctrine of not-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 impossible for them.

It is the unique quality or attribute of the Exalted Enlightened Ones to be able to teach and explain the doctrine of not-self. Teachers outside of the Dispensation are not up to the subtlety and profundity of this doctrine. The Commentary states that the doctrine of not-self is so deep that even the Enlightened Ones had to employ either the characteristics of impermanence or the characteristics of suffering, or both, to facilitate its teaching.

The Sub-Commentary further explains: "In the above statement of the Commentary, the anicca and dukkha known outside the Dispensation are mere conventional terms, they cannot be used as means for realizing not-self. Only the anicca and dukkha realized in the absolute sense can be used in explaining the doctrine of nonself." Making use of this Sub-Commentary comment, I have described conventional and real concepts of anicca and dukkha in my book on the Sīlavanta Sutta, reference to which may be made for further information.

Not-Self Explained By Means Of Impermanence

In the Chachakka Sutta of the Uparipannāsa section of the Majjhima Nikāya we find not-self explained by means of anicca. According to this Sutta, the meditator should know the following six classes of six:

1. Six internal bases of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind

2. Six external bases of sight, sound, odor, taste, touch and mental impressions

3. Six kinds of consciousnesses: eye-, ear-, nose- tongue-, body- and mind-consciousness

4. Six kinds of phassa, sense contact, through eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind

5. Six kinds of feeling through eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind

6. Six kinds of desire -- hunger for sights, sounds, odors, tastes, touches and mental impressions

Here "should know" means, according to the Commentary, "should know by means of vipassanā contemplation, by means of knowledge of the Noble Path." Therefore, whenever anything is seen, it should be mindfully noted so that the eye and its object of sight, the eye consciousness, the contact and the feelings that arise on seeing are all made apparent. And if liking or craving for the object develop with seeing, that desire should also be noted as "liking, liking."

Likewise, while hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, and thinking, the six classes of six kinds of objects should be known. To the meditator who is aware of these, the knowledge is gained personally that eye, visible sight and eye consciousness arise and cease. The meditator realizes, "Previously, I thought that there is a permanent entity, an enduring self. Now I see by actual observation that there is only the natural phenomenon of incessant arising and vanishing." Perceiving no self, no living entity, the meditator may even wonder for whom he is 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 in this Chachakka Sutta:

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

Seeing Not-Self Through Seeing Suffering

Not-self is explained in terms of dukkha in the Anattalakkhana Sutta itself. "Form tends to afflict because it is not self." That which is oppressing is fearful, a cause of suffering; and it is very plain that a fearful source of suffering cannot be one's self, one's inner entity.

Not-Self Explained In Terms Of Both Impermanence And Suffering

To explain nonself in terms of both impermanence (anicca) and suffering (dukkha), the Blessed One said,

In short, form is subject to change and suffering and is therefore not self. It is not proper to regard as "mine" what is really not self; it is not proper to think vainly of oneself as "I am, I can ..."; it is not proper to regard it as "my self." In this manner should form be viewed and regarded in accordance with reality.

In a similar manner, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness are also shown to be not self by their characteristics of impermanence and suffering. We shall find in the latter portions of the Anattalakkhana Sutta, the nature of nonself being described in terms of both anicca and dukkha.

The concepts of anicca and dukkha are known and accepted widely, but the doctrine of nonself 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.

Debate With The Wanderer Saccaka

Upon this, Saccaka, the wandering recluse said, "Friend, we hear an utterance which is evil, unpropitious. We have heard that Recluse Gotama has been teaching this doctrine of not-self, to hear which is evil, unpropitious for us. One of these days I may have an opportunity to meet with Recluse Gotama and rid him of this wicked, odious doctrine of his, the wrong view of nonself."

This is an example of how believers in self look down upon the doctrine of not-self. To hear the Blessed One's teaching of nonself is utterly 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 views. Even those who are teaching in accordance with the Pāli Canons are disparaged. Such people who are reviling others are usually found to be deficient in their knowledge of the texts and to have little practical experience of meditation.

Saccaka had not yet made sufficient study of the Buddha's teaching and had no practical knowledge of the Dhamma. Yet he held a poor opinion of it and felt himself very much above it. Therefore, he attempted to go to the Blessed One and engage him in debate. He was sure he would come out the winner and he wanted people to witness his victory, so he went to the Licchavis of Vesālī 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, would whirl it around and around."

When they reached the presence of the Blessed One, the wanderer asked permission from the Blessed One to pose his questions. 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: "Form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness are impermanent, not self. In this way I instruct my disciples. These are the main points of my teaching."

The wanderer then began to give illustrations: "Venerable Gotama, the seed and the shoot have to rely on the earth, they depend on the earth for their growth into plants and trees; likewise, every action that is done with vigor and strength needs the earth for its support; in a similar manner, a person having material form as substantial self, attā, depends on it for both wholesome and unwholesome deeds. Likewise one depends on feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness as substantial self and depends on feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness for both wholesome and unwholesome deeds."

What this assertion means 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 vigor. Trees need the firm support of the earth; similarly, wholesome and unwholesome deeds are performed by individuals having form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness as self; it is dependent on these "selves" that deeds are carried out. Also, it is the self that reaps the fruits (good or bad) of these deeds. Were material form not self, where would be the support for the performance of wholesome and unwholesome deeds, and who would reap their fruits? It was beyond the intellectual scope of the disciples to solve this doctrinal matter of self likened to the earth. Only the Blessed One could handle the problem. So says the Commentary. Accordingly, the Blessed One, intending to tackle the problem personally, asked of the wanderer, "Saccaka, do you hold that material form is self, feeling is self, perception is self, volitional formations are self, consciousness is self?"

"Yes, Venerable Gotama, I hold that view and these people here also hold the same view." The Blessed One urged him, "Saccaka, leave aside other people's views; let us hear what you hold as your own."

It was Saccaka's intention to share the blame with the others present if his view of self happened to be blameworthy, but the Blessed One urged him to confine his reply to himself. He was thus forced to admit that he held that "material form is self, feeling is self, perception is self, volitional formations are self, consciousness is self."

Then the Blessed One asked him,

"Saccaka, rulers like King Pasenadi and King Ajātasattu hold sovereign powers in their own dominions; they execute those who should be executed, 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 indeed have such authority over their countries: even the Licchavis, elected by popular vote, hold such powers to execute, punish or banish in their own countries," replied Saccaka, going beyond the bounds of the question, not foreseeing the repercussions it would have on his beliefs.

Now Saccaka found himself caught in a dilemma. The doctrine of self holds that one can exercise control as one wills. The sāmi attā clinging, which we have repeatedly mentioned, holds that self can be managed at 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 the body, which he regarded as self, would be amenable to management. If he did that, there would come the further question whether he could exercise control over his body so as to keep it youthful like the bodies of the Licchavi princes. If he replied that it could not be managed, then that would amount to admitting that there could be no control over the body and therefore it could not be self. Finding himself in this dilemma, Saccaka kept silent and gave no answer.

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

At that time a celestial ogre, armed with a thunderbolt, was said to be hovering above Saccaka's head, poised to split it open. The ogre was visible only to the Blessed One and Saccaka, not to others. It is somewhat like the ghost manifestations of the present day, which are visible to some, invisible to others. Saccaka was terrified 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, claim that he was forced to answer the way he did, being 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."

"No, Lord, there is no control over it," replied Saccaka, thereby contradicting himself. He had said that material form is self; if material form were self, it should be amenable to control. Now he was saying that there was no control over material form, thus, in effect, admitting that material form is not self.

"No, Lord, there is no control over it."

Similar questions were asked concerning perception, volitional formations and consciousness, prefaced by the same caution to take heed so as not to be contradicting himself. Saccaka provided similar answers, saying there was no control over each of them.

This question is profound: would one who takes delight in the corporeal and mental aggregates which manifest at the six doors during sense contact, and thinks of them, "this I am, this is mine, this is my self," know that these corporeal and mental aggregates are suffering? Would it be possible for him to end suffering, to be rid of suffering? Saccaka provided the answers according to the questions asked: "Venerable Gotama, how could it be possible for him to know the truth of suffering or to end suffering? Impossible, Lord Gotama."

The wanderer Saccaka had thought very highly of his own belief in self. He was very vain and boastful about it, but when examined by the Blessed One he was forced to admit the error of his views. His belief in self, attavāda, was thoroughly annihilated. To give a final blow to his bloated ego, pride and vanity, the Blessed One gave this illustration:

"Aggivessana, suppose there is a man who goes into the forest wanting some heartwood. Seeing a plantain tree and expecting to find heartwood inside it, he fells the tree. Then he cuts off the top part of the tree and begins to peel off the outer skin. He finds in the plantain trunk not even any outer wood fibre, not to mention inner heartwood.

The wanderer Saccaka, having nothing to say in reply, remained silent, embarrassed and crestfallen, 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 give an illustration. On being permitted by the Blessed One, Dummukha, the Licchavi Prince, said,

"Lord, there was a tank not far from the town, and there was a crab living in the tank. The young children came out from the town and, arriving at the tank, caught hold of the crab and placed it on land. The crab clumsily raised its claws and legs and waved them about. Every time the crab raised a claw or leg, the children would smash it off 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 Lord has destroyed all the thorns and spikes of Saccaka's wrong view, his pastures of wrong views, and the movements of his wrong views. There are now no more grounds for Saccaka to approach the Lord in debate."

While Dummukha the Licchavi prince was addressing the Blessed One, other Licchavi princes were anxiously awaiting their turn to denounce Saccaka with more illustrative stories. Seeing a situation developing in which the Licchavi princes would be one by one heaping disgrace on him, Saccaka decided to stop Dummukha from making further remarks: "Hold on Dummukha, we are having a discussion with the Venerable Gotama, not with you." Then he addressed the Blessed One, "Venerable Gotama, let it be, what I have said and what others have said. I wish to bring them to a close. There has been such random talk."

Then he asked the Blessed One how one had to go about practicing in the Buddha's Dispensation to reach the stage where skeptical doubts are overcome and courage of conviction attained. The Blessed One taught him that one has to undertake meditation practice until one attains the stage when one can see, with insight and knowledge of the Path, that the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness, which are liable to be misconceived as "mine," "I," "my self," are in reality "not mine," "not I," "not my self."

Saccaka wanted to know also how to practice to become an Arahat. The Buddha told him that, after realization that the physical and mental aggregates are "not mine," "not I," "not my self" one has to continue practicing until one is free of clinging and attachments.

What comes out of this debate between Saccaka and the Blessed One is that there is a type of wrong belief which holds that all the five aggregates are self and that those who cling to self always think disparagingly of those who believe in the doctrine of not-self. There is another type of wrong belief which holds only one of the aggregates to be self. This is evident from the self clinging of Sāti described in Chapter IV and also from vedaka attā clinging and kāraka attā clinging.

Refuting The Independent Self

There has appeared in modern times still another type of self belief. As described in books on Indian Philosophy, this new type of self clinging has no reference to the five aggregates, it postulates a self existing apart from them. This must be rejected as just an opinion, for in the absence of the five aggregates there can be no self. Consider for a moment: if self has no form, it cannot be experienced in any form or substance. If mental properties still exist, there can be self clinging to them similar to the attachment of the common worldling (puthujjana--unenlightened being) to the formless realm. But without mental properties, then there is nothing to be attached to as one's self. If there is no feeling, there can be no clinging to feelings, pleasant or unpleasant. In the absence of perception, no attachment can arise to recognition or memory. Having no consciousness, nothing can be known; and since there are no volitional formations such as intention, that self cannot do anything. Therefore such a self could exist only in name; it would be of no practical use and could not even be described. Thus, although they assert that their self is apart from the five aggregates, it is obvious that their self clinging is on one, many or all of the five aggregates. It is an impossibility to have any clinging as self apart from or outside of the five aggregates.

Thus, in the Anattalakkhana Sutta, we find the words, "form is not self; feeling is not self; perception is not self; volitional formations are not self; consciousness is not self," thus removing and refuting all types of clinging to a self, either apart from the five aggregates, or within one, two, three, four or all five kinds of aggregates.

If material form is clung to as self, then the remaining four aggregates form part of that self, are its attribute and support, and are also clung to. If one of the other aggregates, such as feeling, is clung to as self, then the remaining four are also clung to as part of that self, as its attribute and its support. All these types of self clinging are refuted by the statement "material form is not self."

The Blessed One had now explained fully about notself, but in order to explain it further in terms of the characteristics of impermanence and suffering, he continued:

The Blessed One asked them whether material form is permanent or not. The Group of Five replied, "Not permanent," an answer which may have been given from knowledge gained by ordinary hearsay, but the Blessed One wanted an answer based on their own knowledge, and the Group of Five monks, having all become Stream Enterers, had seen the truth. Their answers were thus based on their own knowledge, in accordance with the wishes of the Blessed One.

Meditators at this centre can also answer from their own knowledge. When the meditator takes note of the action of rising, he perceives the phenomena of extension, pressure and motion in the abdomen quite vividly. The phenomena of extension, pressure and motion are the manifestations of the vāyo element. They were nonexistent before; they become manifest just as the abdomen begins to rise. This is then the arising of the phenomenon, its becoming. The beginning of the phenomenon is the rising of the abdomen, which comes under observation and is duly noted. When the rising comes to an end, there are 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 meditator also perceives the rising to pass away, to disappear. This dissolution following on the heel of arising and becoming is the sure characteristic of impermanence. Realizing this characteristic of impermanence in the course of noting the rising and falling of the abdomen is true insight into the nature of impermanence, aniccā-nupassanā ñāna. The knowledge of impermanence accruing from noting the beginning and end of each arising constitutes sammasana ñāna, the first step in the series of ten ñānas developed through Vipassanā meditation. Sammasana ñāna sees through only the beginning and end of corporeal and mental phenomena; the fine details of what happens in between are not yet perceived. It is just the knowledge of impermanence which accrues from perceiving the becoming and dissolution of the continuing processes as they happen.

When noting the rising of the abdomen, 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. Seeing the becoming and the dissolution of each arising, there can be no misconception of it as permanent.

When noting the falling of the abdomen, the contracting motion of the abdomen is distinctly seen. This is the vāyo element in motion. In seeing the beginning of the falling motion of the stomach and its end, the vāyo element is being seen. The falling material form was not in existence at the time of extension; it is only when the rising motion comes to an end that the falling material form comes into being. Then finally the falling material form vanishes, so it is also impermanent.

Characteristics Of Impermanence

Another Commentary definition is hutvā abhāvato anicca: previously nonexistent, it comes into being and then dissolves, thus it is impermanent.

While noting, "falling, falling" the beginning and end of the falling is perceived, and the meditator realizes its impermanent nature. This is true understanding of the nature of impermanence (aniccānupassanā ñāna) on the level of sammasana ñāna, seeing the becoming and dissolution of the continuous processes as they occur. At the level of udayabbaya ñāna, three, four, or five distinct moments of beginning and ending of the phenomenon can be discerned during the interval of one cycle of rising and falling of the abdomen. When the meditator progresses to the bhanga stage, numerous moments of dissolution will be seen to flit by during the interval of one cycle of rising and falling. The material body of rising and falling, being subjected to incessant dissolution, is indeed impermanent.

When the motions of bending or stretching the limbs are heedfully noted, as "bending, bending," or "stretching, stretching," the beginning and end of each bending or stretching is distinctly seen. It is seen thus because the respective motions are being carefully noted. One who doesn't note may not be aware of the bending or stretching of his limbs. Even if he is aware of these motions, he will not perceive the beginning of the motions separately from their ends. He will be under the impression that the hand which was there before bending or stretching still remains there 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. In every instance of bending or stretching, the beginning of the extending and moving is the coming into being (becoming) of the vāyo element; the end of the extending and moving is the dissolution of the vāyo element. When noting bending, to know the beginning and ending of each act of bending is to know the arising and dissolution of vāyo element. Similarly, when noting stretching, to know the beginning and end of each act of 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 limbs clearly brings out the nature of impermanence. This cannot, however, be realized without heedful noting of each action.

While walking, the meditator who is taking note as "right step, left step," 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 meditator who takes note of the movements of the legs in raising, stepping out, and dropping down knows separately the beginning and end of those movements. 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 the vāyo element. Thus the vāyo element, responsible for the movement of each step, is arising and passing away with each step and is, therefore, impermanent.

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

When noting hearing as "hearing, hearing," the meditator notices the sound freshly arising and disappearing. This is knowing the arising and dissolution of sound. Thus any sound which arises is impermanent. Along with this material quality of the sound, the material quality of the ear on which sound makes its impression also arises afresh 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 meditator knows 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 meditator whose vipassanā insight has grown strong, those sounds appear in minute portions, section by section, one after another. The meditator, therefore, realizes that the material quality of sound is also arising and perishing at a very fast pace.

Likewise the meditator who is noting "seeing" knows, when his vipassanā ñāna gets highly developed, that eye consciousness and seeing are quickly appearing and disappearing. The visible forms, also, which arise and perish are not permanent. The material quality of eye which arises and perishes simultaneously with the visible form is also impermanent.

