Chapter 16
(Tape 33 / Ps: 1-31)
The next one is the faculties and truths. There are 22 faculties, namely, eye faculty, ear faculty and so on. This is the order given in the Visuddhi Magga. The order is a little
different than that given in The Manual of Abhidhamma.
Then the Commentator explains the words ‘cakkhu’, ‘sota’ and so on. We are referred back to the bases. Please look at the last three in the fourth column of the handout - I-shall-. Final-knowledge-faculty, final-knower. We have understanding faculty, I-shall faculty, final-knowledge faculty, and final-knower faculty. The last three are also understanding. Understanding is paÒÒÈ and the last three are also paÒÒÈ.
The first one, I-shall etc., is paÒÒÈ at the moment of first Magga. Final knowledge faculty means paÒÒÈ at the moment of first Fruit, and then at second Path and Fruit, third Path and Fruit and at fourth Path. Final-knower is the faculty arising with the fourth Fruit consciousness. The first one is first Magga (first Path). The middle one is the six in between. The last one is the fourth Fruit. They are given different names here - I shall come to know the unknown faculty, the final knowledge faculty, and final knower faculty. They are explained in paragraph 3.
Then the word ‘indriya, whose English translation is faculty, is explained in paragraph 4 and paragraph 5. When explaining the PÈÄi word ‘indriya’, the Commentators just followed the aphorism given in the Sanskrit grammar by PÈÓini. You can find the aphorism in footnote 2. There you see “PÈÓini V, 2, 93 Indriyam indralingam indradrstam indrasretam indrjustam indradattam iti vÈ.” This is the aphorism found in the Sanskrit grammar of PÈÓini. When explaining the word ‘indriya’ here, the Commentator, Venerable Buddhaghosa, followed this aphorism. Only the last one is not taken, indradattam. In the word ‘indriya’ there is the word ‘inda’ or ‘indra’. It is explained here that the word ‘inda’ or ‘indra’ means good or bad kamma, kusala or akusala; or it means the Buddha. If you understand this, then you will understand all. In the word ‘indriya’ we have the word ‘inda’ or ‘indra’. Inda or indra is explained to mean two things. One is what? Kusala and akusala. And the other is the Buddha.
Then there is the ‘ya’ or the ‘iya’ in the word ‘indriya’. The suffix is explained to mean many things. That is what here? The mark, prepared by, taught by, seen by, fostered by. When we take ‘iya’ to mean mark, then the word ‘indra’ means kamma, so the mark of kamma. The mark of kamma is called ‘faculty’ here. By looking at one’s eye, we can say that he has good kamma in the past or he has bad kamma in the past because good kamma creates good eye sensitivity and bad kamma creates bad eye sensitivity. Some people don’t have to use eye glasses all their lives, but some people have to use eye glasses from their childhood. That depends on their kamma. The eye sensitivity is the result of kamma. We all have had bad kamma in the past because we have to use glasses. You have good kamma in the past.
Student: Just for the eyes.
Teacher: We know kamma from the eye, ear and so on. So they are called ‘the mark of kamma’. It is translated here as the mark of a ruler. ‘Ruler’ here means good or bad kamma. The second meaning is prepared by kamma. That means made by or caused by kamma. ‘Ruler’ here also means kamma. The third meaning is being taught by. It is not taught by kamma, but taught by the Buddha. The third meaning is that which is taught by the Buddha. The fourth meaning is seen by. Again it is seen by the Buddha. The last meaning is fostered by, fostered by the Buddha. That means ‘in his cultivation of domain and some in his cultivation of development.” ‘Cultivation of domain’ simply means that he takes them as object. ‘Cultivation of development’ means that he develops them. The faculties were cultivated by the Buddha. That is why they are called ‘indriya’. How did the Buddha cultivate them? He cultivated them in two ways. One is taking them as object. That means when the Buddha took NibbÈna as object and entered into attainment, he was fostering NibbÈna by way of taking it as object. At other times he may be practicing or he may be in some other attainment, so in that case he is in the cultivation of development. So the Buddha acts towards Dhamma in two ways - taking as object and making them happen in his mind. ‘Fostered by a ruler’ means fostered by the Buddha. So there are all together five meanings. The first meaning is mark of kamma. The second meaning is prepared by kamma. The third meaning is taught by the Buddha. The fourth meaning is seen by the Buddha. The fifth meaning is fostered by the Buddha.
As to characteristic and as to order are not difficult to understand. Paragraph 9 “As to divided and undivided: here there is only division of the life faculty.” Only the life faculty has division. The others are only one. “For that is twofold as the material life faculty and the immaterial life faculty.” You know there are two kinds of jÊvita - nÈma jÊvita and r|pa jÊvita (mental jÊvita and physical jÊvita). It is of two kinds and the others are of one kind. “There is no division of the others.”
Then we have their function. Since they are called ‘faculties’ or ‘indriyas’, that means they are predominate. So they make others follow their wish. That is what is meant by the word ‘indriya’. ‘Indriya’ means making other people follow your wish. That is indriya. Or it may be exercising his wish over others. So here “The eye faculty’s function is to cause by its own keenness, dullness, etc., the occurrence of eye consciousness and associated states, etc., in a mode parallel to its own.” That means making them follow its own mode. That means when you have good eye sensitivity, you have good eye consciousness. If you have bad eye sensitivity, you have bad eye consciousness. The keenness or dullness (I don’t think ‘slowness’ is good here.) etc., of eye consciousness is governed by the keenness or dullness of eye sensitivity. That is why eye sensitivity has something like authority, exercising authority over. Then the different functions are mentioned and they are not difficult to understand.
Towards the end of paragraph 10 “That of the final-knowledge faculty is both to attenuate and abandon respectively lust, ill will, etc., and to subject conascent states to its own mastery.” ‘Final knowledge’ means the knowledge between the first Magga and the last Fruit. The understanding concomitant with the first Path is called ‘I shall and so on’. The knowledge or understanding concomitant with first Fruit through the fourth Magga is called ‘final knowledge’. “The final-knowledge faculty is both to attenuate and abandon respectively lust, ill will, etc.” ‘Attenuate’ refers to second Path because the second Path does not eradicate any more mental defilements, but it does make the remaining mental defilements weaker and weaker. So ‘attenuates’ is for the second Magga. ‘Abandon’ is for third and fourth Magga. The third Magga abandons sensual desire and ill will all together. Then the fourth Magga eradicates the remaining mental defilements. So ‘attenuate’ refers to second Magga and ‘abandon’ refers to third and fourth Magga. “That of the final-knower faculty is both to abandon endeavor in all functions.” That is because it has already done its own duty and there is no more to be done.
As to plane - that means which faculty belongs to which plane. The faculties of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and so on belong to kÈmÈvacara (sense-sphere plane) because they are all r|pas. “The mind faculty, life faculty, equanimity faculty, faculties of faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration and understanding are included in the four planes.” That means they belong to all four planes - kÈmÈvacara, r|pÈvacara, ar|pÈvacara and lokuttara. Mind faculty is consciousness. Life faculty and others are mental states (cetasikas). So they are included in all four planes. “The joy faculty (somanassa) is included in three planes, namely sense-sphere, fine-material sphere, and supramundane (not the immaterial sphere). The last three are supramundane only.” That is ‘I shall come to know’ and so on. “This is how the exposition should be known here as to plane.” So according to this we understand that eye faculty belongs to sense-sphere, ear faculty belongs to sense-sphere and so on. Mind faculty belongs to four planes and so on. ‘Four planes’ means sense-sphere (kÈmÈvacara), fine material sphere (r|pÈvacara), immaterial sphere (ar|pÈvacara) and supramundane sphere (lokuttara). Lokuttara is also called a ‘sphere’.
Please look at the sheet. Let us go through the bases, elements and faculties. In order to please the listeners or to suit the susceptibility of listeners the Buddha taught in different ways. One and the same thing is called base, element, faculty and so on. Here I colored them. Eye base, eye element and eye faculty are one and the same thing. They are actually eye sensitivity. They mean the same thing, so they are the same color. Sometimes it is called eye base, sometimes eye element, sometimes eye faculty. So we have ear base, nose base, tongue base, body base, ear element, nose element, tongue element, body element, ear faculty, nose faculty, tongue faculty, body faculty. It is the same thing. And then visible data base and visible data element are the same thing. The same is true for sound, odor, flavor and tangible data with respect to bases and elements.
Mind base is a little different. ‘Mind base’ means all cittas. So in the elements mind base is divided into seven. There are mind element, eye consciousness and so on. They are called ‘viÒÒÈÓa dhÈtu’, seven consciousness elements. Mind base is divided into seven elements - mind element, eye consciousness element and so on. ‘Mind element’ means again #28, #18 and #25 in the chart. Those are the mind element. Eye consciousness element means #13 and #20. Ear consciousness element is #14 and #21. Nose consciousness element is #15 and #22. Tongue consciousness element is #16 and #23. Body consciousness is #17 and #24. All the others are mind consciousness element. And among the faculties mind faculty and mind base are the same. Mind base means all consciousness and mind faculty also means all consciousness.
Now we come to dhamma base, mental data base. I want to call it dhamma base. Dhamma base and dhamma element are the same. In faculties however they are mentioned in different ways. There are femininity faculty, masculinity faculty, life faculty, pleasure (sukha), pain (dukkha), joy (somanassa), grief (domanassa), equanimity (upekkhÈ). Pleasure and pain are bodily pleasure and bodily pain. Joy, grief and equanimity are mental. Then there are faith faculty, energy, mindfulness, concentration, and understanding. Then there are the other three kinds of understanding also. They all belong to dhamma element or dhamma base (no color). You may color them some other color or leave them as they are. So femininity belongs to dhamma element and to dhamma base. The same is true for the others. This way you have a clear vision of bases, elements and faculties. When you read the Visuddhi Magga again, please have it ready and refer to it.
We can go into the truths (sacca) a little. The PÈÄi word ‘sacca’ is translated as truth here. The meaning will come later. “Herein as to class: the meanings of [the truths of] suffering, etc., are analyzed as four in each case that are ‘real, not unreal, not otherwise’ and must be penetrated by those penetrating suffering, etc., according as it is said.” There are said to be four meanings for each truth. Suffering has the meaning of oppressing, being formed, burning and changing. These four meanings belong to the first Truth. Then these meanings belong to the second Truth - accumulating, source, bondage and impeding. The third Truth’s meaning is escape, seclusion, being unformed and deathlessness. And the fourth Truth has the meaning of outlet, cause, seeing and predominance.
“Likewise suffering’s meaning of oppressing, meaning of being formed, meaning of burning, meaning of change are its meaning of penetration and so on. So suffering, etc., should be understood according to the four meanings analyzed in each case.” When you look at dukkha, you see that it is oppressing, that it is being formed, that is burning, that it is changing.
Then there is as to derivation, as to division by character and so on. The definitions of dukkha, samudaya, nirodha and nirodha-gÈminÊ paÔipadÈ are given in paragraphs 16, 17, 18, 19. The meanings may be fanciful. If you take delight in finding out the meanings of words, it may be interesting.
Dukkha is said to come from ‘du’ and ‘kha’. Du is bad. “The word ‘du’ (bad) is met with in the sense of vile.” Then ‘kham’ means empty. So something which is bad, something which is vile and empty is called ‘dukkha’. “And the first Truth is vile because it is the haunt of many dangers, and it is empty because it is devoid of the lastingness, beauty, pleasure, and self, conceived by rash people. So it is called ‘dukkhaÑ (badness)’ = suffering, pain), because of vileness and emptiness. If we do not go further and apply it to sukha, it is all right. But if we try to explain sukha in this way, we run into difficulties. The word ‘sukha’ means happiness. Let us say ‘su’ means good. If ‘kha’ is to mean devoid of lastingness, devoid of beauty, devoid of pleasure, devoid of self, then what about NibbÈna? NibbÈna is called the highest sukha. NibbÈna lasts forever. NibbÈna could be said to be beauty. NibbÈna is pleasure. NibbÈna is not self. If we apply similarly the explanation given here to sukha, then we run into trouble. It is just an explanation of the word.
Samudaya has three parts - ‘sam’, ‘ud’ and ‘aya’. Sam has the meaning of concourse or coming together. ‘Ud’ or ‘U’ means rising up. Then ‘aya’ denotes a reason. So we get the coming together, rising up reason. That is the meaning of samudaya, the Second Noble Truth, the origin of suffering. “This Second Truth is the reason for the arising of suffering when combined with the remaining conditions.” So it is the reason for the arising of suffering when it is combined together with other conditions. That means it is not the only condition for dukkha. It is the prominent condition for dukkha. There are other conditions like ignorance. Without ignorance there can be no craving. Craving is here the origin of dukkha, but it does not mean that craving is the only origin of dukkha. It is the prominent one. That is why it is called the origin of dukkha. But others like ignorance are also the origin of dukkha. When craving comes into combination with other conditions it produces dukkha. It is the reason or cause for the arising of suffering when it is combined with the remaining conditions.
The next one is nirodha, the Third Noble Truth, NibbÈna. Nirodha here is divided into ‘ni’ and ‘rodha’. ‘Ni’ means no or absent. ‘Rodha’ means a prison. ‘Rodha’ really means restriction. When you are in prison, you are restricted. NibbÈna is the opposite of that - no restriction, freedom. NibbÈna is called ‘dukkha nirodha’. It is just translated as the cessation of suffering.