While eating, the meditator notes the taste and knows when the taste disappears. The taste which appears afresh and disappears is, therefore, impermanent. The impermanent nature of taste is very plain. However pleasant the taste is, it remains on the tongue only for a short while before it disappears. As with the taste, the material quality of the tongue on which the taste manifests disappears simultaneously. Thus when the taste is seen to be impermanent, the material quality of the tongue is seen also to be impermanent.

The meditator who keeps note of smell knows that a smell keeps on appearing and disappearing, all the time renewing itself. Smell, which comes into being and dissolves instantly, is therefore impermanent, as is the material quality of the nose which arises and vanishes with it. When thinking occurs while noting the rise and fall of the 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 it is based disappears also. This material base which arises and vanishes with every act of thinking is non-enduring, impermanent. The above concerns material qualities which the meditator realizes personally as impermanent by constantly noting the phenomena of the aggregates. These material qualities relate to the whole of the body; they arise and dissolve, renewing themselves at every moment of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and thinking. Like the material qualities inside one's own body, the material qualities from the bodies of other people are also simultaneously arising and vanishing. For instance, noting sound as "hearing, hearing," the material quality of sound is perishing, as are other material qualities in one's body, as are those in the outside world.

Thus the Blessed One asked, "Is material form permanent or impermanent?" The Group of Five, who had personal knowledge of their impermanent nature, replied, "Impermanent, Lord."

These are questions concerning the characteristics of impermanence. When one knows the characteristics of impermanence thoroughly, it is easy to understand the characteristics of suffering and not-self. The characteristic of impermanence is that it does not endure. The Commentary defines it as hutvā abhāvato anicca: not being in existence, it comes into being and then ceases. These are the characteristics of impermanence. Every-one has seen lightning. At first it does not exist, then it comes into being in a flash. It does not last long, it disappears instantly. The phenomenon of lightning provides all the characteristics of impermanence. Whatever arises afresh to soon disappear is said to have the characteristic of impermanence.

The meditator who continues to observe the process of sense awareness sees things arising and ceasing. Only when he has acquired this personal knowledge of the characteristic of impermanence is the true knowledge of aniccānupassanā ñāna (insight into impermanence) develop-ed. Seeing dissolution, the meditator knows that it is impermanent. This knowledge is aniccānupassanā ñāna. In order to help develop this ñāna, the Blessed One asked, "Is material form permanent or impermanent?"

I have fully dealt with the question of imperma-nence, now I shall go on with the characteristics of suffering.

"That which is impermanent, is it unsatisfactory or satisfactory?" asked the Blessed One. The five monks answered, "Unsatisfactory, Lord."

Two Kinds Of Dukkha

There are two kinds of dukkha. The first is unbearable pain or suffering, the kind that is dukkha because it is oppressive or repulsive. The impermanence of incessant arising and vanishing is not the painful kind of suffering, it belongs to the second kind, in accordance with the Commentary definition: "It is suffering because it is fearsome." The phenomenon of incessant arising and ceasing is terrible, fearsome, or to use the Burmese words, "not good." The question, "That which is impermanent, is it suffering or happiness, dukkha or sukha ?" is the same as "Is it bad or good?" The Group of Five answered, "It is dukkha," or in Burmese idiom, "It is not good."

The reason it is dukkha, not good, is that it is ever arising and perishing, and so it is fearsome. People imagine things to be sukha, good, because they appear to be enduring and stable. When they realize that things do not endure even for a second and are constantly dissolving, they can no longer see any sukha or goodness in them.

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 the building, there is the possibility that it may last for days, months, or even years before coming down, whereas the mental and physical aggregates inside the body cannot endure even for a second. They are undergoing dissolution all the time and are thus more terrible. Hence it is said to be suffering, dukkha.

What are the characteristics of dukkha?

According to the Commentary, abhinha sampaṭipīḷanakara dukkha lakkhanaṁ : Incessant, unceasing oppression is the sign of dukkha. Here, unceasing oppression refers to the incessant arising and passing away of mental and physical aggregates. Thus all mental and physical aggregates are regarded as dukkha, things which are "not good." Seeing the sign of dukkha by personal experience and realizing things to be fearsome, suffering, "not good," not dependable, is true dukkhānupassanā ñāna (insight into suffering).

Development Of Dukkhānupassanā NāṆa

While the meditator is noting the phenomena of mental and physical properties, he sees the incessant origination and dissolution taking place in the rising and falling of the abdomen, in bending, stretching, lifting, stepping, and dropping. He sees also the origination and dissolution taking place in noting every instance of touching, hearing, seeing, and tasting. He begins to see the corporeal and mental aggregates oppressed by processes of origination and dissolution. There is the possibility of death at any moment, hence the oppression is seen as fearsome. This is true dukkhānupassanā ñāna.

In order to help develop this ñāna, the Blessed One asked,"That which is impermanent, is it dukkha or sukha ?" In the paragraph stating, "Body is not self" it is clearly stated, "Since body is not self, it tends to affliction." Therefore it is very plain that the body is suffering, and the five monks answered accordingly, "Dukkha, Lord."

Clinging with Craving, "This is Mine"

Of the three forms of grasping, "this is mine" is clinging with craving, "this I am" is clinging with conceit, and "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 one, it is grasped as if it does. Thus, seeing delightful objects in the market, we take delight in them as if we already owned them. We take a fancy to jackets and skirts, we put them on in our imagination; shoes too, we wear in our imagination, as if they were already our own. We grasp everything, if we fancy it, animate or inanimate, as if it was our own. Therefore, the Blessed One asked whether it was wise to grasp things that are impermanent, suffering and subject to change and delight in them as "mine"; in other words, whether it is proper to delight in suffering.

The physical properties in one's person are constantly originating and dissolving; if one sees this as it really is, it is frightening, just like having to live in a dilapidated building. One may feel quite well for the present, but a change for the worse may take place at any time, depending on conditions and circumstances. Once it is realized that the body does not endure even for a moment, that it is always changing, and therefore a source of suffering, how could one take delight in it? Would anyone willingly choose as one's life partner someone who is going to become an invalid within hours or days, or who is about to die? No one who really knew what was about to happen would take delight in such a course of action.

Similarly, the meditator who sees the unceasing process of origination and dissolution of the aggregates finds only terrible suffering in them. Finding them as such, he has no desire to grasp the body as his own. The Group of Five monks, therefore, answered that it is not proper to regard the body with the thought "this is mine."

Clinging With Conceit, "This I Am"

To consider material form as "this I am" is to cling to it with conceit. When one has good eyes and ears and can see and hear well one begins to take pride in them: "I have good eyes, good ears, I look beautiful, I have a pleasant voice, I am well, I am strong." Is it proper to cling to the body in this manner?

Conceit is developed when there is the misconception that one's possessions are enduring and permanent. When the material qualities of eyes, ears, and visible forms are wrongly held to be permanent, vanity is built round them. It is like a man who has a cache of gold and silver hidden in a certain place: he may be full of pride over his wealth, but if he finds out that his cache has been robbed and he no longer owns any riches, the bubble of his conceit gets burst.

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 conceived when there is belief that the physical properties in one's person are everlasting and amenable to one's control. When knowledge arises that they are unstable, constantly arising and vanishing, and suffering because they are unenduring and subject to change, there are no more grounds for clinging to the body as "self," as a living entity. When the meditator knows that the body cannot be controlled -- "Let everything be pleasant, good; let nothing unpleasant or bad happen; let all good physical properties remain permanent" -- there is nothing for him to cling to as self. Thus to the question, "Is it fitting to regard the body as self?" the five monks replied, "No, Lord." With this question, the Blessed One made it clear that when it is not known that material properties are changing every instant, they are clung to as self. When their impermanence is known, there is no more clinging. According to this, "changeableness at every instant," should also be taken as a characteristic of nonself.

We have dealt with the characteristics of impermanence in the first part of today's lecture; in the latter portion of the discourse, we have gone over all the three characteristics mentioned in the Anattalakkhana Sutta in the form of questions and answers. The exposition on the aggregate of form is fairly complete.

The Blessed One asked: "Is feeling permanent or impermanent?" "Impermanent, Lord, replied the Group of Five. We have spoken about feeling to a certain extent in the previous chapters, but as it is next to be considered according to the Sutta, we shall explain it a little more.

Feeling is of three kinds: feeling of pleasantness or happiness; feeling of unpleasantness or unhappiness; feeling of neither pleasantness nor unpleasantness. Ordinary worldlings regard all three types of feeling as self, living substance, as enduring and permanent. These forms of clinging are called nivāsī attā clinging and vedaka attā clinging.

Nivāsī attā clinging is belief in a permanent, continuous entity or self. Ordinary people believe that there exists a living entity, a self, in their body from the time of conception to the time of death and, some believe, even after death. This is nivāsī attā clinging. They think that this same permanent entity in the body is the one that feels pleasant or unpleasant sensations; this self feels now pleasant in mind and body, now unpleasant and uncomfortable. Thus they believe that feelings last forever, that they are enduring. Actually, when feeling pleasant, there is no unpleasant or neutral feeling; when feeling unpleasant there is no pleasant or neutral feeling. Similarly when feeling neutral, there is no pleasant or unpleasant feeling. There is no feeling which is everlasting. Whether pleasant, unpleasant or neutral, feeling arises depending on conditions, lasts only a moment and then disappears.

An untrained person who is unable to follow the feelings as they arise is liable to develop the impression that all three feelings exist simultaneously. Thus, while feeling a painful sensation in the body one hears some glad news and is happy over it. Or one may be enjoying a pleasant sensation in the body when one happens to think about an unhappy event and feel unhappy. On these occasions, it is usually believed that both pleasant and unpleasant sensations are being felt at the same time. This is because one lacks the ability to distinguish between two successive minds or feelings. In reality, the feelings arise one at a time, one after another.

Thus when the meditator who is diligently noting the phenomena of rising and falling notices the appearance of a painful feeling in the body, he should give concentrated attention to it and note it continuously as "pain, pain." If his concentration is strong enough, the unbearable pain keeps decreasing in intensity even as he is taking note of it and may disappear altogether. For some, the pain will vanish completely and suddenly as if removed by hand. When there is no pain or pleasant feeling to take note of, the meditator reverts back to noting the usual, neutral phenomena of the rising and falling of the abdomen. This is contemplating neutral feeling. While thus contemplating neutral feeling, if pleasant feeling arises, attention should be switched on to it. Similarly, attention should be given to any unpleasant feeling that happens to arise. Taking note of the pleasant, unpleasant and neutral feelings as they arise in this manner, personal knowledge confirms that they are not everlasting. This is discerning each kind of feeling as it occurs in the "continuity of the present."

The meditator who has advanced to the stages of udayabbaya and bhanga ñāna finds that feeling vanishes and ceases section by section, bit by bit. The ordinary phenomena of rise and fall are also found to be passing away section by section, bit by bit. When pleasant feelings and neutral feelings appear in turn, they are separated, not one, continuous phenomenon or process. Similarly with unpleasant feeling appearing along with neutral feeling, they are noted as two distinct feelings. The meditator observing in this manner perceives each feeling or sensation to arise and disappear instantly, and this drives home the fact that feeling is not everlasting. This is knowing the phenomenon section by section in terms of the momentary present. The meditator who is watching the phenomena of rising, falling, and feeling painful is doing so in order to see each phenomenon section by section, bit by bit, in its momentary present.

Therefore, the meditator clearly perceives how pleasant, unpleasant and neutral feelings with respect to sense objects vanish immediately after they have arisen, and he realizes with personal knowledge that all feelings are of an impermanent nature.

In answer to the question, "Is feeling permanent or impermanent?" the Group of Five monks, having reached the stage of Stream Entry through this kind of contemplation, replied from their own personal experience, "Not permanent, Lord."

Is unbearable pain in the body permanent or impermanent? It is not permanent because the pain was not here before, it arose at a certain moment. While noting the pain as "pain, pain," it vanishes. For the meditator whose concentration is getting quite strong, each sensation of pain disappears with each noting. As one sensation disappears, a fresh one arises, only to vanish instantly.

When concentration is very good, good feelings may be observed appearing in the body. When these feelings are noted they quickly disappear. Disappearing thus, are these good feelings permanent or impermanent?

Sometimes unhappiness or worry arise; when these are noted as "unhappiness," or as "worry," they disappear, so they are impermanent.

On seeing a pleasant sight, an agreeable feeling arises; this also disappears when noted. Is it permanent or impermanent? In a similar manner, an unpleasant sight causes a disagreeable feeling which disappears when noted. Pleasant or unpleasant feelings which arise from hearing, smelling or tasting also disappear when noted.

When noting something not particularly pleasant or unpleasant, neutral objects of contemplation such as the rising and falling of the abdomen, the feeling observed is a neutral one, and it also disappears with every noting. Is that permanent or impermanent?

All three feelings, pleasant, unpleasant and neutral, are impermanent. When these three kinds of feelings are perceived to be impermanent, it is realized too that they are suffering, not self, just phenomena. The Blessed One continued to question: "That which is impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?" "Suffering, Lord."

We have dealt considerably with this before, so it needs little elaboration. People like pleasant sensations, they see them as enduring, everlasting. When they see sensations dissolving every moment, not even lasting for a tenth of a second, they lose their passion for them. Just for the sake of enjoying this so-called happiness, they have to go in pursuit of it, not for one hour, not for one day, not for one year, but their whole lives. While in pursuit of this happiness, they meet their death. There is nothing one can rely upon. Even if the happiness one is seeking is not obtained, one has to find means of avoiding unhappiness or unpleasantness, of maintaining oneself in a neutral condition. Even as the neutral feeling of neither happiness nor unhappiness is being sought, physical pain and mental anguish may arise. And they appear because happy feelings and neutral feelings are not permanent. Thus, impermanent happy feelings and neutral feelings 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 after the disappearance of a happy feeling, when one may be plunged into the depths of despair. 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 bereft of dear ones through death or separation; or of someone who has been happy with his wealth and affluence, and is suddenly deprived of them. They are all subjected to intense unhappiness, which may even cost them their lives. Thus, feeling is terrifying because of its impermanent nature.

Coming to the next paragraph of the Pāli 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, Lord."

This is the same type of question and answer employed when explaining form. The difference is that in the case of form, the term involves not only the material qualities inside one's body, but also all external objects, animate and inanimate. As to feelings, it is chiefly the internal ones which are grasped as one's own. In feelings of happiness, one takes delight in announcing, "this is mine." Neutral feelings, being devoid of unpleasantness, have the nature of happiness: although attachment to them is not so strong, there is still some delight in the very fact that they are neither pleasant nor unpleasant. Unpleasant feelings are no doubt undesirable, but thinking "it is I who is suffering," is still grasping them as self.

Attachment to feelings in this way is brought about by ignorance of the real nature of impermanence, suffering and subjection to change. The meditator who is taking note of feelings as they occur knows at once their oppressive nature. Is there any difference between the meditator and the ordinary person with regard to their awareness of feelings? There is indeed a great difference: the ordinary person perceives 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"-- whereas the meditator knows from the very outset that there is just continuous arising and perishing of the aggregates. When unhappy feeling appears, the meditator perceives it as an undesirable intrusion occurring in the continuous process of mental and physical properties. He perceives it as another process of arising and perishing superimposed on the one he has been observing. From its very first appearance, the meditator recognizes its oppressive nature, just like a thorn which has become embedded in the flesh.

A happy feeling appears to be pleasant and good while it is happening, but the effort that has to be made in search of or for maintaining it is itself suffering. If an unwholesome (akusala) act is performed in pursuit of pleasurable feeling, suffering has to be faced in the woeful state to which one will accordingly be doomed. Delight in pleasurable sensations keeps renewing the cycle of existences, resulting in the suffering of old age and death. When happy feeling disappears, the attachment to it gives rise to intense unhappiness. Therefore, happy feeling is to be regarded as suffering.

The Daṭṭhabba Sutta of the Saṁyutta Nikāya describes how these feelings should be noted and regarded:

Seeing Feelings As They Really Are

The meditator who is constantly noting sees unpleasant feelings as an oppression, like a thorn. Pleasant feelings are seen as frightful, due to the trouble of having to pursue them and the pain caused when they are lost. Neutral feelings are seen as suffering because of their impermanence and the effort required to maintain them. Thus when asked whether it is proper to regard feeling as "This is mine, this I am, this is my self," the Group of Five replied, "Not indeed, Lord."

The Blessed One taught that feeling is not to be viewed as "mine", "me", "my self." For the Group of Five, who were already Stream Enterers, this teaching was for countering the perception of feeling as permanent, as "mine, me," and its subsequent craving and conceit. For the ordinary worldling, the teaching counters the wrong view "this is my self."

Impermanence Of Perception

It is perception which remembers objects previously seen. Perception is an essential factor in learning and remembering. A good saññā will long remember something seen or heard only once. This retentiveness is wrongly taken to be everlasting, to be good, to be self.

But once saññā has recognized an object it vanishes. What are recognized later are the functions of later saññā. The same applies to hearing. What is heard and remembered first vanishes, followed by what is heard and recognized later. The meditator who is taking note of everything seen or heard perceives that the two processes of seeing and recognizing, or hearing and recognizing, vanish together. Knowing this, the meditator concludes that saññā is also impermanent. Knowing this, the Group of Five, when asked whether saññā is permanent or impermanent, replied "Impermanent, Lord," because they found the words of the Blessed One quickly vanishing even while hearing and recognizing them.

These are the same 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 corporeal and mental phenomena are pleased with saññā, clinging to it (with craving) as "this is mine". One thinks one's retentive memory is better than others and is proud of it: this is clinging by conceit. One thinks also that every act of seeing and hearing is recognized and remembered by one, which is clinging through the view, "this is my self."

Actually, the saññā of visible objects is imperma-nent, it arises and instantly vanishes. The ever-watchful meditator knows saññā to be impermanent because he sees it arising and instantly vanishing; he knows it to be suffering because of its impermanence. Saññā may retain memories of terrible things and be oppressive. It does not stay in one form but keeps on changing. Saññā is not worth craving as something pleasant, nor taking pride in as everlasting, nor believing to be a living entity. Therefore the Group of Five replied that it was not proper to regard saññā as "mine, me, my self."

The Blessed One asked these questions so as to counter clinging with craving and conceit in the minds of the Group of Five to the impermanent, suffering, changing saññā as "This is mine, this I am", and, for the common worldling, to uproot the wrong view of self.

Impermanence Of Volitional Formations

Sankhārā are the volitional motivations responsible for physical, vocal and mental actions. In the abstract sense, they are the fifty kinds of mental concomitants headed by cetanā, volition, which we have already talked about. They cover an extensive field. The motivating power behind all physical actions, such as going, standing, sitting, lying, bending, stretching, and moving, is sankhāra; vocal actions are also caused by the same sankhāra agents. My talking now is urged on by sankhāra. In talking and reciting, every word uttered has been primed by sankhāra. It is sankhāra, too, which are at the back of all thoughts and mental proliferation.

Ordinary people think all these actions (physical, vocal and mental) are being done by "me, my self" and this self, the doer, is permanent. But the meditator who is ever watchful of the rising and falling of the abdomen takes note of any activity of the mind as soon as it occurs. Cetanā, volition, accompanied by greed (lobha) is perceived by the meditator to be arousing desire and urging one to go after that which is wanted. The meditator notes these mental activities as "liking," "wanting". When associated with aversion, volition appears as anger or rage that has to be noted as "anger", "rage". When headed by delusion, wrong actions are thought about; these thoughts have to be noted. When associated with conceit, volition bloats one with ego and one has to get rid of it by noting, "conceit, conceit". When accompanied by envy, jealousy, or avarice, volition manifests as envy and avarice, 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 Sangha, urging one to give homage and respect to them. These thoughts are noted as they arise as faith, devotion and piety. Akusala leads to unwholesome results, but volition may interrupt an unwholesome train of thought, discouraging one from that thought, hindering it. Kusala leads to wholesome results; volition may arouse one to follow it. Volition may manifest in any number of ways, and should be noted accordingly. It may appear accompanied by mindfulness, heedful of the fact that at such and such a time, such a wholesome act will be done. It may arise in various ways, and the mental attitudes of those moments should also be noted. When mettā, loving-kindness, arises with volition, there is a feeling of benevolence to others, thoughts of making others happy. With compassion, volition arises accompanied by pity for others and thoughts of how to help them out of suffering. All these mental attitudes should be carefully noted.

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

Then there is volitional urging concerning vocal activities, urging and directing what to say and how to say it, just as I am now talking. The meditator who keeps constant track of all these volitional activities knows from personal experience that they appear and vanish instantly and are, therefore, impermanent.

And the Group of Five had become Stream Enterers through their own knowledge of the nature of impermanence.

While listening to the Anattalakkhana Sutta, they saw again the nature of impermanence, by perceiving the constant arising and falling of the sankhāra, such as phassa (sense contact), cetanā (intention), manasikāra (attention), saddhā (faith), and sati (mindfulness). Thus, to the question, "Are volitional formations permanent or impermanent?" they replied, "Not permanent, Lord."

"Furthermore, that which is impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?" ... "Suffering, Lord."

These are the same types of questions and answers as dealt with before. We have only to know here how sankhārā could be clung to with craving, conceit and wrong view, and how to become free of these kinds of clinging.

The meditator who is ever on the watch of physical and mental phenomena perceives that every activity that arises, such as desire to think, to see, to hear, to bend, to stretch, to change position, to rise, to go, or to talk, vanishes immediately after it is noted. Therefore, all these activities, incessantly arising and vanishing, are impermanent. Consequently, they are not delightful or dependable, but suffering; thus it is concluded through personal knowledge that there is nothing to cling to as "this is mine," to take pride in as "this I am," or to believe that "this is my self." The Group of Five had realized in this manner and become Stream Enterers. While listening to this discourse too, they perceived the volitional activities arising and ceasing. Therefore they replied to the Blessed One that it was not proper to regard that which is impermanent, suffering and subject to change as "mine, me, my self."

Impermanence Of Consciousness

Viññāna is mind or consciousness; the term "consciousness" is not as commonly used as the word "mind." Even mental concomitants such as volition, greed and aversion are talked about as mind, because mind plays a leading role. We shall also generally use the word "mind" instead of "consciousness" in this chapter.

Those who cannot watch and note the mind as it is arising imagine that it is continuous, permanent; that it is the one mind that is conscious of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and thinking, the one mind that sees in a sustained manner, and that hears and smells in a sustained manner, the one mind that was in existence when young, is existing now and will continue to exist till death; that it is the one mind that has been functioning throughout the whole of our existence. Some even believe that it will be the same mind that will move on to future existences. This is how mind is regarded to be permanent and everlasting.

When the meditator who is noting the rise and fall of the abdomen, ever watchful of corporeal and mental phenomena, 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 meditator realizes: "The thought was not in existence before; it appeared just now and disappeared at once. I have previously imagined thought to be permanent because I have not carefully observed it. Now that I have watched it, and seen it disappearing, I know it truly as it is, impermanent."

When hearing too, if noted "hearing, hearing," the mind keeps on arising, vanishing, arising, vanishing, instantaneously. The same applies to consciousnesses of smelling and tasting. Consciousness of touch is noted to be arising and vanishing quickly, here and there, all over the body. When concentration is very strong, the act of seeing is observed to be arising and disappearing in a series of separate but continuous events, one after another. Thus it is realized that consciousnesses of thinking, hearing, touching, seeing and so on arise separately and disappear one by one, all impermanent, unstable.

The minds that want to change posture, to bend, get up or walk, renew themselves afresh and dissolve instantly. The mind that takes note of each phenomenon also vanishes with each noting. Thus the mind which is conscious of various kinds of objects is incessantly arising and vanishing and is therefore impermanent. The Group of Five had realized the same thing when they became Stream Enterers. While listening to this discourse on the Anattatakkhana Sutta, they saw again the nature of impermanence by perceiving the constant arising and vanishing of consciousnesses. Therefore, to the Blessed One's question, "Is consciousness permanent or impermanent", they replied, "Not permanent, Lord." To the watchful meditator, this is of course very clear.

These are the same questions and answers dealt with 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 kinds of clinging.

Ordinary people who cannot take note of the mind as it appears at the six sense doors take delight in sense awareness as "mine, me." They are pleased with the mind which is manifesting at the present moment; they are delighted with the mind which had arisen before and they wish to enjoy such delightful mind in the future. This is clinging with craving. As he notes, the meditator perceives that all consciousnesses with respect to pleasant sights or sounds disappear even as he is taking note of them. Thus he does not delight in them or yearn for them. This is how one keeps free of clinging with craving.

Ordinary people who cannot take note of the mind cannot distinguish the preceding mind from the following one. They think the mind of their younger days persists as one continuous, permanent mind. The mind that was there before keeps on seeing, hearing, touching, and thinking. 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 meditator knows that all these moments of consciousnesses are always disappearing as they are being noted. He knows their impermanent nature. Just as no conceit arises in a person who knows he is about to die, no conceit is developed by the meditator 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 and thinks; I can know various kinds of objects; I want to bend, stretch, go, talk; all the thoughts and actions are undertaken by my mind, by my self." This is kāraka attā clinging.

Clinging in the form of volitional activities may be classed under sankhāra, but is also concerned with mind (viññāna). Generally, desire to bend, stretch or do something 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 and hearing." Believing in this manner is nivāsī attā clinging.

Some modern religions talk about a consciousness or soul permanently residing in one's body. According to them, when a person dies, the soul leaves the dead body and goes to reside in a new one. At the time of the Buddha, the monk Sāti took consciousness to be self. His story has been told in Chapter Four. This is the wrong view of conscious-ness as self.

Then there is the belief that one can think if one wishes or control one's mind as one wills. This is sāmi attā clinging.

For the meditator 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 conscious-nesses concerning thinking, hearing, touching, seeing, noting and so on are mere phenomena which arise conditioned by their own causes and then dissolve. They are not self, not a living entity."

Realization comes in this way: in accordance with cakkhuṁ ca paṭicca rūpa ca uppajjati viññānaṁ -- eye consciousness arises dependent on eye and visible forms; ear consciousness arises dependent on ear and sound; tactile consciousness arises dependent on the body and tactile object; mental consciousness arises dependent on the heart base (bhavanga and thinking) and mental object -- the consciousness of noting arises dependent on the intention (to note) and the object noted. The various kinds of consciousness arise because of their own causes and conditions. With these conditioning causes they come into being and pass away, whether we wish it to happen or not. In the absence of these conditioning causes, no amount of wishing will produce them. We wish the pleasant mind to endure, but it does not last, it quickly passes away.

We have fully explained the questions in the teaching dealing with clinging through craving, conceit and wrong view concerning the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and conscious-ness. Now we shall go on to how to contemplate to get clear of these three types of clinging.

Elevenfold Analysis Of Form

In the above statement, material form is described in eleven ways: as past, future, present, internal, external, coarse, fine, inferior, superior, far and near. With respect to time, form is described in terms of past, future or present. "The past" refers to what has arisen and ceased either in previous existences or previously in 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 covers what happened before, what is happening now and what will happen in the future. Thus, when form is enumerated in these three ways respective of time, all the material form in oneself and in others, both animate and inanimate, are covered.

But for the purpose of vipassanā meditation, disciples are mainly concerned with contemplating what is happening in the body, as clearly stated in the Commentary and Sub-Commentary of the Anupada Sutta in the Majjhima Nikāya. Phenomena happening elsewhere need be known only conjecturally. Thus the meditator needs only to understand the corporeal and mental phenomena happening inside his own body and see their true nature with his own (insight) knowledge.

Even in connection with the phenomena happening inside oneself, one can only understand things in the future by inference, because they have not yet occurred. What has occurred before cannot be known as it really is, other than through guess work. Even with those phenomena that occur during one's life time, it is not easy to see what really 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 people, once an object is seen, heard or touched, it is immediately attached to in terms of conventional concepts as "I" "he," "a woman" or "a man."

As stated in the Bhaddekaratta Sutta, "Paccup-pannañca yo dhammaṁ, tattha tattha vipassati: Only the present should be contemplated in vipassanā meditation, that is, as phenomena are being seen and experienced." In the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta, too, it is stated that the present phenomenon occurring while walking, standing, sitting, and lying, should be noted initially. I have carefully analyzed this paragraph because it mentions "past, present, future," and doubt may arise whether one should start meditating about what had happened in the past. This analysis should remove such doubts.

Only those mental and physical phenomena which manifest at the six doors at the time an object is seen, heard, tasted, smelt, touched or thought should be noted, just as our meditators are now taking note of the phenomena of rising, falling, sitting, touching and so on. In this way, as the concentration is strengthened, the meditator comes to differentiate between the rising and the noting of it; the falling and the noting of it. The extension, pressure and motion of the moment of rising do not last till the moment of falling; they disappear at the moments of their respective occurrence. 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 material properties of the "left step" are not retained till the "right step." They vanish at the moment of their appearance.

The material properties of the "raising" moment do not last till the moment of "stepping out"; those of the "stepping" moment do not stay on till the moment of "dropping down"; they all vanish at their respective moments of arising.

Similarly in bending and stretching, each phenomenon disappears at its respective moment of appearance. When the concentration gets particularly strong, the meditator will observe, during the period of one act of bending or stretching, the process of dissolution in very quick serial succession happening in the same place without change of position.

The meditator realizes that the nature of these phenomena was not known before because they were not heedfully noted. Now that he is noting them, he perceives that the aggregates do not pass on from one moment to another, they constantly perish at the very moment of their appearance. Thus the material properties which had occurred before do not last till the present moment; they have all perished. The material properties which are manifesting now in rising, falling, bending, stretching, stepping, dropping, moving will not reach a future moment, they will vanish in the present. The material properties of coming phenomena will also cease at their respective moments of arising.

Therefore, all kinds of material properties are impermanent, incessantly arising and disappearing. They constitute suffering, not self, mere phenomena, because they are not amenable to one's control, they arise and vanish in accordance with their own conditioning causes. The meditator 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 NetaṀ Mama And Aniccā -- A Discussion

Here, seeing "this is not mine" is the same as perceiving that, as things are incessantly arising and passing away, there is nothing delightful or dependable, there is just suffering. Seeing "this I am not" is the same as perceiving that it is not permanent. Conceit arises because things are believed to be permanent. When the truth of their impermanent nature is known, there is nothing to take pride in. Seeing "this is not my self' is seeing anattā. Failing to take note of corporeal and mental phenomena as they arise at the six doors and believing them to be permanent leads to the conceit "this I am." But when phenomena are perceived to not last even the blink of an eye, when everything is seen as impermanent, conceit cannot arise. As long as things are not known to be selfless, there is clinging to self; when things are seen to be not-self, no self-clinging is possible. This is obvious and needs no elaboration.

Ordinary people who cannot observe sensory phenomena at the moment of their arising believe that the material properties at the moment of seeing linger on to become material properties at the moment of hearing, or vice versa, lasting from one moment to the next. They believe also that it is the same "I" who sees as that which hears and touches. They believe too that the material properties of the past have arrived at the present, and the present ones will go on to the future, which is clinging to the belief in their permanence.

But the meditator who is watchful of these phenomena knows that the material properties at the moment of seeing perish then and there, they do not reach the moment of hearing; the material properties at the moment of hearing perish then and there, they do not reach the moment of seeing. Every act of seeing, hearing, touching and knowing is a new arising. This is knowing the truth of impermanence as it really is. Knowing this, the meditator realizes that the material properties of the past have ceased in the past, they have not come forward to the present; the present material properties are always perishing even as they are being noted, and will not reach the future. He knows also that material properties of the future will also perish at the moment of arising. He realizes that a material property does not endure even for the flick of an eyelid. Realizing thus, there is no opportunity for the arising of clinging through craving "this is mine," clinging through conceit, "this I am," or clinging through wrong view as "this is my self." The Blessed One exhorted the Group of Five to contemplate in this way so as to be rid of clinging by craving and conceit. Ordinary worldlings are also instructed to contemplate so as to be free of the clinging by wrong view.

Stream Enterers - Instructed To Contemplate Not-Self

Why was the Group of Five, who had already become Stream Enterers, instructed to get rid of self-view with the reflection "this is not my self'? This is something to ponder upon.

According to the Visuddhimagga, Stream Enterers are free from the illusions of wrong view of self clinging (diṭṭhi vipallāsa), illusions of perceptions (saññā vipallāsa) and illusion of the mind (citta vipallāsa). Since the monks of the Group of Five were free from all the three kinds of self clinging, on account of what kind of clinging was this exhortation on nonself given?

In the first part of this book, it was explained how this Anattatakkhana Sutta was taught to remove asmi māna, which is akin to self clinging. But here, as separate instruction has been given to remove asmi māna in the phrase neso hamasmi, "this I am not," the instruction to contemplate on na meso attā, "this is not my self," cannot be for removing asmi māna.

Then to remove what kind of clinging is this teaching for? This is the point to consider.

It is not easy to find a definite and accurate solution to this problem. We shall attempt to solve it in three ways:

(1) In the Sīlavanta Sutta, it is mentioned that the Arahats also meditate on the nature of not-self. Reference may be made to page 470 of my discourse on the Sīlavanta Sutta [Burmese edition]. Although a Stream Enterer has no self clinging to be rid of, he nevertheless contemplates on nonself just like the Arahats for the attainment of higher knowledge. If this first answer is not satisfactory, here is our second answer:

(2) This is in accordance with what is provided on page 330 of my discourse on the Sīlavanta Sutta. There is no doubt that the Stream Enterer is free from the illusion of belief in the permanency of self. As to the illusion of perception, it should be understood that a Stream Enterer is free from it only when he is intentionally reflecting on it or when engaged in contemplation on impermanence and not-self. Only then may the Stream Enterer be said to be free from wrong perceptions of permanence and self. To say that he was free from these illusions on other occasions also, when no particular attention is being paid to them, would be putting Stream Enterers on the same level as Arahats, who know all acts of seeing and hearing as impermanent and have no conceit or lustful desires regarding men or women.