Then we have nirodha-gÈminÊ paÔipadÈ. That is the road leading to cessation. The Fourth Noble Truth is called ‘dukkha nirodha-gÈminÊ paÔipadÈ (the way leading to the cessation of suffering)’.
In paragraphs 20, 21, 22 the PÈÄi word ‘Ariya Sacca’ is explained in four ways. According to paragraph 20 Ariya Sacca is the truth to be penetrated by the Ariya or the Ariya penetrable truth becomes Ariya Truth.
According to the first part of paragraph 21 ‘Ariya Truth’ means the Truth of the Ariya. ‘Ariya’ means the Buddha, so the Truth of the Buddha or Ariya’s Truth, Buddha’s Truth.
The third one in paragraph 21 beginning with “or alternatively, according to that passage ‘Ariya Truth’ means that Truth which makes people into Ariyas. That means when you penetrate the Truth, you become an Ariya. So Truth that makes people into Ariyas.
The fourth one is paragraph 22. The PÈÄi word ‘Ariya Sacca’ means the Truth which is real, the Truth which is real, not unreal. The word ‘Ariya Sacca’ is explained in four ways. It is usually translated as Noble Truth. In paragraph 22 ‘noble’ means ‘true’, true Truth or real Truth.
Paragraph 24 “As to ‘meaning’ firstly, what is the meaning of truth?” The word ‘sacca’ (truth) is explained. “For the eye of those who examine it with the eye of understanding, it is not misleading like an illusion.” ‘Misleading’ really means untrue. It is not untrue like an illusion. Illusion is the translation of the word ‘mÈyÈ’ which can mean magic. Magic is untrue. When you go to a magic show, they show you things that are untrue, but you think they are true. So it is like magic.
Paragraph 25 “There is no pain but is affliction
And naught that is not pain afflicts.”
The meaning is there is no dukkha which does not afflict, and there is nothing other than dukkha that afflicts.
Paragraph 26 tracing out the meaning - here the meanings of the word ‘sacca’ are given. ‘Sacca’ can mean what? What is the first one? Verbal truth. Saying something true is also called ‘sacca’. The next one is abstinence from lying is also called ‘sacca’. The third one is what? Truth is views. View is called ‘truth’. “And in such passages as ‘Truth is one, there is no second’ it is, as truth in the ultimate sense, both NibbÈna and the Path. In such passages as ‘Of the four truths how many are profitable?’ It is Noble Truth. And here too it is proper as Noble Truth. This is how the exposition should be understood as to tracing out the meaning.” Sometimes the Commentary has the habit of showing us many meanings of the word. Then it says among the meanings this is proper here, that is proper there. That means giving the meanings the word can denote and then choosing the meaning that is appropriate here. So ‘sacca’ can mean verbal truth, abstinence from lying and so on. But what is proper here is just Noble Truth.
The next passages are not difficult. Paragraph 31, as to expounding birth and so on - from here comes the detailed exposition of the Four Noble Truths. The First Noble Truth is described by the Buddha as The Noble Truth of Suffering. It is expounded as “Birth is suffering, aging is suffering, death is suffering, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair, are suffering, association with the unloved is suffering, separation from the loved is suffering, not to get what one wants is suffering, in short, the five aggregates [as object] of clinging are suffering.” These explanations you find in the first sermon, the setting in motion of the wheel of Dhamma. Then he explains them in detail. We will not come to the end of the explanations tonight. Let’s stop here.
SÈdhu! SÈdhu! SÈdhu!
(Tape 34 / Ps: 32-74)
In paragraph 4 I want to correct something. ‘A’ is mark of kamma. ‘Mark of a ruler’ means the mark of kamma. ‘Mark of a ruler’ just means mark of kamma. ‘B’ is taught by the Buddha. There is says ‘ruler’. ‘Ruler’ means the Buddha, so taught by the Buddha actually. ‘C’ should be seen by the Buddha. ‘Seen by a ruler’ is seen by the Buddha. Then ‘D’ is prepared by kamma. That means the result of kamma. ‘E’ is fostered by the Buddha. So A. mark of kamma, B. taught by the Buddha, C. seen by the Buddha, D. prepared by kamma, E. fostered by the Buddha. These are the meanings given for the word ‘indriya’ in PÈÄi.
Today we come to the explanation of birth and so on. The Truth of Suffering - Birth - paragraph 32 gives the meanings of the word, the meanings of the PÈÄi word ‘jÈti’ can have. The word ‘jÈti’ can have many meanings. Its meanings are given here in this paragraph. From this paragraph on the explanations of dukkha are given again - birth is suffering, aging is suffering, death is suffering and so on. These are explained one by one. Paragraph 32 gives the meanings that the PÈÄi word ‘jÈti’ can have. Then the meaning that is appropriate here is pointed out at the end. JÈti has how many meanings?
“For in the passage ‘[He recollects..] one birth (jÈti), two births’ it is becoming.” That means it is one life, two lives. “In the passage ‘VisÈkhÈ, there is a kind (jÈti) of ascetics called NigaÓÔhas (Jains)’ it is a monastic order.” In this passage the word ‘jÈti’ means a monastic order or something like a religious denomination. “In the passage ‘Birth (jÈti) is included in two aggregates’ it is the characteristic of whatever is formed.” That means the first phase of existence. You know that there are three phases of existence - arising, continuation and death. So it is the first phase of existence that is arising. “It is the characteristic of whatever is formed.” That means all formations have the characteristic of arising, continuation and disappearing. In this passage jÈti means that. “In the passage ‘His birth is due to the first consciousness arisen, the first cognition manifested, in the mother’s womb’, it is rebirth-relinking.” In that passage the word ‘jÈti’ means real relinking at the first moment in one’s life. “In the passage ‘As soon as he was born, Œnanda, the Bodhisatta..’ it is parturition.” (That is the act of being born.) “In the passage ‘One who is not rejected and despised on account of birth’ it is clan.” Here ‘jÈti’ or ‘birth’ means clan. One is not rejected or despised because one is born in a low caste or whatever. “In the passage (This was uttered by Venerable A~gulimÈla.) ‘Sister, since I was born with the Noble birth’ it is the Noble Ones’ virtue.” Here ‘birth’ means becoming a Noble Person.
“Here it should be regarded as the aggregates that occur from the time of rebirth-linking up to the exit from the mother’s womb in the case of the womb-born, and as only the aggregates of rebirth-linking in the case of the rest.” Here the word ‘jÈti’ means the aggregates that occur from the time of rebirth-linking up to the exit from the mother’s womb. That means during pregnancy. That is called ‘jÈti’ here. “And as only the aggregates of rebirth-linking in the case of the rest” - now there are beings who are womb-born and there are beings who are born spontaneously. For those who are born spontaneously just the aggregates at the moment of relinking are called ‘jÈti’. “But this is only an indirect treatment. In the direct sense, however, it is the first manifestation of any aggregates that are manifested in living beings when they are born anywhere that is called ‘birth’.” First it says birth is from conception until the real birth for human beings. But for other beings like the devas it is just the relinking.
In paragraph 32 although it is not important here, the translation of one of the passages is quite wrong. In the middle of the paragraph “His birth is due to the first consciousness arisen, the first cognition manifested, in the mother’s womb.” That is wrong. This passage comes from the Vinaya PiÔaka. A person can become a monk only when he is 20 years of age. If he is younger than 20 years of age, then he cannot become a monk. ’20 years’ means 20 years from conception, not from birth. Buddha was saying that. A monk was ordained reckoning from the conception. Later on he was doubtful about whether he was really a monk or not. It was reported to the Buddha and the Buddha said that it was all right. So one must reckon 20 years from the moment of conception. That is the passage here. But the translation here is not correct. He misunderstood one word.
Student: Is time in the womb counted as nine months?
Teacher: Mostly we count it as ten months. But to be on the safe side we do not actually count the ten months for ordination because sometimes people are born in seven months or whatever. For me I was ordained when I was 19 years and 7 months. This is a passage from the Vinaya PiÔaka. In the translation of Vinaya PiÔaka by I. B. Horner it is correct. You may look it up in Book of Discipline, part 4, page 120. You will get the correct translation there.
Paragraph 34 “Its characteristic is the first genesis in any [sphere of] becoming. Its function is to consign [to a sphere of becoming]. It is manifested as an emerging here from a past becoming; or it is manifested as the variedness of suffering.”
“But why is it suffering? Because it is the basis for many kinds of suffering.” Why is this birth, this jÈti, suffering? Because it is the basis for many kinds of suffering. Then the many kinds of suffering are explained here. The most important are the first three because they will be referred to again when dukkha is explained. At least you have to remember these three even if you do not remember the other ones.
The first one is what? Dukkha dukkha (intrinsic suffering). The second one is viparinÈma dukkha (suffering in change, suffering when there is change). The third one is sa~khÈra dukkha (suffering due to formation). It is suffering because they are formations. Then they are explained. There is also concealed suffering, exposed suffering, indirect suffering, and direct suffering.
“Herein, bodily and mental painful feeling are called intrinsic suffering.” That means real suffering. In PÈÄi you see the word dukkha repeated, dukkha dukkha. That means real dukkha. Real dukkha is what? Bodily and mental painful feelings. There are pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling, and neutral feeling. Here the unpleasant or painful feeling is meant, both bodily and mental. Both bodily and mental painful feeling are called ‘intrinsic suffering’ or ‘dukkha dukkha’. “Because of their individual essence, their name, and their painfulness” because they are real dukkha they are called ‘dukkha dukkha’ (intrinsic suffering).
The next “[Bodily and mental] pleasant feeling are called ‘suffering in change’.” This is good feeling, pleasant feeling, somanassa and sukha. Even these are called ‘suffering (dukkha) because when there is change there is dukkha. When you lose the good feeling, you long for that. So you are not happy. That is called ‘suffering in change’. Here even pleasant feelings are called suffering because they are a cause for the arising of pain when they change.
“Equanimous feeling and the remaining formations of the three planes (That means kÈmÈvacara, r|pÈvacara, ar|pÈvacara) are called suffering due to formations because they are oppressed by rise and fall.” Buddha said that whatever has rise and fall is impermanent. And whatever is impermanent is suffering. Whatever has rise and fall is suffering actually. Since everything in the world of formations has a beginning and an end, so everything in the world is suffering. This is called ‘sa~khÈra dukkha’. This is the widest of the dukkhas. At least try to remember these three - dukkha dukkha, viparinÈma dukkha, sa~khÈra dukkha. You cannot escape sa~khÈra dukkha. Nothing in this world can escape.
Then there are other kinds of suffering - concealed suffering, exposed suffering, indirect suffering and direct suffering. These are easy to understand. For example an earache is called ‘concealed suffering’. If you look at the person from a distance, you don’t know that he is suffering. Exposed suffering is the suffering produced by the 32 tortures. There are 32 tortures mentioned in the Suttas, very frightening tortures. When a person is tortured by one of these 32, it is exposed suffering because you can see that he is really suffering even from a distance. “Except intrinsic suffering, all given in the exposition of the truth of suffering beginning with birth are also called ‘indirect suffering’ because they are the basis for one kind of suffering or another.” They are the basis for suffering. That is why they are called ‘indirect suffering’. “But intrinsic suffering is called ‘direct suffering’.” Intrinsic suffering is painful bodily and mental feeling. That is called ‘direct suffering’.
“herein, this birth is suffering because it is the basis for the suffering in the states of loss as made evident by the Blessed One by means of a simile in the BÈlapaÓÉita Sutta, etc., and for the suffering that arises in the happy destinies in the human world and is classed as ‘rooted in the descent into the womb’ and so on.” Suffering in the descent into the womb and others are given here. The fetus is described here as being in a very painful position. I always say that I’m not so much afraid of the fetus because I don’t know. The suffering in the mother’s womb is described here.
Paragraph 39 “When the mother has a abortion” - that is not an abortion. No, he misunderstood this. The PÈÄi word is ‘gabbham|Äha’. ‘M|Äha’ means something like confused. And ‘gabbha ’ means the womb. It actually means difficult delivery. When a woman cannot give birth to a child easily, that means a difficult delivery. “When the mother has a difficult delivery, the pain that arises in him through the cutting and rending in the place where the pain arises that is not fit to be seen even by friends and intimates and companions - this is the suffering rooted in difficult delivery.” It is not ‘abortion’. If it were abortion, it would be done secretly. Here other people help her. It is not abortion but difficult delivery. The others are not difficult to understand. This is just to make you afraid of the suffering through birth and so on.
The next one is aging (jarÈ). Here also it is twofold. There are two kinds of jarÈ or aging; “as a characteristic of whatever is formed (That means the second phase of existence, continuation.), and in the case of a continuity, as the oldness of aggregates included in a single becoming, which oldness is known as ‘brokenness’ (‘Brokenness’ means broken teeth and so on.) and so on. The latter is intended here.” It is not the jarÈ which is the characteristic of formations. It is getting old. Your teeth are broken. You have white hair. You cannot see well and so on.
“This aging has as its characteristic the maturing (ripening) of aggregates. Its function is to lead on to death. It is manifested as the vanishing of youth. It is suffering because of the suffering due to formations and because it is a basis for suffering.” It is itself suffering and it is also a basis for suffering. That is why it is described as dukkha or suffering. These explanations are not difficult to understand. When you have to get old, then there is leadnness in all the limbs (That means weakness in all the limbs.), decline of the faculties (You don’t see well, you don’t hear well.), vanishing of youth, undermining of strength, loss of memory and intelligence, contempt on the part of others, and so on.
Next is death. “Death is suffering: death too is twofold, as a characteristic of the formed (That means the last phase of existence.), with reference to which it is said ‘Aging and death are included in the aggregates’, and as the severing of the connection of the life faculty in a single becoming (That means ordinary death. The severing of the life faculty or the disappearance of the life faculty is called ‘death’.), with reference to which it is said ‘So mortals are in constant fear.. that they will die’. The latter is intended here. Death with birth as its condition, death by violence, death by natural causes, death from the exhaustion of the life span, death from the exhaustion of merit are names for it.”
“It has the characteristic of a fall.” These are not difficult to understand. “its function is to disjoin. It is manifested as absence from the destiny.” ‘Destiny’ really means ‘this life’. The PÈÄi word is ‘gati’. The PÈÄi word ‘gati’ is always translated as destiny. That is why in brackets it says [in which there was the rebirth], this life. “It should be understood as suffering because it is a basis for suffering.”
Then the next one is sorrow. “Sorrow is a burning in the mind in one affected by loss of relatives and so on. (loss of relatives, loss of wealth, loss of youth, loss of health). Although in reality (not ‘in meaning’) it is the same as grief, nevertheless it has inner consuming as its characteristic” and so on. The PÈÄi word here is attha. ‘Attha’ can mean meaning or sometimes ‘attha’ means reality. Here it means reality. “Although in reality it is the same as grief (domanassa)), nevertheless it has inner consuming as its characteristic” and so on.
The next one is lamentation. The PÈÄi word is parideva. “Lamentation is verbal clamor on the part of one affected by loss of relatives and so on.” That means crying aloud, saying something. “It has crying out as its characteristic. Its function is proclaiming virtues and vices.” When someone dies, then people say that oh, he is good or oh, he is bad. “It is manifested as tumult. It is suffering because it is a state of suffering due to formations (sa~khÈra dukkha) and because it is a basis for suffering.
The next one is pain. Here it is bodily pain. Bodily pain is also suffering. It is not difficult to understand.
The next one is grief. It is mental pain (domanassa). “Its characteristic is mental oppression” and so on. “It is suffering because it is intrinsic suffering (It is real suffering.) and because it brings bodily suffering.” This mental suffering brings bodily suffering. “For those who are gripped by mental pain tear their hair, weep, thump their breasts, and twist and writhe; they throw themselves upside down, use the knife, swallow poison, hang themselves with ropes, walk into fires, and undergo many kinds of suffering.”
The last one is despair. Here he misunderstood one word again. “Despair is the same as the humor produced by excessive mental suffering in one affected by loss of relatives and so on.” The PÈÄi word is dosa. He misunderstood the word ‘dosa’ here. ‘Dosa’ can mean humor in the body. Here it is simple. Dosa is dosa. “Despair is the same as anguish produced by excessive mental suffering.” Despair is mental, not r|pa. Despair is anguish.
“Some say that it is one of the states included in the formations aggregate.” The Sub-Commentary does not say who ‘some’ were. The Sub-Commentary explained one of the states included in the formation aggregate means it is not included in the unwholesome cetasikas. It is something different from dosa, something outside the unwholesome cetasikas. This is just said for information. We have to take it as anguish. In PÈÄi it is dosa.
“Its characteristic is burning of the mind. Its function is to bemoan. It is manifested as dejection. It is suffering because it is suffering due to formations (sa~khÈra dukkha), because of the burning of the mind, and because of bodily dejection.”
Paragraph 53 gives the difference between sorrow, lamentation and despair. “Sorrow is like the cooking [of oil, etc.] in a pot over a slow fire.” So it is not so intense. “Lamentation is like its boiling over from the pot when cooking over a quick fire.” So first you are sorry and then you say something aloud. “Despair is like what remains in the pot after it has boiled over and is unable to do so any more, going on cooking in the pot till it dries up.” A portion remains in the pot which cannot spill over and goes on cooking until it dries up. Despair is like that. So in this paragraph the difference between sorrow, lamentation and despair is explained.
Then there is association with the unloved. ‘Unloved’ here means both living beings and non-living beings. “Association with the unloved is meeting with disagreeable beings and formations (inanimate things).” If you have to live with a person whom you do not like, that is dukkha. If you have to be with a car that is giving you trouble, that is dukkha. That is a disagreeable formation.
The next one is separation from the loved. “Separation from the loved is to be parted from agreeable beings and formations (inanimate things).” So now people are suffering from separation from the loved - separation from beings and also separation from their houses and so on.
The next one, not to get what one wants is also suffering. Here not to get what one wants is explained as not to get what is unobtainable. We wish for something which is unobtainable. It is not that I wish to get a car and then I do not get a car. It is dukkha, but the dukkha here means more than that. That is why we have the passage here “ ‘Oh that we were not subject to birth!’ is called suffering since one does not get what is wanted.” We are always subject to let us say old age. We say “Oh, that we were not subject to old age!” It would be good if we did not get old. However much we may not want to get old, still we get old. That is the meaning of not to get what one wants. Old age, death and also rebirth we get even though we may not want them. “Its characteristic is the wanting of an unobtainable object. Its function is to seek that. It is manifested as disappointment. It is suffering because it is a basis for suffering.”
“In short the five aggregates [as objects] of clinging are suffering.” The five aggregates are themselves suffering. Paragraph 58 “For birth etc., thus oppress the pentad of aggregates [as objects] of clinging as fire does fuel, as shooting does a target (Actually it is ‘as weapon does a target’.), as gadflies, flies etc. So a cow’s body, as reapers do a field, as village raiders do a village; and they are generated in the aggregates as weeds, creepers, etc., are on the ground, as flowers, fruits and sprouts are on trees.” The clingings oppress the five aggregates and they live on the five aggregates.
“And the aggregates [as objects] of clinging have birth as their initial suffering, aging as their medial suffering, and death as their final suffering. The suffering due to burning in one who is the victim of the pain that threatens death is sorrow. The suffering consisting in crying out by one who is unable to bear that is lamentation” and so on. All these are shown to be caused by the five aggregates of clinging. That is why the Buddha said “The five aggregates of clinging are suffering.” This is actually the philosophical meaning of the word ‘dukkha’. It is not so difficult to understand that birth is dukkha, aging is dukkha, death is dukkha and so on. But this is not so easy to understand. In order to understand this you have to understand the third kind of dukkha, sa~khÈra dukkha, suffering through formations. If you understand sa~khÈra, you can understand this.
Then the Commentator said: “It is impossible to tell it [all] without remainder, showing each kind of suffering, even [by going on doing so] for many eons, so the Blessed One said ‘In short the five aggregates of clinging are suffering’.”
Then the next one is the Truth of the Origin of Suffering. First there are the word explanations. “It is a making become again” - that means it causes rebirth. “Thus it is ‘becoming again’; becoming again is its habit, thus it ‘produces further becoming’.” These are word explanations.
The next explanation is for the expression ‘nandirÈgasahagata’ in PÈÄi. It is translated as ‘accompanied by concern and greed’. But the explanation that is given here is that it is identical with delight and greed. So it does not mean that it is accompanied by delight and greed. It is delight and greed.
If you studied the Abhidhammatthasa~gaha, you may know the word ‘sahagatÈ’. ‘SahagatÈ’ means ‘arising together with’. But sometimes the word ‘sahagatÈ’ has no meaning at all. Here the word ‘sahagatÈ’ has no special meaning like ‘arising together’ or ‘accompanied by’. So it is identical with nandirÈga or delight and greed.
“Concerned with this and that” - that means delighting with this that. “Wherever personality is generated” - that means wherever life is generated. “There is delight (not ‘concern’) with that (life).” That means according to Abhidhamma when a person takes rebirth there is rebirth thought process. In that rebirth thought process there are javanas. These javanas are always accompanied by lobha. So we begin our lives actually with lobha. We are fresh in this new life and we have attachment to this new life. We begin with this attachment. “Wherever personality is generated there is concern with that.” Actually “Wherever life is generated or wherever there is rebirth there is delight or attachment to that rebirth.”
“The expression ‘that is to say (seyyathidaÑ) is a particle; its meaning is ‘which is that.’ Craving for sense-desires, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming will be explained in the Description of the Dependent Origination.” We will come to that later. These are important - craving for desires, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming. They will be explained later. “Although this is threefold, it should nevertheless be understood as ‘The Noble Truth of the Origin of Suffering’, taking it as one in the sense of its generating the truth of suffering.” So it is the cause of suffering.
Then there is the Truth of the Cessation of Suffering, the Third Truth. “In the description of the cessation of suffering it is the cessation of the origin that is stated by the words that which is.. of that same craving, and so on. Why is that? Because the cessation of suffering comes about with the cessation of its origin. For it is with the cessation of its origin that suffering ceases, not otherwise.” Now when the Buddha described the cessation of suffering, the Buddha said “Cessation of craving is the cessation of suffering.” Buddha did not say that the end of suffering is the Third Noble Truth. He said that the cessation or the abandonment of the origin or craving is the cessation of suffering. That is because when there is no origin or cause, there is no effect.
“Just as a tree cut down grows up again
While yet its root remains unharmed and sound,
So with the tendency to crave intact
This suffering is ever reproduced.”
“So it is because suffering ceases only through the cessation of its origin that, when teaching the cessation of suffering, the Blessed One therefore taught the cessation of the origin.” He explained that it is the cessation of craving. Cessation of craving equals cessation of dukkha (suffering).
“For the Perfect Ones behave like lions. When they make suffering cease and when they teach the cessation of suffering, they deal with the cause, not the fruit. But the sectarians behave like dogs.” The authors always have something bad to say about those of other faiths. “When they make suffering cease and when they teach the cessation of suffering, by teaching devotion to self-mortification, etc., they deal with the fruit, not the cause. This in the first place is how the motive for teaching the cessation of suffering by means of the cessation of its origin should be understood.”
How the Buddhas are like lions and how the sectarians are like dogs is explained in footnote 15. “Just as a lion directs his strength against the man who shot the arrow at him, not against the arrow, so the Buddhas deal with the cause, not with the fruit. But just as dogs, when struck with a clod, snarl and bite the clod and do not attack the striker, so the sectarians who want to make suffering cease devote themselves to mutilating the body, and to causing cessation of defilements.”
“Of that same craving: of that craving which, it was said, ‘produces further becoming’, and which was classed as ‘craving for sense-desires’ and so on. It is the Path that is , called ‘fading away’; for ‘With the fading away [of greed] he is liberated’ is said. Fading away and cessation is cessation through fading away. Remainderless fading away and cessation is cessation through fading away that is remainderless because of eradication of inherent tendencies. Or alternatively, it is abandoning that is called ‘fading away’; and so the construction here can be regarded as ‘remainderless fading away, remainderless cessation’. The PÈÄi word here is ‘asesavirÈganirodha’. So there are three words grouped together as one word. ‘VirÈga’ is translated here as fading away. ‘Asesa’ is translated as remainderless and ‘nirodha’ is translated as cessation. So it is remainderless fading away cessation.
According to the first explanation we cannot translate it a fading away and cessation. We should translate as through fading away. ‘Fading away’ here means actually Path (Magga). The word ‘virÈga’ here means Magga. According to the first explanation the translation should be remainderless cessation through explanation the translation should be remainderless cessation through fading away or remainderless cessation through Magga.
According to the second explanation ‘fading away’ just means fading away, not the Path here. Cessation is cessation. Remainderless should be combined with both words - so remainderless fading away and remainderless cessation. According to the first explanation it is remainderless cessation through fading away. According to the second explanation it is remainderless fading away and remainderless cessation. “Or alternatively, it is abandoning that is called ‘fading away’; and so the construction here can be regarded as ‘remainderless fading away, remainderless cessation’.”
“But in essence (not ‘as to meaning’), all of them are synonyms for NibbÈna.” When the Buddha described the Third Noble Truth, be used the word ‘asesavirÈganirodho cÈgo paÔinissago mutti analÈyo’. What the Commentator is saying is that all these words are synonyms of NibbÈna. “For in the ultimate sense it is NibbÈna that is called ‘The Noble Truth of the Cessation of Suffering’. But because craving fades away and ceases on coming to that” - ‘on coming to that’ really means depending upon that. That is when Path consciousness arises, it takes NibbÈna as object. Only when there is NibbÈna as object can Path consciousness arise. Only the Path consciousness abandons the mental defilements. So NibbÈna is called ‘fading away’ and NibbÈna is called ‘cessation’. ‘Fading away’ actually means the cause of fading away, the cause of cessation.
“And because there comes to be the giving up, etc., of that [craving] on coming to that [NibbÈna], and since there is not even one kind of reliance here [to be depended upon] from among the reliances consisting in the cords of sense desires, etc., it is therefore called giving it up, relinquishing it, letting it go, not relying on it.” All these expressions are synonyms for NibbÈna. NibbÈna is actually not giving up, but it is the cause of giving up, the cause of relinquishing, the cause of letting go, the cause of not relying. NibbÈna is something, not just the act of giving up, not the act of relinquishing, not just letting go, not relying. It is something that helps consciousness give up, relinquish, let go and so on.