Therefore, at inattentive moments, a Stream Enterer can have wrong perceptions or notions of things. To enable the Group of Five to get rid of such wrong perceptions and notions, they were asked to contemplate on not-self. (3) This is based on an explanation offered by the Venerable Khemaka, who had already reached the stage of anāgāmi. Khemaka said that he did not cling to material form as "I am" nor to each of the other aggregates of feeling, perception, volitional formations and conscious-ness, but with regard to the five aggregates as a whole, he was still not free of the notion "I am". Just as in this explanation, for a Stream Enterer, there is no clinging as self towards any of the aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volitional formations or consciousness, but with regard to the five aggregates as a whole, a Stream Enterer is not free from the perception of them as man or woman. Not being free from this perception, the sensual passions can still arise in him, even to the extent that he may settle down to married life. Therefore it should be regarded that the monks of the Group of Five were exhorted to contemplate on not-self so as to become free from such ordinary perceptions and notions.

This is an attempt to reconcile the text in the Pāli Canon with the statement in the Commentary, which states that Stream Enterers are free from perceptions of self or notions of self.

The Elevenfold Contemplation

I shall now discuss how material form of the past, present and future are contemplated as impermanent. We have already described how the meditator, observing how the physical properties at the moment of rising and falling perish as they come into being, comes to know the characteristics of impermanence, suffering and not-self. The meditator who knows thus can deduce from his own experience that forms of the past have not reached the present and that presently occurring forms will not reach the future; they perish at the moment of coming into existence and are therefore impermanent. Consequently, they are suffering, not self, mere phenomena. The reflection is as follows:

1. Forms of the past have ceased to exist; they do not carry over to the present. As they have ceased now, they are impermanent. Because they disappear instantly, they are fearsome, a source of suffering. Not being a controlling authority (sāmi), a permanent entity (nivāsī), a doer (kāraka), an experiencer of sensations (vedaka), they are not self, without essence.

2. The forms of the present will perish and cease now, they will not reach the future. As they are ceasing and vanishing, they are impermanent. Because they are constantly disappearing, they are fearsome, a source of suffering. Not being a controlling authority, a permanent entity, they are not self, without essence.

3. The forms which will come into being in the future will cease to exist then and there, they will not be carried over to any further existence. As they are constantly passing away, they are fearsome, a source of suffering. Being without essence, they are not self.

This is how the true nature of forms is generally considered. During the meditation, we reflect as follows:

1. Past forms at the moment of last rising (of the abdomen) did not reach the stage of falling; the past forms at the moment of falling did not reach the stage of rising, they perished at the moment of their rising and falling and are therefore impermanent. Because they are impermanent, they are suffering; because they are unmanageable, they are not self.

The last material form at the time of last seeing and hearing did not reach the present moment of seeing and hearing; it is therefore impermanent, suffering, not self.

2. Material form rising in the present moment does not reach the stage of falling; the presently falling material form does not reach the stage of rising. They perish even while rising and falling and are therefore impermanent, suffering, not self.

The material forms at the present moment of seeing and hearing do not reach the next moment of seeing and hearing. They pass away even while seeing and hearing. They are, therefore, impermanent, suffering, not self.

3. The material forms at the moment of future rising and falling will not reach the next future moments of rising and falling. They will fade away at the respective moments of coming into being. They are, therefore, impermanent, suffering, not self.

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

Just as there are impermanent material forms with respect to rising, falling, bending, stretching, raising, stepping, dropping, seeing, and hearing, which rise and fall and perish even while they are being noted, so there have been similar material forms with respect to rising, falling, bending and stretching in the past perishing at their respective moments of coming into being. They are, therefore, impermanent, suffering and not self.

Having perceived by oneself how the material form in one's person passes away, there remains the task of reflecting on the material forms of other people, and the material forms of the whole world. Just as the material forms in one's person perish while being noted, the material forms in other people and in the whole world will also perish and are therefore impermanent, suffering and not self.

People imagine that when they spit, defecate or excrete, the material form from inside the body gets expelled or thrown outside the body. When food is eaten or air is breathed in, the external material forms are believed to have come into the body. Actually, it is not like this. Material forms undergo dissolution at the moment and place of their coming into being, and new material forms rise afresh at the new place. The meditator who is taking note perceives such dissolution and cessation taking place at each place of origination.

And this is how it is perceived: when mindfulness and concentration get strong, the out-breath (during noting the rise and fall) is seen to break into small sections in the chest, throat and nose before it finally makes the exit from the body. The in-breath is also seen to be entering, pushing in, in a series of small sections. The meditator who smokes knows the smoke going out and pushing its way in, in a series of small portions. A similar phenomenon is seen while drinking water, as it pushes its way down the throat. Therefore, internal material forms do not get outside; external material forms do not get inside.

They cease and vanish at the place where they come into being, and are thus impermanent, suffering, and not self.

Ordinarily people believe that it is the tender material forms of our young days which have become the coarse, gross material forms of adults; the healthy, light, fine material forms that become the unhealthy, heavy, gross material forms; the unhealthy, heavy, gross material forms that become healthy, light, fine, material forms. The meditator who is constantly watching tactile bodies perceives these material forms breaking up into tiny bits even while being observed. Thus perceiving, he knows that gross material forms do not become fine material forms, neither do fine material forms become gross material forms. The gross, hot or cold material forms do not become fine, cold or hot material forms; fine, cold or hot material forms do not become gross, hot or cold material forms. Gross, stiff, extending, moving material forms do not become fine, stable, still material forms. They all vanish at the moment of arising; they are thus impermanent and void of self.

Ordinarily, it is believed that the unhealthy, inferior material forms become the healthy, superior material forms; the youthful material forms become the material forms of an old man. But the meditator who keeps track of material forms at the moment of their arising perceives that any material form that arises ceases and vanishes as it is being noted and therefore knows that the inferior material form has not become the superior material form, nor does the superior one become an inferior one. Thus they all have the nature of being suffering and nonself.

To normal perception, it seems that when a man is seen coming from afar, he brings with him the material form of that far distance. When a man goes from a near to a far distance, he carries away the material form of the near distance. But the meditator who is always noting corporeal and mental phenomena knows when watching, for instance, the phenomenon of stretching the body, that the material form that stretches vanishes in a series of blurring fade-outs without reaching any distance; when bending, the material form that bends fades away in a series of blurring fade-outs without reaching any distance. Perceiving thus, the medi-tator is convinced that the material form which is near has not gone afar; the distant material form has not come near. They vanish at the respective moments of becoming and are, therefore, impermanent, suffering and not-self.

While looking at a man approaching from a distance, and noting, "seeing, seeing," we see him disappearing section by section, part by part in a series of quick blurring fade-outs. While looking at someone leaving from nearby and noting "seeing, seeing," the man disappears section by section, part by part in a series of quick, blurring fade-outs. Thus the material form from a distance has not come near; the material form which is near has not gone to a distance. The old material form keeps on vanishing and the new material form keeps on arising, giving the appearance of someone coming from afar and someone going away. Only the meditator who has reached the stage of bhanga ñāna and whose discernment is sharp can perceive the phenomena as they really are in this manner. Others with not so sharp insight may not perceive so clearly.

Again, while walking to and fro and noting raising, stepping and dropping, raising appears separately as one stage, stepping separately as one stage and dropping separately as another. When insight is well developed, the movements of body and limbs are seen as series of blurring fade outs. Perceiving thus, the conclusion is reached that material forms 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." Therefore, material forms from afar do not come near; material forms which are near do not go afar. They cease and vanish at the place where they come into existence. They are, therefore, impermanent, suffering and not self.

This is how material forms described in eleven ways are contemplated as "this is not mine" ... netaṁ mama.

Elevenfold Analyses Of The Aggregates

This is the exhortation to contemplate feeling analytically under eleven headings, so as to bring out its impermanent, suffering and not self characteristics. Here, past feeling means the sensations experienced in previous existences as well as those experienced days, months or years ago in this very life. There are also those experienced in the earlier part of today. Of these, it is obvious that the feelings of past existences have all ceased to exist, but to those with strong attachment to self, this will not be so obvious: they hold to the view that the self that experienced the sensations of previous existences continues to experience them now. In their view, all the sensations of earlier times in the present existence have not perished and ceased. They believe that the self that had enjoyed sensations before is still enjoying them now.

Feeling In The Three Periods Of Time

If unpleasant feelings such as stiffness, heat, or pain appear while contemplating the rising and falling of the abdomen, the meditator takes note of them. When thus noted, the unbearable feeling gets less and less painful and then vanishes.

When the concentration is specially strong, it will be seen that each pain passes away with each noting. Perceiving thus, the meditator realizes for himself that feelings are not everlasting, they do not endure even for a second, but are incessantly arising and vanishing. It is not only feelings of previous existences that are no longer present, but also earlier feelings of the present existence. The feelings which manifested only a moment ago are also no longer in existence. All these are realized by the observing meditator, who sees also that the pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral feelings, which are being experienced at the present moment are constantly arising and vanishing. Hence it can be surmised that feelings which will arise in the future will also vanish at the moment of arising. During meditation practice, the contemplation is carried out thus:

1. Feelings of stiffness, heat, pain and discomfort which were experienced a moment ago did not reach the present moment of comfortable feeling. They passed away at the moment of feeling stiff, hot, painful and uncomfort-able. As they passed away in this manner, they are impermanent. And because they are impermanent and unbearable, they are fearsome, a source of suffering. The comfortable feelings of a moment ago did not reach the present moment of intense discomfort, they passed away at that very moment of comfortable feeling, and are therefore impermanent. Since they are impermanent, they are fearsome and a source of suffering. All feelings, pleasant or unpleasant, are not self, without essence.

2. The pleasant or unpleasant feelings of the present repeatedly cease and vanish even while they are being noted and are, therefore, impermanent, suffering and not self.

3. The pleasant or unpleasant feelings of the future too will cease and vanish at the moment of their arising. They are, therefore, impermanent, suffering and not self.

This is how feelings of the past, present and future are considered as they are being noted. There is also a method of reflecting on the feelings of the past and the future by inference from the feelings of the present:

"Just as there are now impermanent feelings, pleasant, unpleasant and neutral, which cease even as they are being noted, there have been similar feelings before, perishing at the moment of their arising. They are therefore impermanent, suffering and not self. The feelings which will come into being in the future will also pass away at the moment of arising and are thus impermanent, suffering and not self."

Having perceived for ourselves how our feelings pass away, there remains the task of considering by inference the feelings in other people, and the feelings in the whole world:

"Just as the feelings in myself cease and vanish while they are being noted, the feelings in other people, indeed the feelings in the whole world, will also cease and vanish. They too, are impermanent, suffering and not self."

Internal And External Feelings

"Just as material form is considered in two aspects, internal and external, the internal material form not becoming external material form and vice versa, so also feeling should be considered in two aspects, internal and external," states the Visuddhimagga. The feeling from inside does not reach outside; the feeling from outside does not reach inside. This is how it should be contemplated. The question arises: Does this mean feelings from inside us not reaching the body of another person and other people's feelings not reaching our body? Nobody believes that feelings go from one person to another, so this manner of contemplation is not meant here. What is meant here is change of object, from internal to external and vice versa.

When feeling that has arisen dependent on an internal object is replaced by feeling that has arisen dependent on an external object, people ordinarily think that the internal feeling has become an external one. Conversely when pleasant or unpleasant feelings conditioned by an external object are replaced by pleasant or unpleasant feelings dependent on an internal object, people think that the external feeling has become an internal one. Similarly, when feelings arising from an object far away change to feelings dependent on a near object, people think that feeling has moved from a far distance to nearby and vice versa. What is meant here, therefore, is change of objects, external and internal, far and near, dependent on which feelings arise.

The meditator who is noting the corporeal and mental phenomena as they occur takes note of the pain 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 subsequently arise, these feelings should be noted as happiness or sorrow. Thus, during this time of careful noting, the original feeling of unpleasant-ness does not reach outside, it ceases internally. Then attention is switched on to an external object which causes the arising of new feeling. The meditator thus understands these phenomena.

He fully understands also when the reverse process takes place; that is, the original feeling of happiness, for example, arising from an external object, ceases, and new feeling of pain is experienced internally. Internal feeling does not reach outside; external feeling does not reach inside. Feelings arise and cease at the respective moments of becoming and are thus impermanent, suffering and not-self.

Coarse And Fine Feelings

If we begin to feel subtle painful feelings while experiencing gross sensations of pain, we tend to 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 meditator, however, sees with every noting that painful sensations perish, part by part, section by section, and therefore knows that the subtle pains have not changed into gross ones, nor the gross ones into subtle ones. The old feelings perish and are replaced by new ones arising in their place. This is impermanence. The meditator realizes all this through his own knowledge.

Gross pains do not become subtle pains and vice versa. They perish at their respective moments of arising. Thus, feeling is impermanent, suffering and not self.

Inferior And Superior Feelings

Painful sensations in the body are regarded as inferior forms of feeling whereas fine, pleasant sensations are regarded as superior kinds. Likewise, unhappiness, sorrow, dejection, and sadness are inferior feelings, while happiness and gladness are of the superior kind. In other words, feeling angry, depressed and unhappy is inferior feeling; feeling happy is superior feeling. But here again, happiness from delighting in sensual objects is inferior to happiness from devotional piety towards an object of worship, such as the Buddha. As the experiences of feeling change from one type to another, people usually think that the inferior feeling has become a superior one, or the superior feeling has changed into one of inferior type. But the meditator perceives that the feelings cease even as they are being noted, and therefore knows that superior feeling does not become inferior, nor does inferior feeling become superior. They perish at the moment of their arising and are, therefore, impermanent.

The pain of inferior feeling does not become the happiness of superior feeling. Nor does the superior feeling become inferior feeling. They cease at the moment of their arising and are impermanent, suffering and not-self.

Far And Near Feelings

We have already dealt with considerations of feelings far and near: feelings arising from distant objects do not become feelings dependent on near objects; feelings with regard to near objects do not become feelings concerned with distant objects. They cease at the moment of experiencing them and so they are impermanent, suffering and not-self.

Elevenfold Analysis Of Perception

The Blessed One said:

Ya kāci saññā, atītānāgatapaccuppannā ajjhattā vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikā vā sukhumā vā hīnā vā panītā vā yā dūre santike vā sabbā saññā netaṁ mama neso hamasmi na meso attāti. Eva metaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṁ.

This is the exhortation to analyze perception under eleven headings -- past, future, present, internal, external, gross, fine, inferior, superior, far or near-so as to bring out its impermanent, suffering and not-self nature. Here, past perception means the perceptions experienced in previous existences as well as those experienced previously in this life time. Of these past perceptions, it is obvious that perceptions of previous existences have long ceased to exist. However, to those with strong attachment to self, this may not be so obvious because of their view that the same self that recognized and remembered things in previous existences continues to recognize and remember things now; that all acts of recognizing have been done and are being done by the one self, the same self; that in this lifetime too, what was recognized in younger days or very recently is always the work of one and the same self.

The meditator who is ever watchful of the rising and falling of the abdomen and the phenomena that arise at the moment of sensory impingement finds that the perception of sound disappears at once when noted as "hearing, hearing;" the perception of sight vanishes when noted as "seeing, seeing;" so also the perceptions of thoughts and ideas disappear 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 incessantly ceasing. Let alone perceptions perceived in previous existences, even in the present life, perceptions experienced in past moments are no longer existent, they have all ceased and vanished. This the meditator can see for himself. Even the perceptions that occurred only a moment ago have passed away. So also have the perceptions based on the acts of seeing, hearing and touching in the present moment. They are repeatedly arising and vanishing. Thus it can be concluded that perceptions arising in the future will also disappear at the moment of their becoming.

During meditation practice, the nature of perception is analyzed as follows:

1. The perceptions which recognized sense objects a moment ago do not reach the present moment; they disappeared even while recognizing. Therefore they are impermanent, suffering and not-self.

2. The perceptions which are recognizing and remembering things now also perish while actually recognizing. Therefore, they are impermanent, suffering and not-self.

3. The perceptions which will recognize things in the future will also vanish at the time of recognizing and they are therefore impermanent, suffering and not self. Perceptions of the past and the future and of the whole world can be inferred from the knowledge of the perceptions which manifest at the time of noting. just as the perceptions are ceasing as they are being noted in the present, so also the perceptions of the past vanished as they occurred and are therefore impermanent, suffering and not self. Likewise the perceptions arising in the future will also disappear at their respective moments of occurrence and are therefore impermanent, suffering and not self. The perceptions in one's person, in other people, and in the whole world also vanish at the moments of their arising and are all impermanent, suffering, not self.

That the perceptions (which recognize and remember things) are impermanent is quite obvious if we just reflect on how easily we forget things we have studied or once memorized.

Perceptions with regard to one's own body do not reach the moment of perceiving external objects; perceptions on outside bodies do not last till internal objects are perceived -- they perish at the respective moments of their arising and are therefore impermanent, suffering and not self.

Perceptions with regard to desire and craving, anger and transgression, conceit, wrong view, doubts and misgivings, are all unwholesome, they are perceptions of the gross type. Perceptions with regard to devotional piety towards the Blessed One, a Dhamma discourse, good advice and instructions from teachers and parents are fine, subtle types of perception, they are perceptions of the superior type. The gross types belong to the inferior class of perceptions. In other words, recognition of prominent, coarse objects is coarse perception; recognition of fine objects is subtle perception.