“It has peace as its characteristic. Its function is not to die; or its function is to comfort. It is manifested as the signless; or it is manifested as non-diversification.” In footnote 17 the word ‘nippapaÒca’ is explained. You may read it later. Footnote 16 about ‘on coming to that’ is also good to read. The PÈÄi word used here is ‘Ègama’.
Next is the discussion of NibbÈna. These are questions and answers, like a debate. One is the opponent and one is the defender. [Question 1] “Is NibbÈna non-existent because it is unapprehendable, like the hare’s horn?” The opponent said that there is no NibbÈna. NibbÈna is non-existent because it cannot be apprehended like a hare’s horn. There is no such thing as a hare’s horn. Like that there is no NibbÈna.
[Answer] “That is not so, because it is apprehendable by the [right] means. For it is apprehendable [by some, namely the Noble Ones] by the [right] means,, in other words, by the way that is appropriate to it, [the way of virtue, concentration, and understanding (wisdom);] it is like the supramundane consciousness of others, [which is apprehendable only by certain of the Noble Ones] by means of knowledge of penetration of others’ minds.” So it is like supramundane consciousness. Supramundane consciousness can only be apprehended by those who have attained enlightenment or who have attained the supramundane consciousness. The higher Noble Persons can know the supramundane consciousness of the lower Noble Persons. There are four stages for Noble Persons. Those who have reached the second stage can know the supramundane consciousness of those at the first stage and so on. So like that, NibbÈna can be apprehended by right means. That means one may apprehend by following the path of virtue, concentration and wisdom. So there is NibbÈna. “Therefore it should not be said that it is non-existent because unapprehendable, for it should not be said that what the foolish ordinary man does not apprehend is unapprehendable.” These people say that it is unapprehendable, but it is not unapprehendable just because they say it is.
And then the defender continues. “Again it should not be said that NibbÈna does not exist. Why not? Because it then follows that the Way would be futile.” ‘The Way’ means the practice, the practice of the Noble Eightfold Path. It would be nonsense if you said that there was no NibbÈna. “For if NibbÈna were non-existent, then it would follow that the right way, which includes the three aggregates beginning with virtue and is headed by right understanding would be futile. And it is not futile because it does reach NibbÈna.” I don’t like the word ‘aggregates’ here. It may confuse you. I just want to say ‘groups’. Here ‘groups beginning with virtue’ means sÊla, samÈdhi and paÒÒÈ. They are described in PÈÄi as sÊla khandha, samÈdhi khandha and paÒÒÈ khandha. But ‘khandha’ here does not mean the aggregates like r|pa khandha and so on. We can just say ‘groups’. “The three groups beginning with virtue and is headed by right understanding would be futile. And it is not futile because it does reach NibbÈna.” So you cannot say that there is no NibbÈna. If you say that there is no NibbÈna, then the Path would be meaningless. The path is not meaningless. The Path leads to NibbÈna. So there is NibbÈna. That is what the author meant.
[Question 2] “But futility of the Way, does not follow what is reached is absence (non-existent), [that is, absence of the five aggregates consequent upon the cutting off of the defilements]?” After cutting off the defilements, the five aggregates do not exist.
[Answer] “That is not so. Because, though there is absence of past and future [aggregates], there is nevertheless no reaching of NibbÈna [simply because of that].” The opponent takes the absence of five aggregates to be NibbÈna. If the absence of aggregates is NibbÈna, then the past is not existent now, the future is not existent now, so there would be NibbÈna. There is no reaching of NibbÈna simply because the past is not present now, the future is not present now, the past aggregates are not present, the future aggregates are not present. If you say that the absence or the non-existence of the five aggregates are NibbÈna, then it will be otherwise.
[Question 3] “Then is the absence of present [aggregates] as well NibbÈna?” The absence of present aggregates is NibbÈna. Could that not be NibbÈna the opponent asks.
[Answer] “That is not so.” That is because it is a contradiction of terms. The present cannot be absent. “Because their absence is an impossibility, since if they are absent their non-presence follows. [Besides if NibbÈna were absence of present aggregates too,] that would entail the fault of excluding the arising (not ‘arising’ but ‘reaching’) reaching of the NibbÈna element with results of past clinging left, at the Path moment, which has present aggregates as its support.” The second part of the paragraph means that would entail the fault of excluding the reaching of the NibbÈna element with results of past clinging and so on. That means at the moment of Path consciousness there are aggregates, aggregates in existence. If you say that the absence of the present aggregates is NibbÈna, then there should be no reaching of NibbÈna at the moment of Path consciousness because at the moment of Path consciousness there are aggregates. If you say that absence of aggregates is NibbÈna, then there can be no NibbÈna at the moment of Path consciousness. That NibbÈna is the result of past clinging left. That means NibbÈna before death. There are two kinds of NibbÈna - NibbÈna before death of the Arahant and NibbÈna after the Arahant dies. We find out more later. When an Arahant dies, there are no aggregates. That kind of NibbÈna is possible, but the other kind of NibbÈna is not possible if you take the absence of aggregates to be NibbÈna because aggregates are not absent at the moment of Path consciousness.
[Question 4] “Then will there be no fault if it is non-presence of defilements [that is NibbÈna]?” Then just the non-presence, the non-existence of defilements if that is NibbÈna, there will be no fault?
[Answer] The defender said that is not so. “Because it would then follow that the Noble Path was meaningless. For if it were so, then, since defilements [can be] non-existent also before the moment of the Noble Path, it follows that the Noble Path would be meaningless.” Non-existence of defilements - there can be non-existence of defilements before the Path arises. Sometimes the defilements do not arise. If that is NibbÈna, then the Path would be meaningless. You don’t have to try to reach the Path because you already have NibbÈna. This is one set of questions and answers.
[Question 5] “But is not NibbÈna destruction, because of the passage” - now here the question is on another aspect. The opponent points out the passage says “That, friend, which is the destruction of greed..[of hate..of delusion, ..is NibbÈna.” NibbÈna is just the destruction of greed, hate and delusion. So there is no separate thing that is NibbÈna, but there is just destruction, just the disappearance of defilements. He takes it that way.
[Answer] Then the defender said “That is not so, because it would follow that Arahantship (That means Arahatta Phala, the Fruit), also, was mere destruction. For that, too, is described in the [same] way beginning ‘That, friend, which is the destruction of greed..of hate.. of delusion is Arahantship].” The answer here is following the passage ‘the destruction of greed, of hate, of delusion is NibbÈna’, if you would follow that passage that NibbÈna is mere destruction, there is another passage in the same Sutta that says Arahantship is destruction. So Arahantship also would be mere destruction. So it is not to be taken that way. NibbÈna is not to be taken as mere destruction nor as mere disappearance of mental defilements.
“And what is more the fallacy then follows that NibbÈna would be temporary, etc.; for if it were so, it would follow that NibbÈna would be temporary, have the characteristic of being formed, and be obtainable regardless of right effort; and precisely because of its having formed characeristics it would be included in the formed, and it would be burning with the fires of freed, etc., and because of its burning it would follow that it was suffering.” NibbÈna would be suffering. NibbÈna is the destruction, the disappearance of mental defilements. Since mental defilements are formed, they are burning. They are dukkha. Then NibbÈna would also be dukkha. Therefore it should not be taken that way.
[Question 6] “Is there no fallacy, if NibbÈna is that kind of destruction subsequent to which there is no more occurrence?” Suppose defilements are destroyed and they don’t appear again. Then that destruction could be called ‘NibbÈna’, the opponent is saying. Suppose a person practices jhÈna. By the practice of jhÈna he could put off or he could avoid the arising of defilements, not by total destruction but just by putting them away. Then after that he gets enlightenment. Then NibbÈna would not be at the moment of enlightenment, but at the time when he could put off defilements. That is what is meant by the opponent.
[Answer] “That is not so. Because there is no such kind of destruction. And even if there were, the aforesaid fallacies would not be avoided. Also because it would follow that the Noble Path was NibbÈna. For the Noble Path causes the destruction of defects, and that is why it is called ‘destruction’; and subsequent to that there is no more occurrence of the defects.” After Path consciousness there are no more mental defilements. The Path would be called ‘NibbÈna’ and not NibbÈna itself. “But it is because the kind of destruction called ‘cessation consisting in non-arising’, [that is NibbÈna,] serves figuratively speaking as decisive support [for the Path] that [NibbÈna] is called ‘destruction’ as a metaphor for it.”
Do you understand this? There are two things - cessation consisting in non-arising and NibbÈna. ‘NibbÈna serves as a decisive support’ simply means let us say as an object. Since NibbÈna serves as a decisive support for the Path, NibbÈna is said to be the cause and cessation consisting in non-arising is the effect. But here NibbÈna is called ‘destruction’. That is by metaphor. In the passage quoted NibbÈna is described as destruction. Destruction of greed, hatred and delusion is NibbÈna. We are to understand that destruction is not really NibbÈna. NibbÈna is described as destruction because it is the cause or condition for destruction. NibbÈna serves as a condition for destruction. That is why NibbÈna is called ‘destruction’. It is not a direct expression. There are some kinds of metaphors that are this way.
As an example we say that sugar is phlegm. If you eat much sugar, you have phlegm. So people say sugar is phlegm. Or perhaps salt is blood pressure. Salt is not blood pressure, but it is the cause for blood pressure. So people say salt is blood pressure. Here NibbÈna is destruction. NibbÈna is not actually destruction, but it is the cause for destruction. It is the condition for destruction. That is why NibbÈna is stated as destruction. It is not direct talk. That is the reason for the next question.
[Question 7] “Why is it not stated in its form?” Why is it not stated directly? Why is it not called the cause of destruction?
[Answer] Then the answer is because it is extremely subtle. Even the Buddha hesitated to teach this Dhamma because it is so subtle that it would not be readily understood by the listeners.
Student: There is a problem here. If you say that NibbÈna is the cause of destruction, then NibbÈna comes before destruction.
Teacher: ‘Cause for’ means a condition for. NibbÈna does not cause destruction, but NibbÈna is a condition for destruction.
Student: It sounds like destruction is the next step after NibbÈna. Do you know what I mean? It is a step after, a higher step.
Teacher: We cannot say that NibbÈna is past, or present, or future. NibbÈna is some kind of dhamma. When Path consciousness arises, it takes NibbÈna as object and at the same time it eradicates mental defilements. So destruction is there. Destruction of mental defilements is at the moment of Path consciousness. And Path consciousness can arise only when it takes NibbÈna as object. If there is no such thing as NibbÈna, then Path consciousness cannot arise. That is why NibbÈna is said to be a condition for the destruction of mental defilements.
[Question 8] “Since it is, when the Path is, then it is not uncreated?” If it is so, then only when there is Path, there is the destruction of mental defilements. It is taken as NibbÈna. So NibbÈna is not uncreated. NibbÈna is made by something. That is what the opponent is saying.
[Answer] “That is not so, because it is not arousable by the Path (That means it is not produced by the Path.); it is only reachable, not produced (strike out arousable), by the Path; that is why it is uncreated. It is because it is uncreated that it is free from aging and death. It is because of the absence of its creation and its aging and death it is permanent.” Then ‘permanent’ has been said so here is another argument.
[Question 9] “Then it follows that NibbÈna, too, has the kind of permanence [claimed] of the atom and so on?” I think this is not correct. What the opponent says here is that you say NibbÈna is permanent. If NibbÈna is permanent, then the atoms. etc. are permanent. The atom etc., are taught in other philosophies. There are six Hindu philosophies. They are called ‘darshan’ in Sanskrit. In some of these philosophies they accept the atom the atom as a cause of creation or atoms are an ultimate truth. Atoms are taken to be indestructible, to be permanent. So if you say NibbÈna is permanent, then the atoms are also permanent. “As NibbÈna is permanent, so the atoms, etc., are also permanent?”
{Answer] “That is not so. Because of the absence of any cause [that brings about its arising].” This is also not correct. Because of the absence of any reason, (not ‘cause’); that can prove its truth that brings about its arising. In this passage the terms used in Hindu logic are used. You have to understand Hindu logic in order to understand this passage and the Sub-Commentary on it. It is very difficult. The word ‘hetu’ means reason. Are you familiar with syllogism in logic? I wrote a book on Hindu syllogisms in Burmese. I had forgotten about that. So I had to read it again. There is what is called syllogism in Hindu logic. You accept something.
The classical example is there is fire on the mountain
because there is smoke. Wherever there is smoke, there is fire, for example a
kitchen. There is smoke on the mountain, therefore the mountain has fire. These
are the five stages of syllogism. In order to convince people you have to make
use of these five steps. The first one is just the statement of fact. There is
fire on the mountain. Then ‘Why?’ someone may ask. Because there is smoke. How
are fire and smoke related? Wherever there is smoke there is fire, for example
the kitchen. Not kitchens in the
[Question 10] “Because NibbÈna has permanence, then, these, [that is, the atom, etc.] are permanent as well?” The next question is because NibbÈna is permanent, the atoms are also permanent.
[Answer] “That is not so. Because [in that proposition] the characteristic of [logical] reason is not valid (‘Cause does not arise’ is incorrect.), [in other words, to say that NibbÈna is permanent is not to assert a reason why the atom, etc., should be permanent.” According to TheravÈda Buddhists the permanency of atoms is not proved. They are not proved. To say because NibbÈna is permanent, they are permanent is not a valid reason, valid statement. The reason is not valid.
[Question 11] “Then they are permanent because of the absence of their arising, as NibbÈna is?”
[Answer] “That is not so. Because the atom and so on have not been established as facts. (That is according to Buddhists.) The aforesaid logical reasoning proves that only this, [that is NibbÈna,] is permanent [precisely because it is uncreated].” (There should be a period there. Then we should strike out ‘and’.) “It is immaterial because it transcends the individual essence of matter.” That is another statement. Questions and answers for #9, #10, #11 use logical terms. We have to understand Hindu logic in order to understand these passages clearly.
Then NibbÈna is described as immaterial. NibbÈna is nÈma or ar|pa although it is not consciousness nor is it a mental factor. It is nÈma. It is ar|pa.
“The Buddhas’ goal is one and has no plurality.” Actually what is meant here is it is a single goal because there is no difference in the goal of Buddhas etc. Buddhas’ goal, or Buddhas’ enlightenment, Buddhas’ destruction of defilements and others’ destruction of defilements are the same. “The Buddhas’ goal is one and has no plurality” - I think that is not so good. It is a single goal because there is no difference in goal of Buddhas, etc.
Then he describes the two kinds of NibbÈna - NibbÈna with results of past clinging left and NibbÈna without results of past clinging left. That simply means NibbÈna while the Arahant is living or before death and NibbÈna after the death of the Arahant. Before he dies he still has the aggregates. He still has his body and mind. They are called ‘the results of past clinging’. ‘With the results of past clinging’ means while he is alive. ‘Without the results of past clinging’ means when he dies.
Paragraph 74 “Because it can be arrived at by distinction of knowledge that succeeds through untiring perseverance; and because it is the word (not ‘world’) of the Omniscient One, NibbÈna is not non-existent as regards individual essence in the ultimate sense; for this is said: ‘Bhikkhus, there is an unborn, an unbecome, an unmade, an unformed’.” This is a famous passage quoted by many people.
“This is the section of the definition dealing with the description of the Cessation of Suffering (The Third Noble Truth).” We cannot go to the Fourth Noble Truth tonight. OK.
Student: Bhante, back in paragraph 69 you said that Arahantship really means what?
Teacher: It really means Path of Arahantship and Fruit of Arahantship.
Student: So they want to say that is the same as NibbÈna.
Teacher: No. NibbÈna is a separate dhamma. Path is one thing. Fruit is another thing. NibbÈna is yet another thing. We will cross over into PaÔicca SamuppÈda next week.
SÈdhu! SÈdhu! SÈdhu!
(Tape 34 / Ps: 32 – 74)
In paragraph 4 I want to correct something. ‘A’ is mark of kamma. ‘Mark of a ruler’ means the mark of kamma. ‘Mark of a ruler’ just means mark of kamma. ‘B’ is taught by the Buddha. There is says ‘ruler’. ‘Ruler’ means the Buddha, so taught by the Buddha actually. ‘C’ should be seen by the Buddha. ‘Seen by a ruler’ is seen by the Buddha. Then ‘D’ is prepared by kamma. That means the result of kamma. ‘E’ is fostered by the Buddha. So A. mark of kamma, B. taught by the Buddha, C. seen by the Buddha, D. prepared by kamma, E. fostered by the Buddha. These are the meanings given for the word ‘indriya’ in PÈÄi.
Today we come to the explanation of birth and so on. The Truth of Suffering - Birth - paragraph 32 gives the meanings of the word, the meanings of the PÈÄi word ‘jÈti’ can have. The word ‘jÈti’ can have many meanings. Its meanings are given here in this paragraph. From this paragraph on the explanations of dukkha are given again - birth is suffering, aging is suffering, death is suffering and so on. These are explained one by one. Paragraph 32 gives the meanings that the PÈÄi word ‘jÈti’ can have. Then the meaning that is appropriate here is pointed out at the end. JÈti has how many meanings?
“For in the passage ‘[He recollects..] one birth (jÈti), two births’ it is becoming.” That means it is one life, two lives. “In the passage ‘VisÈkhÈ, there is a kind (jÈti) of ascetics called NigaÓÔhas (Jains)’ it is a monastic order.” In this passage the word ‘jÈti’ means a monastic order or something like a religious denomination. “In the passage ‘Birth (jÈti) is included in two aggregates’ it is the characteristic of whatever is formed.” That means the first phase of existence. You know that there are three phases of existence - arising, continuation and death. So it is the first phase of existence that is arising. “It is the characteristic of whatever is formed.” That means all formations have the characteristic of arising, continuation and disappearing. In this passage jÈti means that. “In the passage ‘His birth is due to the first consciousness arisen, the first cognition manifested, in the mother’s womb’, it is rebirth-relinking.” In that passage the word ‘jÈti’ means real relinking at the first moment in one’s life. “In the passage ‘As soon as he was born, Œnanda, the Bodhisatta..’ it is parturition.” (That is the act of being born.) “In the passage ‘One who is not rejected and despised on account of birth’ it is clan.” Here ‘jÈti’ or ‘birth’ means clan. One is not rejected or despised because one is born in a low caste or whatever. “In the passage (This was uttered by Venerable A~gulimÈla.) ‘Sister, since I was born with the Noble birth’ it is the Noble Ones’ virtue.” Here ‘birth’ means becoming a Noble Person.
“Here it should be regarded as the aggregates that occur from the time of rebirth-linking up to the exit from the mother’s womb in the case of the womb-born, and as only the aggregates of rebirth-linking in the case of the rest.” Here the word ‘jÈti’ means the aggregates that occur from the time of rebirth-linking up to the exit from the mother’s womb. That means during pregnancy. That is called ‘jÈti’ here. “And as only the aggregates of rebirth-linking in the case of the rest” - now there are beings who are womb-born and there are beings who are born spontaneously. For those who are born spontaneously just the aggregates at the moment of relinking are called ‘jÈti’. “But this is only an indirect treatment. In the direct sense, however, it is the first manifestation of any aggregates that are manifested in living beings when they are born anywhere that is called ‘birth’.” First it says birth is from conception until the real birth for human beings. But for other beings like the devas it is just the relinking.
In paragraph 32 although it is not important here, the translation of one of the passages is quite wrong. In the middle of the paragraph “His birth is due to the first consciousness arisen, the first cognition manifested, in the mother’s womb.” That is wrong. This passage comes from the Vinaya PiÔaka. A person can become a monk only when he is 20 years of age. If he is younger than 20 years of age, then he cannot become a monk. ’20 years’ means 20 years from conception, not from birth. Buddha was saying that. A monk was ordained reckoning from the conception. Later on he was doubtful about whether he was really a monk or not. It was reported to the Buddha and the Buddha said that it was all right. So one must reckon 20 years from the moment of conception. That is the passage here. But the translation here is not correct. He misunderstood one word.
Student: Is time in the womb counted as nine months?
Teacher: Mostly we count it as ten months. But to be on the safe side we do not actually count the ten months for ordination because sometimes people are born in seven months or whatever. For me I was ordained when I was 19 years and 7 months. This is a passage from the Vinaya PiÔaka. In the translation of Vinaya PiÔaka by I. B. Horner it is correct. You may look it up in Book of Discipline, part 4, page 120. You will get the correct translation there.
Paragraph 34 “Its characteristic is the first genesis in any [sphere of] becoming. Its function is to consign [to a sphere of becoming]. It is manifested as an emerging here from a past becoming; or it is manifested as the variedness of suffering.”
“But why is it suffering? Because it is the basis for many kinds of suffering.” Why is this birth, this jÈti, suffering? Because it is the basis for many kinds of suffering. Then the many kinds of suffering are explained here. The most important are the first three because they will be referred to again when dukkha is explained. At least you have to remember these three even if you do not remember the other ones.
The first one is what? Dukkha dukkha (intrinsic suffering). The second one is viparinÈma dukkha (suffering in change, suffering when there is change). The third one is sa~khÈra dukkha (suffering due to formation). It is suffering because they are formations. Then they are explained. There is also concealed suffering, exposed suffering, indirect suffering, and direct suffering.
“Herein, bodily and mental painful feeling are called intrinsic suffering.” That means real suffering. In PÈÄi you see the word dukkha repeated, dukkha dukkha. That means real dukkha. Real dukkha is what? Bodily and mental painful feelings. There are pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling, and neutral feeling. Here the unpleasant or painful feeling is meant, both bodily and mental. Both bodily and mental painful feeling are called ‘intrinsic suffering’ or ‘dukkha dukkha’. “Because of their individual essence, their name, and their painfulness” because they are real dukkha they are called ‘dukkha dukkha’ (intrinsic suffering).
The next “[Bodily and mental] pleasant feeling are called ‘suffering in change’.” This is good feeling, pleasant feeling, somanassa and sukha. Even these are called ‘suffering (dukkha) because when there is change there is dukkha. When you lose the good feeling, you long for that. So you are not happy. That is called ‘suffering in change’. Here even pleasant feelings are called suffering because they are a cause for the arising of pain when they change.
“Equanimous feeling and the remaining formations of the three planes (That means kÈmÈvacara, r|pÈvacara, ar|pÈvacara) are called suffering due to formations because they are oppressed by rise and fall.” Buddha said that whatever has rise and fall is impermanent. And whatever is impermanent is suffering. Whatever has rise and fall is suffering actually. Since everything in the world of formations has a beginning and an end, so everything in the world is suffering. This is called ‘sa~khÈra dukkha’. This is the widest of the dukkhas. At least try to remember these three - dukkha dukkha, viparinÈma dukkha, sa~khÈra dukkha. You cannot escape sa~khÈra dukkha. Nothing in this world can escape.
Then there are other kinds of suffering - concealed suffering, exposed suffering, indirect suffering and direct suffering. These are easy to understand. For example an earache is called ‘concealed suffering’. If you look at the person from a distance, you don’t know that he is suffering. Exposed suffering is the suffering produced by the 32 tortures. There are 32 tortures mentioned in the Suttas, very frightening tortures. When a person is tortured by one of these 32, it is exposed suffering because you can see that he is really suffering even from a distance. “Except intrinsic suffering, all given in the exposition of the truth of suffering beginning with birth are also called ‘indirect suffering’ because they are the basis for one kind of suffering or another.” They are the basis for suffering. That is why they are called ‘indirect suffering’. “But intrinsic suffering is called ‘direct suffering’.” Intrinsic suffering is painful bodily and mental feeling. That is called ‘direct suffering’.
“herein, this birth is suffering because it is the basis for the suffering in the states of loss as made evident by the Blessed One by means of a simile in the BÈlapaÓÉita Sutta, etc., and for the suffering that arises in the happy destinies in the human world and is classed as ‘rooted in the descent into the womb’ and so on.” Suffering in the descent into the womb and others are given here. The fetus is described here as being in a very painful position. I always say that I’m not so much afraid of the fetus because I don’t know. The suffering in the mother’s womb is described here.
Paragraph 39 “When the mother has a abortion” - that is not an abortion. No, he misunderstood this. The PÈÄi word is ‘gabbham|Äha’. ‘M|Äha’ means something like confused. And ‘gabbha ’ means the womb. It actually means difficult delivery. When a woman cannot give birth to a child easily, that means a difficult delivery. “When the mother has a difficult delivery, the pain that arises in him through the cutting and rending in the place where the pain arises that is not fit to be seen even by friends and intimates and companions - this is the suffering rooted in difficult delivery.” It is not ‘abortion’. If it were abortion, it would be done secretly. Here other people help her. It is not abortion but difficult delivery. The others are not difficult to understand. This is just to make you afraid of the suffering through birth and so on.
The next one is aging (jarÈ). Here also it is twofold. There are two kinds of jarÈ or aging; “as a characteristic of whatever is formed (That means the second phase of existence, continuation.), and in the case of a continuity, as the oldness of aggregates included in a single becoming, which oldness is known as ‘brokenness’ (‘Brokenness’ means broken teeth and so on.) and so on. The latter is intended here.” It is not the jarÈ which is the characteristic of formations. It is getting old. Your teeth are broken. You have white hair. You cannot see well and so on.
“This aging has as its characteristic the maturing (ripening) of aggregates. Its function is to lead on to death. It is manifested as the vanishing of youth. It is suffering because of the suffering due to formations and because it is a basis for suffering.” It is itself suffering and it is also a basis for suffering. That is why it is described as dukkha or suffering. These explanations are not difficult to understand. When you have to get old, then there is leadnness in all the limbs (That means weakness in all the limbs.), decline of the faculties (You don’t see well, you don’t hear well.), vanishing of youth, undermining of strength, loss of memory and intelligence, contempt on the part of others, and so on.
Next is death. “Death is suffering: death too is twofold, as a characteristic of the formed (That means the last phase of existence.), with reference to which it is said ‘Aging and death are included in the aggregates’, and as the severing of the connection of the life faculty in a single becoming (That means ordinary death. The severing of the life faculty or the disappearance of the life faculty is called ‘death’.), with reference to which it is said ‘So mortals are in constant fear.. that they will die’. The latter is intended here. Death with birth as its condition, death by violence, death by natural causes, death from the exhaustion of the life span, death from the exhaustion of merit are names for it.”