Coarse perceptions do not reach the moment of occurrence of fine perceptions; fine perceptions do not reach the moment of occurrence of coarse perceptions. They vanish at the respective moment of occurrence and are impermanent, suffering and not-self.

Inferior perceptions do not reach the moment of occurrence of superior perceptions; so also superior perceptions do not reach the moment of occurrence of inferior perceptions. They vanish at the respective moments of occurrence and are impermanent, suffering and not-self.

Recognizing and remembering distant, fine objects is called perception of the far distance; recognizing coarse, near objects, objects in one's person, is called near perception. A distant perception does not reach the moment of occurrence of a near perception; a near perception does not reach the moment of occurrence of a distant perception. They vanish at the moment of arising and are impermanent, suffering and not-self.

Elevenfold Analysis Of Volitional Formations

The Blessed One stated:

Ye keci sankhārā atītānāgatapaccuppañña ajjhattā vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikā vā sukhumā vā hīnā vā panītā vā ye dūre santike vā sabbe sankhārā netaṁ mama, neso hamasmi na meso attāti evametaṁ yathābūtaṁ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabaṁ.

This is the instruction to contemplate volitional formations analytically under eleven headings so as to bring out their impermanent, suffering and not-self nature.

Here it should be noted that there are many dhammas classified under sankhārakkhandha. We have already stated that apart from feeling and perception, the remaining fifty kinds of mental concomitants come under the classification of sankhārakkhandha. In brief, sankhāra are the motivating forces behind physical, vocal and mental activities. They are responsible for the changes between the four bodily positions of walking, standing, sitting and lying down. Sankhāra give the commands: "Now go, now stand, now sit down." They also initiate actions such as bending, stretching, moving and smiling. It is also these sankhāra which cause vocal actions, just as if they were ordering, "now say this." They are also responsible for acts of thinking, seeing and hearing.

Thus, sankhāra of past existences -- the wish to go, stand or speak -- could not come over to the present existence, could they? Did they not all perish and pass away, then and there? It is obvious that the desires to do, take or think in previous existences have now entirely vanished. 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 has done all the actions in the previous existence; the doer in the present existence is also I". For them, I the doer is everlasting.

To the meditator who is constantly watching the rise and fall of the abdomen, when an itchy feeling is felt, he notes "itching, itching". While noting thus, if the desire to scratch the itchy spot arises, he immediately notes, "desire to scratch, desire to scratch." The sankhāra, namely the desire to scratch, is seen to disappear every time it is noted. Also while noting, "stiff, stiff" because of a feeling of stiffness, if the desire to bend or stretch appears, it has to be noted. Thus the sankhāra, namely the desire to bend, to stretch or change posture, perishes when noted, and keeps on perishing.

In this manner, the volitional formations of wishing to change, to talk or to think are seen to be constantly ceasing.

For the meditator, not only volitional formations of past existences, but presently forming volitional formations are seen to be constantly perishing. Thus he knows that volitional formations of past existences have not come over to the present, that present volitional formations will not go over to the future, and that future volitional formations will not move over to a later time; they vanish at the moment of arising. He realizes with his own knowledge that volitional formations are impermanent, suffering and not self.

In meditation practice, volitional formations are contemplated as follows:

1. The intention to step out with the right foot of a moment ago does not reach the moment of intending to step out with the left foot; the intention to step out with the left foot of a moment ago does not reach the moment of intending to step out with the right foot: they perish and vanish at the respective moments of arising, and are, therefore, impermanent, suffering and not-self. Similarly, the volitional formations of the past do not reach the present moment. They perish at the moment of their arising and are impermanent, suffering and not-self.

2. The presently forming volitional formations of desiring to do or of careful noting do not reach the next moment. They are always dissolving as they are formed and are impermanent, suffering and not-self.

3. The volitional formations which will arise in the future concerning the desire to do and careful noting will also cease without reaching a later future time. They are consequently impermanent, suffering and not-self

With the knowledge of the volitional formations which occur at the time of noting, the volitional formations of the past, the future and of the whole world can be inferred in the same manner.

Just as the impermanent volitional formations of wishing to do and noting are perishing even while being noted, so also did the volitional formations of the past vanish at the time of occurrence. They are, therefore, impermanent, suffering and not-self. Likewise, the voli-tional formations of the future will also disappear at the respective moments of occurrence and are, therefore, impermanent, suffering and not self. The volitional formations of one's own person or in other people, and indeed the whole world, also perish and vanish, just like the volitional formations which are being noted at the present moment. They are all impermanent, suffering and not-self.

The differentiation between internal and external volitional formations is the same as the one we have described for feelings and perceptions: volitional formations on an internal object are internal; those developed concerning an external object, that is, thoughts of acquiring or destroying external objects, animate or inanimate, are external.

Volitional formations concerning an internal action cease before reaching the moment of thinking of an external action. Therefore they are impermanent, suffering and not-self. Similarly with respect to volitional formations concerning external actions.

Thinking of doing a rough action is a coarse type of volitional formation; contemplating doing fine, subtle deeds is a fine type of volitional formation.

Volitional formations of the coarse type do not become volitional formations of the fine type, and vice versa. They perish at the moments of arising and are impermanent, suffering and not-self.

All kinds of thinking about and performing bad deeds are inferior volitional formations. Thinking of and doing meritorious deeds are superior volitional formations. Among meritorious deeds, the act of keeping precepts is superior to acts of charity, meditation is superior to keeping precepts, and insight meditation is superior to concentration meditation.

Inferior volitional formations do not reach the moment of arising of superior volitional formations; superior volitional formation too, do not reach the moment of arising of inferior volitional formation. They perish at the respective moments of their arising and are therefore impermanent, suffering and not-self.

The volitional formations of charitable deeds do not reach the moment of arising of the volitional formations of keeping precepts, and vice versa. The volitional formations of keeping precepts do not reach the moment of arising of volitional formations of meditation, and vice versa. The volitional formations of the development of concentration meditation do not reach the moment of arising of volitional formations of insight meditation, and vice versa. They all vanish at the moment of their arising and are therefore impermanent, suffering and not-self.

Contemplation on the volitional formations of unwholesome and wholesome deeds is very subtle, but the ardent meditator can see from his own personal experience how these volitional formations keep on vanishing at their respective moments of arising. For instance, while noting the rise and fall of the abdomen, if desirous thoughts arise, the meditator notes that phenomenon as "wanting, desiring." When noted thus, the desirous thoughts vanish before reaching the moment of the wholesome deed of noting. The meditator who has advanced to the stage of bhanga ñāna knows this phenomenon clearly as it is. When the meditator feels glad over an act of charity, he should note, "glad, glad". When noted in this way, the meditator who has reached the stage of bhañga ñāna sees clearly the volitional formations of the wholesome deed of contemplating on charity vanish before reaching the moment of noting. In addition, when random thought arises while noting the rise and fall of the abdomen, it should be noted. When thus noted, the volitional formation of noting, the rise and fall vanishes without reaching thc moment of arising of the random thought; the volitional formation of random thought also vanishes without reaching the moment of reaching it as a random thought. In this manner, the meditator perceives each and every volitional formation perishing before it reaches the moment of arising of another volitional formation. If the meditator 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 ñāna.

Volitional formations of thoughts arising from distant objects do not reach the moment of thoughts on near objects, and vice versa. They all vanish at the respective moments of their arising and are, therefore, impermanent, suffering and not-self.

Elevenfold Analysis Of Mind Or Consciousness

The Blessed One said:

Yaṁ kiñci viññānaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā panītaṁ vā yandūre santike vā sabbaṁ viññānaṁ netaṁ mama neso hamasmi na meso attāti evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṁ.

This is the instruction to analyze consciousness under eleven heads so as to clarify its impermanent, suffering and not-self nature.

In Chapter VI it was explained that contemplating on impermanence is the same as contemplating on "this I am not," contemplating on suffering is the same as contemplating on "this is not mine" and contemplating on not-self is the same as contemplating on "this is not myself."

Of the four mental aggregates, viññāna, conscious-ness or mind, is the most prominent. Mental concomitants, such as desire and hatred, are described as "mind" in everyday language: "desiring mind," "liking mind," "hating mind." In the Commentaries, too, expositions are given first in mind, then only are they followed by the mental concomitants. Here also we propose to elaborate on mind to a considerable extent.

Past consciousness may be the mind of previous lives; it may also be the mind which occurred during younger days or which happened in all the intervening days, months or years since then. Even today, there was the mind which arose prior to the present moment. Amongst all these possible types of past consciousness, it should be very obvious that the mind of the past existences has not come over to the present life, that it ceased in those existences. But for those with strong attachments to self, it is not easy for such knowledge and understanding to arise, because they hold to the view that viññāna, consciousness, is a soul or self, a living entity. According to them, when the old body of past existences breaks up and perishes, the viññāna leaves it and transmigrates to a new body, where it remains from conception in the mother's womb till the time of death, when it again leaves to a fresh body in a new existence. This belief has been fully described in the story of Sāti in Chapter IV.

As meditators experience for themselves, mind does not last even for a second; it is incessantly arising and vanishing. How it arises and vanishes has also been described in the discussion on the processes of cognition. As explained there, for each existence, at the approach of death, maranasaññā vithī consciousness (the mental process at death) arises , with kamma, kamma-sign (kamma-nimitta) or destination-sign (gati-nimitta) as object. This is how it arises: from the life continuum consciousness (bhavanga) arises the sense door consciousness, the āvajjana citta, which apprehends sensations. This citta reflects on a good or bad action performed during one's lifetime (kamma), or a sign or symbol associated with that action (kamma-nimitta), or a symbol of the place in which one is destined to be reborn (gati-nimitta). After this citta has ceased, the active consciousness, javana, holding on to that object, arises five times. At the cessation of javana consciousness, holding on to the same object, the registering consciousness of tadālambana happens for two thought moments, at the end of which bhavanga consciousness appears, lasting for one or two thought moments. After that, the consciousness or mind comes to termination for that particular existence and the last bhavanga citta is known as cuti citta, death consciousness.

As soon as the cuti citta ceases, depending on the wholesome or unwholesome kamma which manifested at death's door, and the objects that appeared just prior to death, the new consciousness arises in a new existence. This consciousness is called the re-linking consciousness (paṭisandhi citta), because it forms a link with the past existence. As this paṭisandhi citta ceases, a series of bhavanga citta arises. When sense objects such as sights and sounds present themselves at the sense doors, the series of bhavanga citta ceases and sense door consciousness followed by sense consciousness, such as eye consciousness or ear consciousness, arises. This is actually what is happening when you see or hear. According to this process, mind appears one by one in a continuous series, each fresh mind (citta) arising then vanishing. The cuti citta of the last existence ceased then and there. The consciousness of the present life is a new one, arisen afresh, conditioned by previous kamma. Every citta is a fresh arising, not a renewal of the old one. Thus the meditator who watches the phenomena of rise and fall takes note of a thought as it appears. When thus noted, the thought or the thinking mind at once disappears. Perceiving this phenomenon, the meditator concludes that death means the termination of the continuity of mind after the last cuti citta has ceased. Similarly, new becoming means the first arising of a fresh series of cittas in a new place in a new existence, just as the present mind arises afresh all the time. Bhavanga citta is the continuous arising, depending on 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 and thinking arises afresh from the life continuum consciousness. In this way the meditator knows how mind arises and perishes and from this personal experience he can infer about the death consciousness, cuti citta, and re-tinking consciousness, paṭisandhi citta.

The Law Of Dependent Origination

Here, in this manner of discernment, "by means of the round of kamma" includes causes such as ignorance (avijjā), craving (tanhā), clinging (upādāna) and volitional formations (sankhāra). In addition, by discerning the first rebirth linking consciousness and the last death consciousness, all the consciousnesses that have arisen in between in the course of one existence become known. Also, by knowing all the consciousnesses with respect to the present life, the consciousnesses with respect to the past and future existences can 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 the Visuddhimagga says, "all past, future and present dhammas are understood by him".

Consciousness In The Three Time Periods

As the meditator knows in this way that starting from rebirth consciousness a continuous series of mind (moments) arises and vanishes, it is clear to him that the mind of previous existences 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 meditator is in a position to discern all past, future and present minds with his personal knowledge.

To the meditator, if thoughts arise while noting the rise and fall of the abdomen, he notes the fact thus, "thinking, thinking." In this way the thoughts vanish. When he hears, he notes, "hearing, hearing" and the ear consciousness instantly disappears. He does not think, as ordinary people do, that he keeps on hearing for a long time. He finds that he hears intermittently -- hearing, disappearing, hearing, disappearing -- the ear consciousness vanishing in successive instants.

Likewise when noting touch consciousness, it is seen to quickly disappear. When concentration is specially strong, the eye consciousness can be seen arising and vanishing in quick succession. Nose consciousness and taste consciousness should be considered in the same way. The noting mind is also perceived to be alternately noting and disappearing. In short, with every noting, both the object noted and the knowing mind are seen arising and vanishing. To the meditator who is seeing clearly in this way, eye consciousness does not reach the moment of noting, thinking or hearing, it vanishes at the instant of seeing. He realizes it is impermanent. Similarly, noting mind, thinking mind, and hearing mind do not reach the moments of seeing, they disappear at the respective moments of noting, thinking and hearing. Hence, the meditator realizes they are impermanent:

1. The eye consciousness, ear consciousness, touch consciousness and thinking mind which appeared moments ago do not reach the present moments of seeing, hearing, touching and thinking. They passed away and are therefore impermanent, suffering and not-self.

2. The eye consciousness, ear consciousness, touch consciousness and thought consciousness which are presently arising do not reach the next moment of seeing, hearing, touching and thinking. They cease now and are therefore impermanent, suffering and not-self.

3. The eye consciousness, ear consciousness, touch consciousness and thought consciousness which will arise in the future will not reach the moment next to that future instant. They will perish and are therefore impermanent, suffering and not-self.

Knowing personally in this way how consciousness arises and vanishes in one's body, it can be inferred that, just like the consciousness which has been noted, all the consciousnesses which remain to be noted, consciousnesses in other people and in the whole world, are arising and vanishing.

We have considered all types of consciousness, but there remains consideration of consciousness from other aspects, such as internally and externally.

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, consciousness ceases and is therefore impermanent, suffering and not-self.

Angry mind is coarse; other types of mind are fine in comparison. Among angry minds, those which are violent enough to cause murder, torture, destruction to other's properties, or abusive, threatening language are coarse; ordinary irritated mind is fine, subtle. Greedy mind is soft compared to angry mind, but the greedy mind which is intense enough to cause stealing or wrong acts, or low, vulgar language is coarse. Ordinary desire or wish is fine. Deluded mind is mild compared to the greedy mind or the angry mind, but the deluded mind which finds fault with and shows disrespect to the true Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha is coarse. Ordinary doubting mind and scattered mind are subtle. More subtle than all these unwholesome minds are the wholesome minds, and amongst the wholesome minds, gladness and rapture are coarse, while the mind which is unmoving and concentrated is fine.

The meditator who is engaged in constant noting perceives the arising and vanishing of coarse as well as fine minds-that the coarse mind does not reach the moment of arising of a 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 According To The Satipatthāna Sutta

While the meditator is contemplating the rise and fall of the abdomen, if the mind arises with lust, he notes it as mind with lust. This is knowing the mind with lust as it truly is -- sa rāgaṁ vā cittaṁ sa rāgaṁ cittanti pajānāti -- in accordance with the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta. When noted thus, the mind with lust ceases and is followed by a continuous stream of mind made up of the kusala (wholesome) citta of noting and the active (kiriyā), resultant (vipāka) and skillful impulse (kusala javana) minds (citta) which are concerned with mundane acts of seeing, hearing and so on. These wholesome, active and resultant minds are noted as they arise in seeing, hearing, touching and knowing. This is knowing the mind without lust, wholesome, active, resultant and neutral cittas, as it truly is, in accordance with the vītarāgaṁ vā cittaṁ vītarāgaṁ cittanti pajānāti of the Satipaṭṭhāna 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.

I would like 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 the enumeration of lustful minds. Thus if the mind is lustful, it must be one of the eight kinds of consciousness rooted in attachment. However, just to consider that the occurrence of eight kinds of consciousness rooted in attachment is known as sarāga, mind with lust, does not amount to the contemplation on mind with mindfulness.

Further, vītarāga, mind without lust, is defined as mundane wholesome mind, and neutral mind. The Commentary states that because supramundane citta is the object for consideration by insight knowledge (vipassanā ñāna), it is not classified as vītarāgaṁ, mind without lust, vītadosa, mind without ill-will or vītamoha, mind without delusion.

Likewise, neither of the two kinds of consciousness rooted in ill-will and the two rooted in delusion is classified as mind without lust.