“It has the characteristic of a fall.” These are not difficult to understand. “its function is to disjoin. It is manifested as absence from the destiny.” ‘Destiny’ really means ‘this life’. The PÈÄi word is ‘gati’. The PÈÄi word ‘gati’ is always translated as destiny. That is why in brackets it says [in which there was the rebirth], this life. “It should be understood as suffering because it is a basis for suffering.”
Then the next one is sorrow. “Sorrow is a burning in the mind in one affected by loss of relatives and so on. (loss of relatives, loss of wealth, loss of youth, loss of health). Although in reality (not ‘in meaning’) it is the same as grief, nevertheless it has inner consuming as its characteristic” and so on. The PÈÄi word here is attha. ‘Attha’ can mean meaning or sometimes ‘attha’ means reality. Here it means reality. “Although in reality it is the same as grief (domanassa)), nevertheless it has inner consuming as its characteristic” and so on.
The next one is lamentation. The PÈÄi word is parideva. “Lamentation is verbal clamor on the part of one affected by loss of relatives and so on.” That means crying aloud, saying something. “It has crying out as its characteristic. Its function is proclaiming virtues and vices.” When someone dies, then people say that oh, he is good or oh, he is bad. “It is manifested as tumult. It is suffering because it is a state of suffering due to formations (sa~khÈra dukkha) and because it is a basis for suffering.
The next one is pain. Here it is bodily pain. Bodily pain is also suffering. It is not difficult to understand.
The next one is grief. It is mental pain (domanassa). “Its characteristic is mental oppression” and so on. “It is suffering because it is intrinsic suffering (It is real suffering.) and because it brings bodily suffering.” This mental suffering brings bodily suffering. “For those who are gripped by mental pain tear their hair, weep, thump their breasts, and twist and writhe; they throw themselves upside down, use the knife, swallow poison, hang themselves with ropes, walk into fires, and undergo many kinds of suffering.”
The last one is despair. Here he misunderstood one word again. “Despair is the same as the humor produced by excessive mental suffering in one affected by loss of relatives and so on.” The PÈÄi word is dosa. He misunderstood the word ‘dosa’ here. ‘Dosa’ can mean humor in the body. Here it is simple. Dosa is dosa. “Despair is the same as anguish produced by excessive mental suffering.” Despair is mental, not r|pa. Despair is anguish.
“Some say that it is one of the states included in the formations aggregate.” The Sub-Commentary does not say who ‘some’ were. The Sub-Commentary explained one of the states included in the formation aggregate means it is not included in the unwholesome cetasikas. It is something different from dosa, something outside the unwholesome cetasikas. This is just said for information. We have to take it as anguish. In PÈÄi it is dosa.
“Its characteristic is burning of the mind. Its function is to bemoan. It is manifested as dejection. It is suffering because it is suffering due to formations (sa~khÈra dukkha), because of the burning of the mind, and because of bodily dejection.”
Paragraph 53 gives the difference between sorrow, lamentation and despair. “Sorrow is like the cooking [of oil, etc.] in a pot over a slow fire.” So it is not so intense. “Lamentation is like its boiling over from the pot when cooking over a quick fire.” So first you are sorry and then you say something aloud. “Despair is like what remains in the pot after it has boiled over and is unable to do so any more, going on cooking in the pot till it dries up.” A portion remains in the pot which cannot spill over and goes on cooking until it dries up. Despair is like that. So in this paragraph the difference between sorrow, lamentation and despair is explained.
Then there is association with the unloved. ‘Unloved’ here means both living beings and non-living beings. “Association with the unloved is meeting with disagreeable beings and formations (inanimate things).” If you have to live with a person whom you do not like, that is dukkha. If you have to be with a car that is giving you trouble, that is dukkha. That is a disagreeable formation.
The next one is separation from the loved. “Separation from the loved is to be parted from agreeable beings and formations (inanimate things).” So now people are suffering from separation from the loved - separation from beings and also separation from their houses and so on.
The next one, not to get what one wants is also suffering. Here not to get what one wants is explained as not to get what is unobtainable. We wish for something which is unobtainable. It is not that I wish to get a car and then I do not get a car. It is dukkha, but the dukkha here means more than that. That is why we have the passage here “ ‘Oh that we were not subject to birth!’ is called suffering since one does not get what is wanted.” We are always subject to let us say old age. We say “Oh, that we were not subject to old age!” It would be good if we did not get old. However much we may not want to get old, still we get old. That is the meaning of not to get what one wants. Old age, death and also rebirth we get even though we may not want them. “Its characteristic is the wanting of an unobtainable object. Its function is to seek that. It is manifested as disappointment. It is suffering because it is a basis for suffering.”
“In short the five aggregates [as objects] of clinging are suffering.” The five aggregates are themselves suffering. Paragraph 58 “For birth etc., thus oppress the pentad of aggregates [as objects] of clinging as fire does fuel, as shooting does a target (Actually it is ‘as weapon does a target’.), as gadflies, flies etc. So a cow’s body, as reapers do a field, as village raiders do a village; and they are generated in the aggregates as weeds, creepers, etc., are on the ground, as flowers, fruits and sprouts are on trees.” The clingings oppress the five aggregates and they live on the five aggregates.
“And the aggregates [as objects] of clinging have birth as their initial suffering, aging as their medial suffering, and death as their final suffering. The suffering due to burning in one who is the victim of the pain that threatens death is sorrow. The suffering consisting in crying out by one who is unable to bear that is lamentation” and so on. All these are shown to be caused by the five aggregates of clinging. That is why the Buddha said “The five aggregates of clinging are suffering.” This is actually the philosophical meaning of the word ‘dukkha’. It is not so difficult to understand that birth is dukkha, aging is dukkha, death is dukkha and so on. But this is not so easy to understand. In order to understand this you have to understand the third kind of dukkha, sa~khÈra dukkha, suffering through formations. If you understand sa~khÈra, you can understand this.
Then the Commentator said: “It is impossible to tell it [all] without remainder, showing each kind of suffering, even [by going on doing so] for many eons, so the Blessed One said ‘In short the five aggregates of clinging are suffering’.”
Then the next one is the Truth of the Origin of Suffering. First there are the word explanations. “It is a making become again” - that means it causes rebirth. “Thus it is ‘becoming again’; becoming again is its habit, thus it ‘produces further becoming’.” These are word explanations.
The next explanation is for the expression ‘nandirÈgasahagata’ in PÈÄi. It is translated as ‘accompanied by concern and greed’. But the explanation that is given here is that it is identical with delight and greed. So it does not mean that it is accompanied by delight and greed. It is delight and greed.
If you studied the Abhidhammatthasa~gaha, you may know the word ‘sahagatÈ’. ‘SahagatÈ’ means ‘arising together with’. But sometimes the word ‘sahagatÈ’ has no meaning at all. Here the word ‘sahagatÈ’ has no special meaning like ‘arising together’ or ‘accompanied by’. So it is identical with nandirÈga or delight and greed.
“Concerned with this and that” - that means delighting with this that. “Wherever personality is generated” - that means wherever life is generated. “There is delight (not ‘concern’) with that (life).” That means according to Abhidhamma when a person takes rebirth there is rebirth thought process. In that rebirth thought process there are javanas. These javanas are always accompanied by lobha. So we begin our lives actually with lobha. We are fresh in this new life and we have attachment to this new life. We begin with this attachment. “Wherever personality is generated there is concern with that.” Actually “Wherever life is generated or wherever there is rebirth there is delight or attachment to that rebirth.”
“The expression ‘that is to say (seyyathidaÑ) is a particle; its meaning is ‘which is that.’ Craving for sense-desires, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming will be explained in the Description of the Dependent Origination.” We will come to that later. These are important - craving for desires, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming. They will be explained later. “Although this is threefold, it should nevertheless be understood as ‘The Noble Truth of the Origin of Suffering’, taking it as one in the sense of its generating the truth of suffering.” So it is the cause of suffering.
Then there is the Truth of the Cessation of Suffering, the Third Truth. “In the description of the cessation of suffering it is the cessation of the origin that is stated by the words that which is.. of that same craving, and so on. Why is that? Because the cessation of suffering comes about with the cessation of its origin. For it is with the cessation of its origin that suffering ceases, not otherwise.” Now when the Buddha described the cessation of suffering, the Buddha said “Cessation of craving is the cessation of suffering.” Buddha did not say that the end of suffering is the Third Noble Truth. He said that the cessation or the abandonment of the origin or craving is the cessation of suffering. That is because when there is no origin or cause, there is no effect.
“Just as a tree cut down grows up again
While yet its root remains unharmed and sound,
So with the tendency to crave intact
This suffering is ever reproduced.”
“So it is because suffering ceases only through the cessation of its origin that, when teaching the cessation of suffering, the Blessed One therefore taught the cessation of the origin.” He explained that it is the cessation of craving. Cessation of craving equals cessation of dukkha (suffering).
“For the Perfect Ones behave like lions. When they make suffering cease and when they teach the cessation of suffering, they deal with the cause, not the fruit. But the sectarians behave like dogs.” The authors always have something bad to say about those of other faiths. “When they make suffering cease and when they teach the cessation of suffering, by teaching devotion to self-mortification, etc., they deal with the fruit, not the cause. This in the first place is how the motive for teaching the cessation of suffering by means of the cessation of its origin should be understood.”
How the Buddhas are like lions and how the sectarians are like dogs is explained in footnote 15. “Just as a lion directs his strength against the man who shot the arrow at him, not against the arrow, so the Buddhas deal with the cause, not with the fruit. But just as dogs, when struck with a clod, snarl and bite the clod and do not attack the striker, so the sectarians who want to make suffering cease devote themselves to mutilating the body, and to causing cessation of defilements.”
“Of that same craving: of that craving which, it was said, ‘produces further becoming’, and which was classed as ‘craving for sense-desires’ and so on. It is the Path that is , called ‘fading away’; for ‘With the fading away [of greed] he is liberated’ is said. Fading away and cessation is cessation through fading away. Remainderless fading away and cessation is cessation through fading away that is remainderless because of eradication of inherent tendencies. Or alternatively, it is abandoning that is called ‘fading away’; and so the construction here can be regarded as ‘remainderless fading away, remainderless cessation’. The PÈÄi word here is ‘asesavirÈganirodha’. So there are three words grouped together as one word. ‘VirÈga’ is translated here as fading away. ‘Asesa’ is translated as remainderless and ‘nirodha’ is translated as cessation. So it is remainderless fading away cessation.
According to the first explanation we cannot translate it a fading away and cessation. We should translate as through fading away. ‘Fading away’ here means actually Path (Magga). The word ‘virÈga’ here means Magga. According to the first explanation the translation should be remainderless cessation through explanation the translation should be remainderless cessation through fading away or remainderless cessation through Magga.
According to the second explanation ‘fading away’ just means fading away, not the Path here. Cessation is cessation. Remainderless should be combined with both words - so remainderless fading away and remainderless cessation. According to the first explanation it is remainderless cessation through fading away. According to the second explanation it is remainderless fading away and remainderless cessation. “Or alternatively, it is abandoning that is called ‘fading away’; and so the construction here can be regarded as ‘remainderless fading away, remainderless cessation’.”
“But in essence (not ‘as to meaning’), all of them are synonyms for NibbÈna.” When the Buddha described the Third Noble Truth, be used the word ‘asesavirÈganirodho cÈgo paÔinissago mutti analÈyo’. What the Commentator is saying is that all these words are synonyms of NibbÈna. “For in the ultimate sense it is NibbÈna that is called ‘The Noble Truth of the Cessation of Suffering’. But because craving fades away and ceases on coming to that” - ‘on coming to that’ really means depending upon that. That is when Path consciousness arises, it takes NibbÈna as object. Only when there is NibbÈna as object can Path consciousness arise. Only the Path consciousness abandons the mental defilements. So NibbÈna is called ‘fading away’ and NibbÈna is called ‘cessation’. ‘Fading away’ actually means the cause of fading away, the cause of cessation.
“And because there comes to be the giving up, etc., of that [craving] on coming to that [NibbÈna], and since there is not even one kind of reliance here [to be depended upon] from among the reliances consisting in the cords of sense desires, etc., it is therefore called giving it up, relinquishing it, letting it go, not relying on it.” All these expressions are synonyms for NibbÈna. NibbÈna is actually not giving up, but it is the cause of giving up, the cause of relinquishing, the cause of letting go, the cause of not relying. NibbÈna is something, not just the act of giving up, not the act of relinquishing, not just letting go, not relying. It is something that helps consciousness give up, relinquish, let go and so on.
“It has peace as its characteristic. Its function is not to die; or its function is to comfort. It is manifested as the signless; or it is manifested as non-diversification.” In footnote 17 the word ‘nippapaÒca’ is explained. You may read it later. Footnote 16 about ‘on coming to that’ is also good to read. The PÈÄi word used here is ‘Ègama’.
Next is the discussion of NibbÈna. These are questions and answers, like a debate. One is the opponent and one is the defender. [Question 1] “Is NibbÈna non-existent because it is unapprehendable, like the hare’s horn?” The opponent said that there is no NibbÈna. NibbÈna is non-existent because it cannot be apprehended like a hare’s horn. There is no such thing as a hare’s horn. Like that there is no NibbÈna.
[Answer] “That is not so, because it is apprehendable by the [right] means. For it is apprehendable [by some, namely the Noble Ones] by the [right] means,, in other words, by the way that is appropriate to it, [the way of virtue, concentration, and understanding (wisdom);] it is like the supramundane consciousness of others, [which is apprehendable only by certain of the Noble Ones] by means of knowledge of penetration of others’ minds.” So it is like supramundane consciousness. Supramundane consciousness can only be apprehended by those who have attained enlightenment or who have attained the supramundane consciousness. The higher Noble Persons can know the supramundane consciousness of the lower Noble Persons. There are four stages for Noble Persons. Those who have reached the second stage can know the supramundane consciousness of those at the first stage and so on. So like that, NibbÈna can be apprehended by right means. That means one may apprehend by following the path of virtue, concentration and wisdom. So there is NibbÈna. “Therefore it should not be said that it is non-existent because unapprehendable, for it should not be said that what the foolish ordinary man does not apprehend is unapprehendable.” These people say that it is unapprehendable, but it is not unapprehendable just because they say it is.
And then the defender continues. “Again it should not be said that NibbÈna does not exist. Why not? Because it then follows that the Way would be futile.” ‘The Way’ means the practice, the practice of the Noble Eightfold Path. It would be nonsense if you said that there was no NibbÈna. “For if NibbÈna were non-existent, then it would follow that the right way, which includes the three aggregates beginning with virtue and is headed by right understanding would be futile. And it is not futile because it does reach NibbÈna.” I don’t like the word ‘aggregates’ here. It may confuse you. I just want to say ‘groups’. Here ‘groups beginning with virtue’ means sÊla, samÈdhi and paÒÒÈ. They are described in PÈÄi as sÊla khandha, samÈdhi khandha and paÒÒÈ khandha. But ‘khandha’ here does not mean the aggregates like r|pa khandha and so on. We can just say ‘groups’. “The three groups beginning with virtue and is headed by right understanding would be futile. And it is not futile because it does reach NibbÈna.” So you cannot say that there is no NibbÈna. If you say that there is no NibbÈna, then the Path would be meaningless. The path is not meaningless. The Path leads to NibbÈna. So there is NibbÈna. That is what the author meant.
[Question 2] “But futility of the Way, does not follow what is reached is absence (non-existent), [that is, absence of the five aggregates consequent upon the cutting off of the defilements]?” After cutting off the defilements, the five aggregates do not exist.
[Answer] “That is not so. Because, though there is absence of past and future [aggregates], there is nevertheless no reaching of NibbÈna [simply because of that].” The opponent takes the absence of five aggregates to be NibbÈna. If the absence of aggregates is NibbÈna, then the past is not existent now, the future is not existent now, so there would be NibbÈna. There is no reaching of NibbÈna simply because the past is not present now, the future is not present now, the past aggregates are not present, the future aggregates are not present. If you say that the absence or the non-existence of the five aggregates are NibbÈna, then it will be otherwise.
[Question 3] “Then is the absence of present [aggregates] as well NibbÈna?” The absence of present aggregates is NibbÈna. Could that not be NibbÈna the opponent asks.
[Answer] “That is not so.” That is because it is a contradiction of terms. The present cannot be absent. “Because their absence is an impossibility, since if they are absent their non-presence follows. [Besides if NibbÈna were absence of present aggregates too,] that would entail the fault of excluding the arising (not ‘arising’ but ‘reaching’) reaching of the NibbÈna element with results of past clinging left, at the Path moment, which has present aggregates as its support.” The second part of the paragraph means that would entail the fault of excluding the reaching of the NibbÈna element with results of past clinging and so on. That means at the moment of Path consciousness there are aggregates, aggregates in existence. If you say that the absence of the present aggregates is NibbÈna, then there should be no reaching of NibbÈna at the moment of Path consciousness because at the moment of Path consciousness there are aggregates. If you say that absence of aggregates is NibbÈna, then there can be no NibbÈna at the moment of Path consciousness. That NibbÈna is the result of past clinging left. That means NibbÈna before death. There are two kinds of NibbÈna - NibbÈna before death of the Arahant and NibbÈna after the Arahant dies. We find out more later. When an Arahant dies, there are no aggregates. That kind of NibbÈna is possible, but the other kind of NibbÈna is not possible if you take the absence of aggregates to be NibbÈna because aggregates are not absent at the moment of Path consciousness.
[Question 4] “Then will there be no fault if it is non-presence of defilements [that is NibbÈna]?” Then just the non-presence, the non-existence of defilements if that is NibbÈna, there will be no fault?
[Answer] The defender said that is not so. “Because it would then follow that the Noble Path was meaningless. For if it were so, then, since defilements [can be] non-existent also before the moment of the Noble Path, it follows that the Noble Path would be meaningless.” Non-existence of defilements - there can be non-existence of defilements before the Path arises. Sometimes the defilements do not arise. If that is NibbÈna, then the Path would be meaningless. You don’t have to try to reach the Path because you already have NibbÈna. This is one set of questions and answers.
[Question 5] “But is not NibbÈna destruction, because of the passage” - now here the question is on another aspect. The opponent points out the passage says “That, friend, which is the destruction of greed..[of hate..of delusion, ..is NibbÈna.” NibbÈna is just the destruction of greed, hate and delusion. So there is no separate thing that is NibbÈna, but there is just destruction, just the disappearance of defilements. He takes it that way.
[Answer] Then the defender said “That is not so, because it would follow that Arahantship (That means Arahatta Phala, the Fruit), also, was mere destruction. For that, too, is described in the [same] way beginning ‘That, friend, which is the destruction of greed..of hate.. of delusion is Arahantship].” The answer here is following the passage ‘the destruction of greed, of hate, of delusion is NibbÈna’, if you would follow that passage that NibbÈna is mere destruction, there is another passage in the same Sutta that says Arahantship is destruction. So Arahantship also would be mere destruction. So it is not to be taken that way. NibbÈna is not to be taken as mere destruction nor as mere disappearance of mental defilements.
“And what is more the fallacy then follows that NibbÈna would be temporary, etc.; for if it were so, it would follow that NibbÈna would be temporary, have the characteristic of being formed, and be obtainable regardless of right effort; and precisely because of its having formed characeristics it would be included in the formed, and it would be burning with the fires of freed, etc., and because of its burning it would follow that it was suffering.” NibbÈna would be suffering. NibbÈna is the destruction, the disappearance of mental defilements. Since mental defilements are formed, they are burning. They are dukkha. Then NibbÈna would also be dukkha. Therefore it should not be taken that way.
[Question 6] “Is there no fallacy, if NibbÈna is that kind of destruction subsequent to which there is no more occurrence?” Suppose defilements are destroyed and they don’t appear again. Then that destruction could be called ‘NibbÈna’, the opponent is saying. Suppose a person practices jhÈna. By the practice of jhÈna he could put off or he could avoid the arising of defilements, not by total destruction but just by putting them away. Then after that he gets enlightenment. Then NibbÈna would not be at the moment of enlightenment, but at the time when he could put off defilements. That is what is meant by the opponent.
[Answer] “That is not so. Because there is no such kind of destruction. And even if there were, the aforesaid fallacies would not be avoided. Also because it would follow that the Noble Path was NibbÈna. For the Noble Path causes the destruction of defects, and that is why it is called ‘destruction’; and subsequent to that there is no more occurrence of the defects.” After Path consciousness there are no more mental defilements. The Path would be called ‘NibbÈna’ and not NibbÈna itself. “But it is because the kind of destruction called ‘cessation consisting in non-arising’, [that is NibbÈna,] serves figuratively speaking as decisive support [for the Path] that [NibbÈna] is called ‘destruction’ as a metaphor for it.”
Do you understand this? There are two things - cessation consisting in non-arising and NibbÈna. ‘NibbÈna serves as a decisive support’ simply means let us say as an object. Since NibbÈna serves as a decisive support for the Path, NibbÈna is said to be the cause and cessation consisting in non-arising is the effect. But here NibbÈna is called ‘destruction’. That is by metaphor. In the passage quoted NibbÈna is described as destruction. Destruction of greed, hatred and delusion is NibbÈna. We are to understand that destruction is not really NibbÈna. NibbÈna is described as destruction because it is the cause or condition for destruction. NibbÈna serves as a condition for destruction. That is why NibbÈna is called ‘destruction’. It is not a direct expression. There are some kinds of metaphors that are this way.
As an example we say that sugar is phlegm. If you eat much sugar, you have phlegm. So people say sugar is phlegm. Or perhaps salt is blood pressure. Salt is not blood pressure, but it is the cause for blood pressure. So people say salt is blood pressure. Here NibbÈna is destruction. NibbÈna is not actually destruction, but it is the cause for destruction. It is the condition for destruction. That is why NibbÈna is stated as destruction. It is not direct talk. That is the reason for the next question.
[Question 7] “Why is it not stated in its form?” Why is it not stated directly? Why is it not called the cause of destruction?
[Answer] Then the answer is because it is extremely subtle. Even the Buddha hesitated to teach this Dhamma because it is so subtle that it would not be readily understood by the listeners.
Student: There is a problem here. If you say that NibbÈna is the cause of destruction, then NibbÈna comes before destruction.
Teacher: ‘Cause for’ means a condition for. NibbÈna does not cause destruction, but NibbÈna is a condition for destruction.
Student: It sounds like destruction is the next step after NibbÈna. Do you know what I mean? It is a step after, a higher step.
Teacher: We cannot say that NibbÈna is past, or present, or future. NibbÈna is some kind of dhamma. When Path consciousness arises, it takes NibbÈna as object and at the same time it eradicates mental defilements. So destruction is there. Destruction of mental defilements is at the moment of Path consciousness. And Path consciousness can arise only when it takes NibbÈna as object. If there is no such thing as NibbÈna, then Path consciousness cannot arise. That is why NibbÈna is said to be a condition for the destruction of mental defilements.
[Question 8] “Since it is, when the Path is, then it is not uncreated?” If it is so, then only when there is Path, there is the destruction of mental defilements. It is taken as NibbÈna. So NibbÈna is not uncreated. NibbÈna is made by something. That is what the opponent is saying.
[Answer] “That is not so, because it is not arousable by the Path (That means it is not produced by the Path.); it is only reachable, not produced (strike out arousable), by the Path; that is why it is uncreated. It is because it is uncreated that it is free from aging and death. It is because of the absence of its creation and its aging and death it is permanent.” Then ‘permanent’ has been said so here is another argument.
[Question 9] “Then it follows that NibbÈna, too, has the kind of permanence [claimed] of the atom and so on?” I think this is not correct. What the opponent says here is that you say NibbÈna is permanent. If NibbÈna is permanent, then the atoms. etc. are permanent. The atom etc., are taught in other philosophies. There are six Hindu philosophies. They are called ‘darshan’ in Sanskrit. In some of these philosophies they accept the atom the atom as a cause of creation or atoms are an ultimate truth. Atoms are taken to be indestructible, to be permanent. So if you say NibbÈna is permanent, then the atoms are also permanent. “As NibbÈna is permanent, so the atoms, etc., are also permanent?”
{Answer] “That is not so. Because of the absence of any cause [that brings about its arising].” This is also not correct. Because of the absence of any reason, (not ‘cause’); that can prove its truth that brings about its arising. In this passage the terms used in Hindu logic are used. You have to understand Hindu logic in order to understand this passage and the Sub-Commentary on it. It is very difficult. The word ‘hetu’ means reason. Are you familiar with syllogism in logic? I wrote a book on Hindu syllogisms in Burmese. I had forgotten about that. So I had to read it again. There is what is called syllogism in Hindu logic. You accept something.
The classical example is there is fire on the mountain
because there is smoke. Wherever there is smoke, there is fire, for example a
kitchen. There is smoke on the mountain, therefore the mountain has fire. These
are the five stages of syllogism. In order to convince people you have to make
use of these five steps. The first one is just the statement of fact. There is
fire on the mountain. Then ‘Why?’ someone may ask. Because there is smoke. How
are fire and smoke related? Wherever there is smoke there is fire, for example
the kitchen. Not kitchens in the
[Question 10] “Because NibbÈna has permanence, then, these, [that is, the atom, etc.] are permanent as well?” The next question is because NibbÈna is permanent, the atoms are also permanent.
[Answer] “That is not so. Because [in that proposition] the characteristic of [logical] reason is not valid (‘Cause does not arise’ is incorrect.), [in other words, to say that NibbÈna is permanent is not to assert a reason why the atom, etc., should be permanent.” According to TheravÈda Buddhists the permanency of atoms is not proved. They are not proved. To say because NibbÈna is permanent, they are permanent is not a valid reason, valid statement. The reason is not valid.
[Question 11] “Then they are permanent because of the absence of their arising, as NibbÈna is?”
[Answer] “That is not so. Because the atom and so on have not been established as facts. (That is according to Buddhists.) The aforesaid logical reasoning proves that only this, [that is NibbÈna,] is permanent [precisely because it is uncreated].” (There should be a period there. Then we should strike out ‘and’.) “It is immaterial because it transcends the individual essence of matter.” That is another statement. Questions and answers for #9, #10, #11 use logical terms. We have to understand Hindu logic in order to understand these passages clearly.