At one time, before I had any knowledge of meditation, I was assailed by doubt as to why the consciousness rooted in ill-will and that rooted in delusion were not classified as mind without lust. Only when I had acquired knowledge through meditation practice did I understand just how natural and right the Commentary exposition was. When the mind with lust is noted, it at once ceases and in its place arise only wholesome, active, resultant and neutral cittas; it is not usual for ill-will and delusion to arise then. Therefore at that time only the wholesome citta which is involved in noting or the neutral resultant (vipāka abyākata), neutral averting (āvajjana abyākata) cittas involved in acts of sense awareness and the skilful impulse citta are contemplated.

Thus the definition of vītarāga, mind without lust, as neutral wholesome (kusala abyākata) citta is very natural and is in keeping with what meditators find in their personal experience.

When ill-will arises in the course of noting the rise and fall of the abdomen, it has to be noted. The ill-will vanishes at once and in its place there arises the wholesome citta of the act of noting the neutral and wholesome impulse cittas of the acts of seeing and so on. The meditator knows this mind without ill-will by noting it too. When the mind with delusion, that is, doubtful or distracted mind, appears, they are noted as usual and they disappear. In their place arise the wholesome citta of the act of noting, and the neutral and wholesome impulse cittas of the acts of seeing. The meditator knows this mind without delusion, vītamoha, by noting.

Further, when sloth and torpor arise during noting the rise and fall of the abdomen, these have to be noted as "sloth," "torpor." They vanish at once and mindfulness arises in their place. This is noted by the meditator before he reverts to noting the rise and fall of the abdomen.

Again, while noting the rise and fall of the abdomen, if distraction and restlessness appear, they are noted as "distraction," "restlessness." When noted thus, restlessness disappears, the mind remains still and tranquil. This state of mind is also to be noted.

When the concentration is good, and the mind rests on the object under contemplation, this quiet mind is also known automatically. When restlessness appears, it is then noted and the mind becomes still again. All these changes in the state of mind are heedfully noted. A mind which is noted and contemplated on is said to be vimutta, free of defilements. A mind which remains to be noted and contemplated upon is avimutta, not free of defilements. The meditator takes note of all these states of mind.

This is how mind is contemplated as taught by the Blessed One in the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta. According to this practice, minds with lust and desire, ill-will, distraction, and restlessness are all of the coarse variety. When free of those coarse minds, there arise in their place wholesome and neutral cittas, which are fine minds. Therefore, the meditator engaged in watching phenomena as they take place perceives that the coarse mind does not reach the moment of fine mind and so on. They vanish at the respective moments of their arising and are impermanent, suffering and not-self.

The classification of mind according to inferior and superior status is similar to the classification of inferior and superior volitional formations. The inferior unwholesome citta does not reach the moment of arising of wholesome neutral citta; the superior wholesome mind also does not reach the moment of arising of the inferior unwholesome citta. They cease at the moments of their respective arising and are, therefore, impermanent, suffering and not-self. The wholesome citta of generosity does not reach the moment of arising of wholesome citta of moral precepts or of meditation. The wholesome citta of moral precepts does not reach the moment of arising of wholesome citta of meditation, and vice versa. The concentration meditation citta does not reach the moment of insight meditation; the insight meditation citta 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 sensory awareness thinks that when he looks from a distant object to a near one, the mind which sees the distant object comes closer to him. When he looks from a near object to a distant one, he thinks the mind has gone away to a distance.

Similarly when hearing a nearby sound while listening to a distant sound, it is presumed that the mind which listened to the distant sound has moved nearer; when hearing a distant sound while listening to a nearby sound, it is presumed that the mind which hears the nearby sound has moved away to a distance. When, while smelling a distant smell, an internal odor is smelt, it is thought that the mind from afar has come nearer. When, while smelling the odor of one's body, an odor from outside is smelt, the mind which is nearby appears to have gone afar.

While tactile sensation is being felt at a distance, for instance, on the feet, and another tactile sensation is felt on one's breast, the distant sensation appears to have moved closer, and vice versa. While thinking of a distant object, one thinks of a nearby object and it appears that the distant mind has come nearer, and vice versa. In short, it is the general belief that there is only one permanent mind which knows everything near and far.

The meditator 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 near mind does not go afar. At respective moments of arising, they cease and pass away.

The original Anattalakkhana Sutta is divided into four parts. The first part deals with the teaching that "the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness tend to afflict and, being unmanageable, are therefore not self or inner essence."

The second part deals with the questions, "Are the five aggregates permanent or impermanent? Are they suffering or happiness"' and explains that it is not fitting to regard that which is not permanent, suffering, and subject to change as "mine," "me," "my self."

In the third part, the five aggregates are classified and enumerated under eleven headings and it is taught to contemplate them as "not mine, not me, not my self" (impermanent, suffering, not self).

In the fourth part, which we will deal with now, the Blessed One taught how the meditator develops the knowledge of insight step by step, and how nibbidā ñāna, knowledge of disenchantment, 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

In this way, the Blessed One taught how nibbidā ñāna is developed. "Seeing thus" in the above passage means seeing impermanence, suffering and not self. He becomes the instructed disciple, fully equipped with knowledge from both hearing and from personal experience.

He has learned from hearing that in order to perceive the nature of impermanence, suffering and not-self in the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness he has to take note of every act of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and thinking. He has also heard that one must contemplate the five groups of grasping as just mental and physical properties and that the knowing is (a function of) mind (mentality, nāma). He has also heard about cause and effect, about the nature of incessant arising and vanishing, impermanence and insubstantiality. All of this constitutes knowledge acquired from hearsay or learning. Meditators are accomplished in this form of knowledge even before they start meditation.

Then while taking note of rising, falling, bending, stretching, moving, extending, pressing, feeling touch that is hard, coarse, soft, smooth, hot, cold, and seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and touching, the meditator realizes that the objects he is taking note of are corporeality and the knowing of these objects is mentality, and that there are only these two: corporeality and mentality. When he takes note of eye consciousness, ear consciousness, touch consciousness and mental consciousness, he knows that consciousness is mentality and the location of this consciousness is corporeality; that there are only these two. This is knowledge acquired through personal experience.

Further, when there is desire to bend, he bends; when there is desire to stretch, he stretches; when there is desire to walk, he walks. Noting all these, he comes to realize that he bends because there is desire, he stretches or walks because there is desire to do so; there is no living entity making him bend, stretch or walk, there are only respective causes for each result produced. This is also knowledge from personal experience.

If the meditator fails to take note of phenomena he cannot see them as they really are. He develops liking for them. From liking comes craving. Because he craves for them, he has to make efforts to obtain them, thereby producing wholesome and unwholesome kamma, in consequence of which there are new becomings. In this way he comes to understand the Law of Dependent Origination concerning the cause and effect of phenomena.

Again, both the objects of form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness and the knowing mind keep on arising afresh and perishing. Thus he knows rightly, as the Blessed One instructed, that they are impermanent, suffering and not-self.

As stated above, various kinds of knowledge, beginning with that of differentiation between corporeality and mentality, right up to knowledge of their nature as impermanent, suffering and not-self, are all gained by personal experience, not from hearing or learning. We dare say that among the present audience there are many members who are equipped with such personal knowledge. Thus we say that the person who can perceive the true nature of impermanence, suffering and not-self through personal experience is one who is well instructed, equipped with both the knowledge of learning and the knowledge of personal experience.

It goes without saying that the Group of Five, being Stream Enterers, were fully equipped with both types of knowledge and were therefore fully instructed.

The disciple of the Blessed One who is thus fully instructed can perceive, with his own knowledge, the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness as they manifest at every moment of seeing, hearing, touching, and knowing, as impermanent, suffering and not-self. The meditator who can perceive in this way soon reaches the stage of udayabbaya ñāna, in which the rapid arising and dissolution of corporeality and mentality are discerned. According to the Visuddhimagga, when that stage is reached, the meditator witnesses strange lights and aura, and experiences unprecedented happiness, intense joy (pīti) and quietude. He also experiences lightness in body and mind, softness and gentleness, vigor and energy. He thus feels indescribably pleasant in body and mind. His mindfulness is so perfect that it may be said that there is nothing he is not mindful of, his intellect so keen and sharp that it seems there is nothing he cannot comprehend. His religious fervor increases and his faith and devotion in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha grow 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 the appearance of bhanga ñāna. At that time, the object of meditation and the meditating mind are perceived to be disintegrating, vanishing pair by pair. For instance, when the rising is noted, it vanishes together with 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 ceases first, and the noting of it comes later. This is of course what actually happens. When arising of thought is contemplated, the noting mind arises only after that thought has disappeared. The same thing happens while noting other objects: the noting takes place only after the object to be noted has disappeared. But when 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. Perceiving the continuous and rapid process of dissolution, one comes to know that death may occur at any time, which is a terrifying thing to realize. This is knowledge of danger or terror, bhaya ñāna. When things are seen as dangerous, the understanding arises that they are baneful and full of danger. This is ādinava ñāna. The meditator no longer finds delight in these baneful aggregates of corporeality and mentality. He finds them detestable, wearisome, and this is nibbidā ñāna. The Blessed One was referring to this state of mind when he said, rūpasmiṁpi nibbindati: "He grows wearied of form ..."

Before the development of nibbidā ñāna, one may be quite satisfied and happy with one's present physical form, and satisfied and happy with the expectation of human or celestial physical form in a future existence. One craves for and looks forward to the happiness of human or celestial existence, and a beautiful, healthy body. With the arising of this knowledge, one no longer feels happy, no longer lives with joyful expectation. The so-called happi-ness of human life is made up of incessantly arising and ceasing corporeality and mentality. The meditator also visualizes that the so-called happiness in a celestial being is similarly constituted of fleeting corporeality and mentality, for which he has developed detestation and weariness. It is just like the fisherman holding a dangerous snake, thinking it to be an eel: once he realizes that he has a dangerous snake in his hand, not an eel, he wants to throw it away as quickly as possible. This illustration was described fully in my discourse on the Sīlavanta Sutta.

Furthermore, before the advent of nibbidā ñāna, he takes delight in all the feelings he is enjoying, and he yearns for pleasurable feelings of the human or celestial worlds in future existences. He takes delight in the good perceptions (saññā) he is blessed with now; he longs for and is 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 people even pray for what they would like to do when reborn. Some indulge and rejoice in daydreaming and ideation now and look forward to doing similarly in coming existences. But when nibbidā ñāna is developed, one sees the ever arising and ceasing of feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness as they truly are and feels a distaste for them. Just as they are quickly passing away right now, whether one is reborn as a human or a celestial being, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness will always be disintegrating. Considering thus, he feels dispassionate towards all these formations (aggregates), and is dissatisfied with them.

It is essential that the meditator becomes genuinely dissatisfied and wearied with conditions. Only when genuine distaste is developed towards them does the wish to escape from them, to discard them, arise, and the subsequent striving to get rid of them. It is then that sankhārupekkhā ñāna will appear, and when that ñāna is fully developed, Nibbāna can be realized through attainment of the knowledge of the Noble Path and Fruition, becoming a Stream Enterer, a Once Returner, a Non-Returner or an Arahat. Thus it is essential to strive hard for the development of genuine nibbidā ñāna. It is for this reason that the Blessed One taught:

Sabbe sankhārā aniccāti
yadā paññāya passati
atha nibbindati dukkhe
esa maggo visuddhiyā.

"All compounded things, conditioned by kamrna, mind, seasonal variations and nutriment, are transient. When one comprehends this truth by vipassanā ñāna, one grows dissatisfied and wearied with all this suffering (all compounded corporeality and mentality). This dis-satisfaction and antipathy is the true and right Path to purity, to Nibbāna, free from all defilements and suffering."

The meditator who takes note of every act of seeing, hearing, touching and knowing as it arises perceives only phenomena rapidly arising and vanishing. He knows, therefore, things as they truly are -- all transient. With this knowledge of impermanence comes the realization that there is nothing delightful and pleasant in the present mind and body; future states of mind and body, having the same nature of impermanence, will also be undelightful and unpleasant. He therefore develops distaste for all mentality and corporeality, and he wants to be free from them. He strives for liberation by continuing with his meditation. Thereby sankhārupekkhā ñāna appears and Nibbāna is realized through the Noble Path. Therefore the Blessed One taught that the insight, which sees only dissatisfaction and repugnance, is the true path to Nibbāna.

Nibbinda ÑāṆa Developed When Dukkha is Seen

"All compounded things, conditioned by kamma, mind, seasonal variations and nutriment, are suffering. When one comprehends this truth ... "

A certain teacher has interpreted the word "sankhārā" in this verse to mean the cetanā (volition) which produces wholesome and unwholesome actions. Thus, according to him: "Wholesome acts such as charitable deeds and keeping precepts are all sankhārā, and hence suffering. Likewise, practicing concentration and insight meditation are sankhāra. All types of action are thus productive of suffering. In order to attain the peace of Nibbāna, engage in no activity. "Keep the mind as it is." Thus he misrepresents the teaching to suit his purpose, and his disciples, who accept his views, spread his wrong teaching. As a matter of fact, the word "sankhārā" of this verse is not intended to mean wholesome and unwholesome volitional actions (kusala, akusala sankhārā) which arise out of ignorance. Here, sankhārā means simply the mentality and corporeality which arise as conditioned by kamma, mind, seasonal variations and nutriment. Again, mentality and corporeality do not include the supramundane path and fruition consciousness, or mental concomitants which form the object of vipassanā meditation. Only the mundane forms of mentality and corporeality, which occur in the three spheres (sense sphere, form sphere and formless sphere) are meant here, the same as the sankhārā of the previous verse. Thus, all mentality and corporeality which manifest at every moment of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, and thinking are incessantly arising and vanishing, they are transient. Because of their imperma-nence, they are suffering. This is what is meant here.

The meditator perceives that all the mentality and corporeality which appear at the moment of sensory awareness are undergoing instant dissolution and are therefore transient. Because they are impermanent and liable to disintegrate at any moment, the meditator perceives them as fearful and a source of suffering. For some meditators, unpleasant sensations such as stiffness, heat, pain and itchiness are constantly arising in various parts of the body. At every manifestation, these sensations are noted, thereby enabling the meditator to perceive the whole body as a mass of suffering. This is in accordance with the teaching dukkha maddhakkhi sallato: vipassanā ñāna perceives the body as a mass of suffering caused by piercing thorns or spikes.

It may be asked, "What difference is there between the pain experienced by an ordinary person and that experienced by the meditator?" The difference lies in the fact that the ordinary person sees pain as, "my feeling, I am suffering," but the meditator knows unpleasant feeling without any self clinging, he perceives it as just a phenomenon, arising and immediately perishing. It is vipassanā ñāna, an object of insight knowledge, without any self clinging.

Whether perceived as suffering because of impermanence or as a mass of unbearable suffering, there is no delight in compounded things, only repugnance. There is dissatisfaction and weariness with regard to present and future mentality and corporeality, a total distaste for all mentality and corporeality. This is develop-ment of nibbidā ñāna. When this ñāna is developed, there follows the wish to discard mentality and corporeality, to be free of them. The meditator continues with the work of meditation in order to achieve freedom. In time, striving on, sankharupekkhā ñāna arises and Nibbāna is realized by means of the knowledge of the Noble Path. Therefore the Blessed One described the insight knowledge which considers all sankhārā as suffering and as objects of disgust as the Path to Nibbāna. In a similar manner, the Blessed One taught how they are perceived as non-self and thus regarded with disgust and dislike.

Dhamma in this verse has the same purpose as sankhārā of the previous two verses, meaning mundane mentality and corporeality as perceived by insight knowledge. Anattā is dhamma and dhamma, phenomena, thus means anattā. In order to bring out more clearly the meaning of sankhārā as nonself, 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 word dhamma is purposely used here to include the supramundane Path, Fruition and the unconditioned Nibbāna as well. We believe this interpretation is not quite tenable. The ordinary person perceives sankhārā, such as acts of seeing and hearing, as permanent and pleasant, whereas the meditator sees them as transient and suffering. Likewise, what the ordinary person regards as self, namely mundane mentality and corporeality, the meditator sees as not-self, anattā. The meditator need not and cannot note supramundane things. They cannot be objects of contemplation and he could thus have no attachments for them. Thus it must be taken that dhamma here means just mundane sankhārā, mentality and corporeality, which can form the objects of vipassanā contemplation.

Because ordinary people take mentality and corporeality to be self, living entity, they delight in them and feel happy about them. But the meditator sees them only as incessantly arising and perishing phenomena, and realizes, therefore, that they are not self. As explained in this Sutta, because they tend to afflict they are seen to be not self and not subject to one's will. Thus the meditator takes no more delight or pleasure in mentality and corporeality. There arises the wish to discard them, to get free of them. He continues with the meditation in order to achieve freedom. In time, sankhārupekkhā ñāna arises and Nibbāna is realized by means of the knowledge of the Noble Path.

Therefore, the Blessed One described the insight knowledge which considers all mental and corporeal conditions as not-self and leads to disgust with them as the Path to Nibbāna.

These three stanzas should be carefully noted. Unless the sankhārā represented by mentality and corporeality are seen in one's own experience as incessantly arising and disintegrating, true insight knowledge of them as impermanent, suffering and not-self is not developed. And without the development of genuine knowledge of impermanence, suffering and not-self, nibbidā ñāna, the distaste for the sufferings of mental and corporeal formations, will not arise. And in the absence of nibbidā ñāna it is impossible to realize Nibbāna. Only with the absence of personal knowledge of the impermanent, suffering and not-self nature of sankhārā will weariness develop and nibbidā ñāna appear. And it is only after the appearance of this nibbidā ñāna that the knowledge of the Path and Fruition, followed by the realization of Nibbāna, will come. It is for this reason that the Blessed One stated in this Sutta: Evaṁ passaṁ bhikkhave, sutvā ariyasāvako, rūpasmiṁpi nibbindati ... :

Definition Of Nibbinda ÑaṆa

In the above Pāli passage, "Seeing thus" is a summarized statement of the development of vipassanā up to the state of bhanga ñāna. And with the words "wearied of ... " development of vipassanā ñāna from bhanga, ādinava, and nibbidā, right up to vuṭṭhānagāminī, is very concisely described. Thus in the cornmentary to the Mūlapannāsa, we find this exposition:

In the Paṭisambhidāmagga and Visuddhimagga, nibbinda ñāna is enumerated in seven successive stages of development: bhanga, ādīnava, nibbidā, muñcitukamyatā, paṭisankhāra, sankhārupekkhā and vuṭṭhānagāminī vipassanā ñāna. We have so far explained up to the stage of nibbidā. Now I shall continue with the rest.

Genuine Desire For Nibbāna

Finding only rapid dissolution and disintegration at every instance of contemplation, the meditator becomes wearied of and disenchanted with the aggregates of mentality and corporeality manifested in the acts of seeing, hearing and so on. He does not wish to hold onto them, he wants to abandon them. He realizes that only in the absence of these incessantly arising and perishing mental and corporeal phenomena will there be peace. This is the arising of the wish for true, genuine Nibbāna. Formerly, imagining Nibbāna to be something like a great metropolis, one's wish to get there arose with a hope for permanent enjoyment of all that the heart desires. This is not a desire for genuine Nibbāna, but only the mundane type of happiness. Those who have not really seen the dangers and faults of mentality and corporeality wish for enjoyment of mundane types of bliss. They cannot entertain the idea of complete cessation of all mentality and corporeality, including every form of enjoyment.

At one time, a certain young monk by the name of Lāludāyi heard the Venerable Sārīputta murmuring, "Nibbāna is blissful; Nibbāna is blissful." He asked him "Venerable Sārīputta, there is no sensation in Nibbāna, so there is nothing to experience, is there not? Then what is blissful in Nibbāna, where there is no sensation?" He raised this point having learned that Nibbāna is void of all mentality and corporeality, and thus void of sensation, but, having no personal experience of Nibbāna, he could not see what was blissful about it. The Venerable Sārīputta's reply to this question 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 pleasant or delightful sensation. This is true bliss. A sensation is thought of as blissful or delightful because of fondness and craving for it. Without fondness, no sensation can be regarded as delightful. A moment's consideration will prove this point. A tasty food seems delightful and delicious while there is liking or craving for it, but when one is not feeling well, or when one has eaten and is already full, the same tasty food will no longer look appealing. If one were forced to eat it, one would not find it at all enjoyable; it would not be regarded as delicious, but rather as a source of suffering. Take another example: how long can you keep on looking at a beautiful sight, or listening to a pleasant sound? How many hours, days, months, or years? One cannot maintain interest in them continuously even 24 hours before distaste and dislike for them arise. To have to continue looking at that sight or listening to that sound would become a terrible experience. 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 subject has been given in our book entitled Concerning Nibbāna [Published as Nibbānapaṭisaṁyutta Kathā: On the Nature of Nibbāna; Yangon, Myanmar, May, 1995, by the Buddha Sasana Nuggaha Foundation].

Anticipating Nibbāna

The meditator who is developing nibbinda ñāna truly perceives the baneful aspects of mentality and corporeality and has become weary with them. He knows that in Nibbāna, where there is no mentality and corporeality, no sensation, lies real peace, and so he longs for it. This is like scanning the distance from a lookout post. It is looking forward to Nibbāna by means of muñcitukamyatā ñāna, knowledge of desire for liberation. As the will to attain real Nibbāna and desire to be liberated from the ills of mentality and corporeality develop, the meditator increases his efforts. With this doubling of effort, he gains paṭisankhā ñāna, (reflection on what has been contemplated), in which comprehension of the nature of impermanence, suffering and not-self is deeper than previously. Particularly more pronounced and distinct is the understanding of the nature of suffering. When paṭisankha ñāna gains strength and maturity, the meditator attains sankhārupekkhā ñāna, knowledge of equanimity towards all conditioned things, all mentality and corporeality. This is a general description of how, starting from sammasana ñāna, the series of vipassanā nāna gradually develops step by step in a trainable (neyya) individual. With noble people, such as a Stream Enterer, within a few moments after the start of meditation, the stage of sankhārupekkhā ñāna may be reached. There is no doubt that the five monks listening to the Anattalakkhana Sutta reached this stage instantly.

Sankhārupekkhā ñāna is distinguished by six characteristics. The first is maintenance of equanimity, being unmoved by fear or unpleasantness, as stated in the Visuddhimagga: Bhayañca nandiñca vippahāya sabba sankhāresu udāsino. How has this equanimity come about? At the stage of bhaya ñāna, he has contemplated fearsomeness and the knowledge thereby developed is characterized by abhorrence. At the stage of sankhār-upekkhā ñāna, all signs of fear have disappeared. At the stage of ādinava, he regards all things as baneful; at the stage of nibbidā, all things are distasteful and loathsome. At the muñcitukamyatā stage he develops a desire to discard all the aggregates, to escape from them. When he reaches the stage of sankhārupekkhā ñāna, all these characteristics of the lower stages of insight (ñānas), namely, seeing banefulness, feeling distaste and disgust, desire to escape, and putting in extraordinary effort, have disappeared. The quotation bhayañca vippahāya -- "abandoning fear" -- from the Visuddhimagga refers to this progress in knowledge. In accordance with this, it must be taken that with the disappearance of fear, the other characteristics, namely seeing banefulness, feeling disgust, desire to escape and extraordinary efforts, have also disappeared.

Furthermore, at the stage of udayabbaya ñāna the meditator develops intense rapture and exultation, he is highly exultant. Sankhārupekkhā ñāna is a superior development to udayabbaya ñāna; nevertheless, at this stage all this rapture and exultation are absent. Thus it is said in the Visuddhimagga, nandiñca vippahāya -- "abandoning delight." He has abandoned exultation, delight and pleasure; he dwells contemplating all sankhārā manifested in seeing, hearing and so on with complete equanimity. There is no longer great exuberance, gladness, happiness, or delight such as occurs at the stage of udayabbaya ñāna.

This is absence of fear or delight with respect to the practice of Dhamma. With regard to mundane affairs too, it becomes plain how a meditator becomes free from fear and delight. When a meditator who has attained the sankhārupekkhā stage of development hears worrying news of worldly affairs or his personal life, he remains unperturbed, unmoved by worry, anxiety or fear. He remains unperturbed, too, when he meets with gladdening events, little moved by exultation, rejoicing or delight. This is freedom from fear and delight in worldly matters.

The second characteristic is balanced attitude of mind, feeling neither glad over pleasant things nor sad and depressed by distressing states of affairs. One can view things, both pleasant and unpleasant, impartially and with equanimity. The Pali text quoted here is;

"Having seen a visible form with the eye, the meditator remains unaffected by it, neither glad nor unhappy. However beautiful or attractive the sight is, the meditator does not feel excited and jubilant over it; however ugly or repulsive the sight is, he remains unperturbed. He maintains an equanimous attitude, mindful and clearly comprehending."

Taking note of everything seen, pleasant or unpleasant, and knowing its real impermanent, suffering and not-self nature, and developing neither liking nor aversion for it, the meditator views phenomena with impartiality. He observes with detachment in order to know the phenomenon of seeing, which is perishing every moment. The meditator who has attained the stage of sankhārupekkhā ñāna understands through personal experi-ence how this observation may take place. This is how the phenomenon of seeing is observed with an equanimous attitude of mind.

The same thing holds true for all acts of hearing, smelling, knowing, touching, and thinking, where observation is made with equanimity just to know the respective phenomena. This ability to watch the events at the six sense doors with unperturbed equanimity is known as chalangupekkhā, a virtue of the Arahats. But the ordinary worldling who has attained to the stage of sankhārupekkhā ñāna can also become accomplished in this way. According to the Commentary to the Anguttara Nikāya, the meditator who has advanced to the stage of udayabbaya ñāna can be endowed with this Arahat-like virtue, but at this stage the accomplishment is not very prominent. It becomes more distinct at the bhanga stage and becomes well pronounced at the sankhārupekkhā stage. Thus the meditator who has reached this stage of develop-ment, sharing some of the virtues of an Arahat, deserves high esteem and respect. Even if unknown to others, the meditator himself, knowing personally his own virtue, may be well pleased and gratified with his own progress and development.

The third characteristic is effortlessness in contemplation.

Sankhāra vicinane majjhattaṁ hutvā says the Visuddhimagga:

"Taking a neutral attitude with regard to the practice of contemplation."

This is explained in the Sub-Commentary, which states that "just as mental equilibrium is maintained in the matter of sankhārā as objects of contemplation, so also a neutral, balanced attitude should be taken with regard to the practice of contemplation on them." At the lower stages of development, the meditator has to make great efforts for the appearance of the objects for contemplation and similar efforts are needed to bring about contemplation on them. At the stage of sankhārupekkhā ñāna, no special effort is needed for the appearance of objects for contemplation. They appear of their own accord, one by one, followed by effortless contemplation. The act of contemplation has become a smooth, easy process.

These are the three characteristics concerning equanimity and balance. We shall go next to the three special characteristics of the sankhārupekkhā ñāna.

At the lower stages, it is not easy to keep the mind fixed on one object, even for half an hour or an hour. At the sankhārupekkhā level, the concentration may remain constant and steady for one, two or three hours. This is within the experience of many of our meditators. It is because of this characteristic that sankhārupekkhā ñāna is defined by the Paṭisambhidāmagga as the ñāna 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.

The fifth characteristic is that of getting gradually finer and subtler, just like sifting flour on the edge of a tray, as stated in the Visuddhimagga. From the moment of its arising, sankhārupekkhā ñāna is subtle, but as time passes it becomes still finer and more subtle, and this phenomenon is within the experience of many of our meditators.

The last characteristic is that of non-dispersion. At the lower levels, concentration is not strong, the mind is dispersed over many objects, but at the level of sankhārupekkhā ñāna, the mind is almost completely free of scattering or diffusion. Let alone extraneous objects, the mind refuses to take in even those objects appropriate for contemplation.

On the bhanga ñāna level, the mind is directed over the various parts of the body, and thus sensation of touch is felt in the whole body. At this stage, however, dispersing the mind becomes difficult; it remains fixed only on the few 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 objects to be noted. Then the rising mind falling may fade away, leaving only the touching. This cognition of touching may disappear altogether, leaving just the knowing mind, which is noted as "knowing, knowing." At such time, it will be found that whenever reflection is made on objects in which one is specially interested, the mind does not stay on them for long, it reverts back to the usual objects of contemplation. Thus it is said to be void of dispersion. 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 sankhārupekkhā ñāna which should be experienced personally by the meditator. If these characteristic signs are not experienced, it means that one has not yet developed this ñāna.

When sankhārupekkhā ñāna with these six characteristics has become fully perfected, there appears a special kind of knowledge which seems to occur very rapidly. This special kind of cognition is known as vuṭṭhānagāminī vipassanā. Vuṭṭhāna means rising, getting up. Vipassanā ñāna is that knowledge which dwells on the continual process of arising and ceasing formations (mentality and corporeality). With each act of observation, the attention falls on this continuous process of mentality and corporeality. However, when insight into the Noble Path (ariyamagga ñāna) is developed, the object of attention becomes the cessation of mental and corporeal phenomena. This means that the mind rises, or "gets up" from the continuous stream of mentality and corporeality and its object becomes Nibbāna. For this reason ("getting up", turning away from the continuous stream of mentality and corporeality) the Noble Path is known as vuṭṭhāna. When this rapid vipassanā comes to an end, Nibbāna is realized.

Thus, in this special insight knowledge, the mind has gone over to the Noble Path, having risen up from the safe which it previously attended to; hence its name vuṭṭhānagāminī.

This vuṭṭhānagāminī vipassanā arises while taking note of one of the six consciousness, such as mind consciousness or touch consciousness, which become manifest at that particular moment. While the meditator contemplates the rapidly perishing phenomena, he perceives the nature of impermanence, or he perceives the nature of unsatisfactoriness, or the nature of non-self. This vuṭṭhānagāminī rises at least two or three times; sometimes it may repeat four, five or even ten times. As described in the texts, at the last moment of vuṭṭhānagāminī, three thought moments -- parikamma (preparation), upacāra (approximation) and anuloma (adaptation) -- of functional javana (impulsion) appear, followed by one special moment of kāmāvacara moral javana, which takes Nibbāna, where mental and corporeal conditions cease, as its object. After that javana the Noble Path arises, and the mind plunges into the object of Nibbāna, void of mentality and corporeality, the cessation of all sankhārā. Immediately after magga javana the ariyaphala (Noble Fruit) javana arises two or three times. Its object is the same as that of the Noble Path. With the occurrence of the Noble magga and phala javanas, the ordinary common worldling attains the status of a Stream Enterer; a Stream Enterer that of a Once Returner; a Once Returner that of a Non-Returner; and a Non-Returner finally becomes an Arahat.

The wholesome impulsion (kāmāvacara kusala javana) which takes Nibbāna as its object is known as gotrabhū, the impulsion consciousness which overcomes the lineage of the ordinary worldling. The Paṭisambhidāmagga defines gotrabhū as follows:

"Rising from its objects of conditioned phenomena, which have the characteristic of becoming, the mind has the tendency to plunge headlong towards the object of Nibbāna, which is free from becoming, and it is therefore called gotrabhū." Or, "Arising from its object of the continuous process of arising of mentality and corporeality, the mind plunges headlong towards the object of Nibbāna, free from the continuous process of becoming."

The Milindapañhā states: "The mind of the meditator who is contemplating and taking note of one phenomenon after another, step by step, overcomes the continuous stream of mentality and corporeality, and plunges into the state where the stream of mentality and corporeality comes to cessation."

At first the meditator contemplates the ever-arising phenomena of mentality and corporeality as manifested in the acts of thinking, touching, hearing, seeing and so on. He perceives only a continuous and apparently endless stream of mental and corporeal phenomena. While he is thus contemplating on the endless phenomena of mentality and corporeality and reflecting on their impermanence, suffering and voidness of self, 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 towards gotrabhū consciousness whereas the descending is the realization of Nibbāna by means of Noble Path and Fruition. "Oh, great King, the meditator having practiced meditation in a correct manner, and plunging into where there is cessation of the phenomena of mentality, is said to have realized Nibbāna." This is the textual account of how vuṭṭhānagāminī vipassanā and the Path and Fruition, are realized. Meditators have found this account to be in conformity with what their personal experience.

How the texts and experience conform: The meditator generally begins by observing the consciousness of touch and thinking or acts of hearing, seeing and so on; in short, contemplating on the nature of the five groups of grasping.

As stated earlier, at the bhanga ñāna stage, the meditator constantly notes the rapid dissolution of mental and corporeal phenomena and finds them to be dreadful, fearsome. This leads him to regard them as baneful and disgusting.

Wishing to be free of them, he strives harder till he reaches the stage of sankhārupekkhā ñāna, when he views all things with equanimity. When this sankhār-upekkhā ñāna is fully perfected, there arise in him very fast moving and distinct vuṭṭhānagāmirinī and anuloma ñānas, and the meditator descends into a state that is completely void, where all objects and acts of contemplation cease. This is the realization of Nibbāna by means of the Noble Path and Fruition, elevating an ordinary worldling into the state of a Stream Enterer; a Stream Enterer into that of a Once Returner; a Once Returner into that of a Non-Returner and finally a Non-Returner into an Arahat. The Anattalakkhana Sutta gives the following description of such transformations.

From Distaste To Noble Path And Fruition

"Being wearied, he becomes passion-free and the Noble Path is developed. In his freedom from passion, and the Noble Path being developed, he is emancipated from the outflows (āsava) and defilements (kilesa)."

The meditator develops from the stage of sammasana ñāna to that of bhanga ñāna by contemplating on the impermanent, suffering and not-self nature of phenomena. The Blessed One was referring to this development in the words Evaṁ passaṁ -- "Seeing thus" -- in the above text. The stage from bhanga to sankhār-upekkhā and anuloma was described as "nibbindati," feeling wearied or repulsed. Then comes nibbindaṁ virajjati, virāgā vimuccati: "when repulsed, he grows wearied; when wearied, he becomes free from passion; when free from passion, he becomes emancipated, to describe the develop-ment of the knowledge of the Path and Fruition. A very concise description, perfectly matching with the practical experience of meditators.

How The Experience And Description Match

As sankhārupekkhā ñāna gets stronger-, extra-ordinary knowledge begins to rapidly appear. The meditator whose development of the feeling of disgust is not yet strong enough to abandon mentality and corporeality may be overtaken by anxiety: "What is going to happen? Am I about to die?" If anxiety appears the concentration gets weakened, but when the feeling of disenchantment is strong anxiety does not arise, and the meditator continues to contemplate effortlessly and smoothly. Soon he descends into the condition where there is freedom from passion and attachment and complete cessation of all mental and corporeal formations. This is emancipation from defilements and taints (āsava).

When descending without any attachment into where there is cessation, by means of the first Path (sotāpattimagga), the meditator becomes liberated from the defilements of false views (diṭṭhāsava), from ignorance which is associated with doubts and scepticism and from the grosser forms of sense-desire which may lead to the Nether regions. This is emancipation by virtue of Fruition of Stream Entry which is the resultant of the Stream Entry Path.

When descending to where there is cessation by means of the second Path, Once Returner, there is freedom from the gross types of sense desires. When descending to where there is cessation by means of the third Path, the Non-Returner, one becomes free from subtle types of sense-desires as well as from similarly fine types of ignorance. With the attainment of Arahatship (arahattamagga ñāna), there is the liberation from all kinds of defilements. This is in accordance with the statement virāgā vimuccati. When free from passions and descending to cessation, there arises emancipation by virtue of Fruition, which is the result of the Path. This emancipation is perceived vividly by a process of reflection.

Reflection Of An Arahat

The process of reflection in an Arahat is described in the concluding words of the Anattalakkhana Sutta:

This is how an Arahat reflects back on his attainment. 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 mental and corporeal aggregates and attachment to them as permanent, satisfactory, and self, there will be renewal of becoming in the cycle of existence. When one becomes free of wrong views and illusions, one is also free of attachment. The Arahat knows on reflection that he is free of wrong view and illusion with regard to the aggregates and that he has no more attachments for them. Therefore he knows that birth is exhausted for him. This is reflecting on the defilements which have been discarded and exhausted.

Here, "Holy Life" means the practice of morality, concentration, and wisdom (sīla, samādhi, paññā). Keeping the precepts or developing concentration, however, will not in themselves achieve the highest goals. These are achieved only by taking note of mental and corporeal phenomena as they occur until attainment of the Path and Fruition. Therefore it must be taken that "the Holy Life is lived" means that meditation has been practiced to the attainment of the highest goal.

"What was to be done" means practicing meditation so as to fully comprehend the Four Noble Truths. This task is accomplished with the attainment of arahattamagga. Even after having personally seen the nature of cessation by means of the three lower Paths and having known the Truth of Suffering, which is the same as knowing the nature of impermanence, suffering and not-self, certain illusions, such as the illusions of perception and illusions of consciousness, still remain to be eradicated. Because of them, there is still delight, craving and belief in conditions as pleasurable and enjoyable. The origin of craving has not yet been abandoned. So, even for the Non-Returner there is still fresh becoming. At the stage of arahattamagga, the Truth of Suffering is fully and well comprehended. All illusions of perception and consciousness are eradicated. Since there are no more illusions, there are no misconceptions about delight and enjoyment, and no opportunity for the cause of craving to arise, as it is completely eradicated. The task of knowing the Four Noble Truths is fully accomplished. That is why he reflects that there is nothing more to be done.

In this account of the Arahat's reflection, there is no direct mention of reflection on the Path, Fruition, Nibbāna and the defilements, but it should be taken that they are reflected on first, followed by reflection on the other subjects. Thus it should be taken that the reflection "The Holy Life is lived out, what has to be done is done" followed on from reflection on the Path, Fruition and Nibbāna. "The mind is free, birth is exhausted" is reflected on only after the reflection on the defilements which have been eradicated. Accounts of reflection by the Stream Enterer, the Once Returner and the Non-Retumer are given in my discourse on the Sīlavanta Sutta.

Recapitulation

The Venerable Theras who recited the Sutta at the Council recorded the following terminal passage:

Amongst the Group of Five, the Venerable Konḍañña became a Stream Enterer on the first watch of the full moon of July while listening to the discourse on the Turning of the Wheel of Dhamma (Dhammacakkap-pavattana Sutta). He must have continued with the contemplation and meditation, but he did not attain Arahatship until he heard the Anattalakkhana Sutta. Venerable Vappa become a Stream Enterer on the first waning day of July, the Venerable Bhaddiya on the second, the Venerable Mahānāma on the third and the Venerable Assaji on the fourth waning day of July respectively. All five of them, Stream Enterers at the time of listening to this Anattalakkhana Sutta, contemplated on the five aggregates as "This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self"; impermanent, suffering and not-self. They attained to the three higher stages of knowledge, step by step and became Arahats. According to the Commentary to the Paṭisambhidā, they gained Arahatship just at the end of the discourse by reflecting on the reaching.

It was in the year 103 of the great Era. Counting back from this year (1963) it was 2,552 years ago. That year, on the fifth waning day of July, at the completion of the discourse on the Anattalakkhana Sutta, there appeared six Arahats, including the Blessed One, in the human world. It is very inspiring to visualize this scene at the Deer Sanctuary near Vārānasī, with the Blessed One teaching the Anattalakkhana Sutta and the Group of Five monks, listening attentively and attaining to 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 July, the Blessed One gave the discourse on the Anattalakkhana Sutta to the Group of Five monks. Listening to the discourse and contemplating on the teaching, all five monks became freed from defilements and attained to Arahatship.

We pay reverential homage with raised hands, palms together, to the All Enlightened One and the Group of Five, who were the first six Arahats, completely free from defilements, at the beginning of the Buddha's Dispensation.

Concluding Words

May all readers, by virtue of your respectful attention to this discourse on the Anattalakkhana Sutta, contemplate as instructed on the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness, noting them at each moment of arising as "not mine, not me, not my self," and perceiving them rightly and well as incessantly arising and ceasing, as impermanent, suffering and not-self, and thereby quickly attain Nibbāna, the end of all sufferings, through the Path and Fruition.

Glossary

Ādīnava ñāna: See The Sixteen Stages of Insight Knowledge (p. 258)

Adukkhamasukha: "neither happiness nor suffering", one of the three kinds of feeling (vedanā).

Akusala: unwholesome, unskillful.

Anāgāmi: See Noble One.

Anāgāmimagga: See Noble One.

Anattā: not-self.

Anicca: impermanence.

Aniccānupassanā ñāna: insight into impermanence.

Āpo: the water element, cohesion.

Arahat: See Noble One.

Arahattamagga: See Noble One.

Ariyamagga: the Noble Path; the attainment of the Noble Path is commensurate with transcendent insight.

Ariyamagga ñāna: insight knowledge of the Noble Path.

Ariyaphala: Noble Fruit: see magga and phala

Āsava: outflow, canker: the four deep-rooted seeds of defilements: kāmāsava (sensual desire), bhavāsava (becoming), diṭṭhāsava (views) and avijjāsava (ignorance)

Assaji, Venerable: one the Group of Five who heard the Buddha's first Sermon and became his first five bhikkhu disciples.

Atman: self.

Attā: self.

Āvajjana citta: apprehending, averting consciousness.

Bhanga ñāna: See The Sixteen Stages of Insight Knowledge. Bhaddiya, Venerable: one of the Group of Five who heard the Buddha's first sermon and became his first five bhikkhu disciples.

Bhavanga: latent or inactive consciousness. See The Functions of Consciousness (p. 259).

Bhāvanā: development, cultivation, meditation.

Bhaya ñāna: See The Sixteen Stages of Insight Knowledge.

Bhikkhu: a Buddhist monk

Bojjhanga: Enlightenment Factors; sati (mindfulness) dhamma-vicaya (investigation of dhamma), viriya (effort), pīti (rapture), passaddhi (calm), samādhi (concentration), upekkhā (equanimity).

Brahma: a "god," a being in one of the higher celestial realms.

Cakkhuviññāna: eye-consciousness

Cetanā: intention

Citta vithī: the mental process. See The Functions of Consciousness (p.259).

Cuti citta: the "death mind" or death consciousness; the last moment of consciousness before death. See The Functions of Consciousness.

Deathless: Nibbāna.

Deva: a celestial being.

Dhamma: the Truth, the Buddha's teaching.

Dhātu: element.

Diṭṭhāsava: see Āsava.

Dukkha: suffering; unpleasant feeling, one of the three types of feeling (vedanā).

Ehi bhikkhu ordination: "Come, bhikkhu," the words used by the Buddha in the early stages of the Dispensation to admit a man into the Order of Monks. As the Order grew, this informal admittance was replaced by a more formal procedure conducted by a quorum of at least five monks.

Foundations of Mindfulness: See Satipaṭṭhāna.

Four Noble Truths: (1): the Truth of Suffering; (2) the Truth of the Cause of Suffering; (3) the Truth of the Cessation of Suffering; (4) the Truth of the Way leading to the Cessation of Suffering.

Fruit: See magga and phala

Gati nimitta: "destination image," a sign appearing in consciousness just before cuti citta, the last moment of consciousness before death.

Gotrabhū: See The Sixteen Stages of Insight Knowledge.

Group of Five: the group of five mendicants who had previously practiced with the Bodhisatta and who listened to the Buddha's First Sermon and subsequently became his first five bhikkhu disciples.

Hadāya vatthu: the "heart base," the seat of consciousness.

Jīva: life, the life principle.

Javana: See The Functions of Consciousness (p.259).

Jhāna: "absorption," advanced states of concentration.

Kāmāvacara: the "sensual realm," as opposed to the realms of form and formlessness.

Kamma: intentional action.

Kamma nimitta: an image appearing in consciousness representing a certain act of kamma just before the moment of death.

Kāraka attā: "active" or "agent" self.

Khandha: "group," "aggregate;" the five groups of formations that make up existence: rūpa (corporeality); vedanā (feeling), saññā (perception); sankhāra (volitional activities); viññāna (consciousness).

Khaya, vaya: cessation and dissolution.

Kilesa: mental defilements.

Kiriyā citta: "active mind".

Konḍañña, Venerable: one of the Group of Five who heard the Buddha's first sermon and became his first five bhikkhu disciples; he was the first to see the Dhamma, and as a result was given the name Aññā Konḍañña: "Konḍañña who knows".

Kusala javana citta: skillful impulse mind, skillful impulse.

Magga and phala: Path and Fruit; the experience of enlightenment is divided again at all four stages into two further stages, experience of the Path, and experience of the Fruit, but both are virtually the same.

Mahānama, Venerable: one of the Group of Five who heard the Buddha's first sermon and became his first five bhikkhu disciples.

Majjhima Nikāya: One of the Five nikāyas of the Sutta Piṭaka, the collections of discourses.

Māna: conceit, one of the ten fetters (saṁyojana). Note the distinction between māna and another of the ten fetters, sakkāyadiṭṭhi, which is self view. Māna is only given up on the attainment of Arahatship, while sakkāyadiṭṭhi is given up on the attainment of Stream Entry. See also Noble One.

Mano: mind.

Manodvārāvajjana: "apprehension by the mind door". See The Functions of Consciousness, Āvajjana.

Manodvāravithī: the thought process.

Muñcitukamyatā ñāna: See The Sixteen Stages of Insight Knowledge.

Ñāna: gnosis, vision.

Nibbāna: the Unconditioned, the Deathless, Enlightenment. Nibbidā ñāna: See The Sixteen Stages of Insight Knowledge.

Niriya: Hell.

Nirodha: cessation.

Nivāsī attā: continuous self.

Noble One: One who has experienced transcendent insight and thus removed defilements. There are four main classes of Noble One:

The first stage of transcendent insight is known as sotāpatti magga, attainment of Stream Entry. One who attains this level of insight is called a sotapanna (Stream Enterer) as he has "entered the stream to Nibbāna" and is assured of final enlightenment in no more than seven lifetimes. Three of the ten fetters (saṁyojana) are removed: sakkāyadiṭṭhi, personality belief; sīlabbataparāmāsa, attachment to rites and rituals; and vicikicchā, doubt.

The second stage of transcendent insight is known as sakadāgāmimagga, attainment of "Once Returning." One who reaches this stage is called a sakadāgāmi, a "Once Returner" as he is said to be assured of full enlightenment in no more than one more birth. A Once Returner removes no further fetters, but mitigates the power of greed, hatred and delusion in the mind.

The third stage of transcendent insight is known as anāgāmi magga, attainment of "Non-Returning." One who reaches this stage is called an anāgāmi, a Non Returner, and is assured of full enlightenment without returning to the sensual realm. A Non-Returner gives up two more fetters, kāmarāga, sensual desire and paṭigha, aversion.

The fourth and final stage of transcendent insight is known as Arahatship, full enlightenment.

An Arahat is fully enlightened, having given up all ten fetters that bind the mind to saṁsāra. In addition to the first five, this includes rūparāga, desire for states of form (i.e., jhāna), arūparāga, desire for states of formlessness (i.e., the formless jhānas), uddhacca, restlessness, māna, conceit and avijjā, ignorance.

Pīti: rapture.

Paṭhavī: the earth element.

Paṭiccasamuppāda: the Principle of Dependent Origination.

Paṭisankhāra ñāna: See The Sixteen Stages of Insight Knowledge.

Paṭisandhi citta: "re-linking consciousness" See The Functions of Consciousness.

Pañcadvārāvajjana: "apprehension by the five sense doors". See The Functions of Consciousness.

Paccekabuddha: a "lone Buddha", one who is fully self-enlightened but who lacks the inclination or ability to teach others.

Pāramita: accumulated virtue.

Parinibbāna: "Final Nibbāna," the death of a Buddha or an Arahat.

Path: The Noble Path, the Eight fold Path of practice leading to Nibbāna; also used to refer to the attainment of transcendent insight: See magga and phala.

Peta: a hungry ghost.

Phala: See magga and phala.

Phassa: sense contact.

Puthujjana: an unenlightened being.

Rūpa: material form, corporeality; visual form.

Sīla: morality, restraint.

Saṁsāra: "wandering," the world of delusion.

Sankhāra: volitional formations, one of the five khandhas; also all conditioned things.

Sankhārakkhandha: the khandha of volitional formations. Sankhārupekkha ñāna: See The Sixteen Stages of Insight Knowledge.

Sankhata: conditioned things.

Saññā: perception, one of the five khandhas.

Sakadāgāmi: a Once Returner; see Noble One.

Sakadāgāmimagga: the Path of Once Returner.

Sakkāyadiṭṭhi: selfview, personality belief; one of the ten fetters (saṁyojana). Note the Distinction between sakkāyadiṭṭhi and another of the ten fetters, māna, which is conceit. Māna is only given up on the attainment of Arahatship, while sakkāyadiṭṭhi is given up on the attainment of Stream Entry. See also Noble One.

Sāmanera: a Buddhist novice.

Samādhi: concentration.

Samana: a "striver," a religious practicer.

Sāmi attā: controlling self.

Sammasana ñāna: See The Sixteen Stages of Insight Knowledge.

Sampaṭicchana: See The Functions of Consciousness.

Santīrana: See The Functions of Consciousness.

Satipaṭṭhāna: Foundations of mindfulness, the areas to which mindfulness is to be directed: body, feelings, mind and dhammas (natural phenomena). Satipaṭṭhāna meditation is meditation in which these four Foundations of Mindfulness are noted, rather than the mind being simply absorbed into a single object.

Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta: the Sutta in which the Buddha puts forth the teaching on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness.

Sotāpanna: Stream Enterer; See Noble One.

Sotāpattimagga: attainment of Stream Entry.

Stream Enterer: See Sotāpanna.

Sukha: happiness; pleasant feeling, one of the three kinds of feeling (vedanā).

Sutta: a teaching recorded in the Sutta Piṭaka of the Pali Canon.

Tadālambana: See The Functions of Consciousness.

Tejo: the fire element.

U: a respectful title used to precede a man's name in Burma.

Uccheda: annihilation, one of the two extreme views. Udayabbaya ñāna: See The Sixteen Stages of Insight Knowledge.

Upādānakkhandha: the grasped at groups (khandha).

Upekkhā: equanimity, one of the three types of feelings (vedanā) (also called adukkhamasukha vedanā: neither pleasant nor painful feeling); upekkhā as one of the three feelings should be distinguished from upekkhā in the higher meaning of equanimity as a skillful quality of mind, as in the Seven Factors of Enlightenment.

Vappa, Venerable: one of the Group of Five who heard the Buddha's first sermon and became his first five bhikkhu disciples.

Vāyo: the wind element.

Vedaka attā: a self that experiences feelings.

Vedanā: feeling, one of the five khandhas.

Vedanakkhandha: the khandha of feeling.

Viññāna: consciousness, one of the five khandhas.

Vipāka citta: resultant consciousness.

Vipassanā: insight.

Vipassanā ñāna: insight knowledge; See The Sixteen Stages of Insight Knowledge.

Virāga: dispassion.

Voṭṭhapana: See The Functions of Consciousness.

Vuṭṭhānagāminī: See The Sixteen Stages of Insight Knowledge.

Worldling: an unenlightened being.

-ooOoo-

-ooOoo-