Then NibbÈna is described as immaterial. NibbÈna is nÈma or ar|pa although it is not consciousness nor is it a mental factor. It is nÈma. It is ar|pa.
“The Buddhas’ goal is one and has no plurality.” Actually what is meant here is it is a single goal because there is no difference in the goal of Buddhas etc. Buddhas’ goal, or Buddhas’ enlightenment, Buddhas’ destruction of defilements and others’ destruction of defilements are the same. “The Buddhas’ goal is one and has no plurality” - I think that is not so good. It is a single goal because there is no difference in goal of Buddhas, etc.
Then he describes the two kinds of NibbÈna - NibbÈna with results of past clinging left and NibbÈna without results of past clinging left. That simply means NibbÈna while the Arahant is living or before death and NibbÈna after the death of the Arahant. Before he dies he still has the aggregates. He still has his body and mind. They are called ‘the results of past clinging’. ‘With the results of past clinging’ means while he is alive. ‘Without the results of past clinging’ means when he dies.
Paragraph 74 “Because it can be arrived at by distinction of knowledge that succeeds through untiring perseverance; and because it is the word (not ‘world’) of the Omniscient One, NibbÈna is not non-existent as regards individual essence in the ultimate sense; for this is said: ‘Bhikkhus, there is an unborn, an unbecome, an unmade, an unformed’.” This is a famous passage quoted by many people.
“This is the section of the definition dealing with the description of the Cessation of Suffering (The Third Noble Truth).” We cannot go to the Fourth Noble Truth tonight. OK.
Student: Bhante, back in paragraph 69 you said that Arahantship really means what?
Teacher: It really means Path of Arahantship and Fruit of Arahantship.
Student: So they want to say that is the same as NibbÈna.
Teacher: No. NibbÈna is a separate dhamma. Path is one thing. Fruit is another thing. NibbÈna is yet another thing. We will cross over into PaÔicca SamuppÈda next week.
SÈdhu! SÈdhu! SÈdhu!
(Tape 35 / Ps: 75 – 104)
Today we study the Four Noble Truths, the Way Leading to the Cessation of Suffering. The Fourth Noble Truth is what we call the Noble Eightfold Path. It consists of eight factors. These eight factors are actually mental factors (cetasikas). That is why the author said “They have, of course, already been explained as to meaning in the Description of the Aggregates.” In the chapter on aggregates they have already been explained. But still he will deal with them here because it is a little different here. Although all these are cetasikas here they belong to the supramundane. So they are a little different.
“Briefly, when a meditator is progressing towards the penetration of the Four Truths, his eye of understanding with NibbÈna as its object eliminates the inherent tendency to ignorance, and that is Right View.” The first factor is Right View or Right Understanding. ‘Right Understanding’ means paÒÒÈ. PaÒÒÈ here is concomitant with the supramundane consciousness or Path consciousness.
“It eliminates the inherent tendency to ignorance.” That means it is the highest Path consciousness, the fourth Path consciousness. PaÒÒÈ concomitant with the first, second and third Path consciousness is also Right View. Here the author states that it is the highest one.
“It has right seeing as its characteristic. Its function is to reveal elements (like a floodlight). It is manifested as the abolition of the darkness of ignorance.” When paÒÒÈ comes, ignorance disappears. It is the abolition of the darkness of ignorance.
The next one is Right Thinking or Right Thought. “When he possesses such view, his directing of the mind on to NibbÈna, which [directing] is associated with that [Right View]” - this Right Thinking is associated with Right View. Actually they arise at the same time and they do their respective functions. Here Right Thinking is concomitant with Right View and it abolishes wrong thinking and that is Right Thinking.
Although it is called ‘thinking’, it is actually the cetasika ‘vitakka’. Vitakka has the characteristic of directing the mind on to the object. “Its characteristic is right directing of the mind on to [its object].” So it is important. Although it is translated as Right Thinking or Right Thought, it is not really thinking. It is a mental factor which takes the mind to the object or which directs the mind to the object.” Its function is to bring about absorption [of the Path consciousness in NibbÈna as object]. It is manifested as the abandoning of wrong thinking.” So Right Thinking is manifested as the abandoning of wrong thinking.
The next one is Right Speech. Right Speech here is also associated with paÒÒÈ. “And when he sees and thinks thus, his abstinence from wrong speech, which abstinence is associated with that [Right View], abolishes bad verbal conduct (or wrong verbal conduct), and that is called ‘Right Speech’. It has the characteristic of embracing. Its function is to abstain. It is manifested as the abandoning of wrong speech.”
Next is Right Action. “It is abstinence from killing living things, which abstinence is associated with that [Right View], cuts off wrong action, and that is called ‘Right Action’.” ‘Right Action’ actually means abstinence from killing, stealing and sexual misconduct. “It has the characteristic of originating. Its function is to abstain. It is manifested as the abandoning of wrong action.” What is missing here is ‘killing living beings, etc.’ ‘Etc.’ is missing. His abstinence is from killing living beings, etc. ‘Etc.’ covers stealing and misconduct.
Right Livelihood is next. “When his Right Speech and Right Action are purified, his abstinence from wrong livelihood, which abstinence is associated with that [Right View], cuts off scheming, etc. (You may read about scheming in the first chapter.) and that is called ‘Right Livelihood’. It has the characteristic of cleansing. Its function is to bring about the occurrence of a proper livelihood. It is manifested as the abandoning of wrong livelihood.”
The next one is Right Effort. It is also accompanied by Right View. “When he is established on that plane of virtue called ‘Right Speech’, ‘Right Action’ and ‘Right Livelihood’ (These three belong to the group of virtue.), his energy, which is in conformity and associated with that [Right View], cuts off idleness, and that is called ‘Right Effort’. It has the characteristic of exerting. Its function is the non-arousing of unprofitable things, and so on. It is manifested as the abandoning of wrong effort.” When you have Right Effort, you do not produce unprofitable states or unwholesome states.
Then there is Right Mindfulness. “When he exerts himself thus, the non-forgetfulness in his mind, which is associated with that [Right View], shakes off wrong mindfulness, and that is called ‘Right Mindfulness’.” The expression ‘wrong mindfulness’ is strange here. In the ultimate sense there is no wrong mindfulness. Mindfulness is always right or always wholesome. There is no wrong mindfulness. What is called ‘wrong mindfulness’ here is wrong perception or distorted perception of things like taking ugly things to be pleasant, taking impermanent things to be permanent and so on. ‘Wrong mindfulness’ here means unwholesome mental states associated with or headed by wrong perception. “It has the characteristic of establishing. Its function is not to forget. It is manifested as the abandoning of wrong perception (not ‘wrong mindfulness’).”
Then there is Right Concentration. “When his mind is thus guarded by supreme mindfulness, the unification of mind, which is associated with that [Right View], abolishes wrong concentration, and that is called ‘Right Concentration’. It has the characteristic of non-distraction. Its function is to concentrate. It is manifested as the abandoning of wrong concentration.” In the first chapter on samÈdhi the characteristics, etc., of concentration are given. They are given again with a little difference.
“This is the method in the description of the way leading to the cessation of suffering.” This is the description of the eight factors of the Fourth Noble Truth.
“As to knowledge’s function” - that means as to the function of knowledge. “The exposition should be understood according to the functions of knowledge.” Please add those words. It is ‘according to the functions of knowledge’, not ‘according to knowledge’. It is ‘according to the functions of knowledge of the truths’. “For knowledge of the truths is twofold, namely, knowledge as idea, and knowledge as penetration.” ‘Knowledge as idea’ really means secondhand knowledge, knowledge after hearing somebody speak. The PÈÄi word is anubodha. ‘Anubodha’ means after knowing. ‘Knowing’ means you hear something and then you know. It is translated as ‘idea’ here. I don’t know if that is a good word for it. ‘Knowledge as idea’ means secondhand knowledge. ‘Knowledge as penetration’ means direct knowledge. So there are two kinds of knowledge. Knowledge as idea or secondhand knowledge is mundane and occurs through hearsay, etc., or just by logical thinking, comparing this with that, not through direct seeing of things.
Now about cessation and the Path - “Knowledge consisting in
penetration, which is supramundane, penetrates the Four Truths as its
function.” Actually it penetrates the Four Truths by way of function by making
cessation its object. Actually the knowledge consisting in penetration takes
NibbÈna as object. It can only take NibbÈna as object and not the other Truths.
When it takes NibbÈna as object, then the Second Noble
Truth is destroyed and the First Noble Truth is completely understood and so
on. So it is said that it penetrates the Four Noble Truths. Really what it
penetrates is only the Third Noble Truth. That is because mind can only take
one object at a time. When mind takes NibbÈna as object, it cannot take other
Truths as object. But it is said that the functions with respect to these
Truths is accomplished at the moment of enlightenment or at the moment of
penetrating NibbÈna or the Third Noble Truth. So it penetrates the Four Noble
Truths by way of function. “By making cessation its object according as it is
said, ‘Bhikkhus, he who sees suffering sees also the origin of suffering, sees
also the cessation of suffering, sees also the way leading to the cessation of
suffering, and it should be repeated thus of all [four Truths].” So he who sees
suffering, sees the origin of suffering and so on. “But its function will be
made clear in the Purification by Knowledge and Vision.” It will be made clear
in chapter 22.
“When this knowledge is mundane, then, occurring as the overcoming of obsessions, the knowledge of suffering therein forestalls the [false] view of individuality.” The knowledge of these Four Noble Truths, each, each abandons a false view. So the first, the knowledge of suffering forestalls the [false] view of individuality. “The knowledge of origin forestalls annihilation view; the knowledge of cessation forestalls the eternity view; the knowledge of the Path forestalls the moral-inefficacy-of-action view.” That is the belief that whatever you do good or bad, there is no moral value.
“Or alternatively, the knowledge of suffering forestalls wrong theories of fruit.” That means the wrong understanding of fruit or results. “In other words, [seeing] lastingness, beauty, pleasure, and self, in the aggregates, which are devoid of lastingness, beauty, pleasure, and self; and knowledge of origin forestalls theories (wrong understanding) of cause that occur as finding a reason where there is none, such as ‘The world occurs owing to an Overlord, a Basic Principle, Time, Nature (Individual Essence), etc.” Wait a minute. These are the views taken by the teachers during the time of the Buddha and after the time of the Buddha. ‘The world occurs owing to an Overlord’ means something like Christianity. God creates the world and so on. You may look at the footnote. "“n Overlord makes the world occur, prepares it, halts it, disposes of it.” In Hinduism there are three gods - BrahmÈ, Vishnu, and Shiva. BrahmÈ creates the world. Vishnu preserves it and Shiva is going to destroy it. Shiva is the god of destruction.
The Basic Principle refers to Samkhya philosophy. In Samkhya philosophy they say that there is one Basic Principle. The world is created out of that principle. When that principle comes into contact with another principle, soul which is called ‘pulsha’, then the world begins. Time is just time. And Nature also is explained in the footnote. “The world is manifested from out of a Basic Principle, and it is reabsorbed in that again.” That comes from Samkhya philosophy.
“Those who hold the theory of time say:
Disposes of this generation,
‘Time it is that creates beings,
Time watches over those who sleep’.”
According to my understanding it means “Time wakes up those who are asleep. To outstrip time is hard indeed.”
“Those who hold the theory of Nature (SabhÈva - Individual Essence) say ‘The world appears and disappears just because of its nature, like the sharp nature of thorns, like the roundness of apples (kabiÔÔhaphala).” ‘KabiÔÔhaphala’ really does not mean apples. KabiÔÔhaphala has a hard shell. I don’t see that fruit in the West, but in our countries they are very common. They have hard shells and small seeds inside. And it is very sour. When we were young, we played with those fruits. One boy hits the fruit of the other boy with his fruit. The one whose fruit cracks loses.
“Like the variedness of wild beasts, birds, snakes and so on” - if it meant only the outside world were to be taken, then Buddhism may be the same as this. It takes not only the outside world, but the living beings as well. That is why it is put here as wrong view.
“The word ‘etc.’ refers to those who preach fatalism and say the occurrence of the world is due to atoms. All is due to causes effected in the past. The world is determined, like drilled gems threaded on an unbroken string. (That is fatalism.) There is no doing by a man; and to those who preach chance:
‘It is by chance that they occur,
By chance as well that they do not;
Pleasure and pain are due to chance;
This generation [lives] by chance’;
and to those who preach liberation by chance.” There are many views about the origin of the world and how the world comes to be and also how there can be release from the world.
Student: The theory of Nature or SabhÈva is said to be wrong understanding?
Teacher: Here it is taken to be wrong view because it doesn’t admit kamma as a cause of living beings.
Student: It says that living beings have their own causation within themselves.
Teacher: That’s right. Kamma is their cause.
Student: When you say karma, how do you explain karma?
Teacher: ‘Kamma’ actually means mental volition. When you do something good or bad, there is a mental factor called ‘volition’. That volition has the potential to give results in the future. It disappears, but it leaves something like a potential to give results in the continuation of that being.
Student: So you are not saying the karma of apples?
Teacher: No. We do not accept that inanimate things have kamma. Kamma is for living beings only.
So there are many theories. “Taking final release to be in the immaterial world” - some take it that if you reach the highest immaterial world (the highest ar|pÈvacara realm), you find release there. “Or in a World Apex [World Shrine - Lokath|pika]” - it is not a shrine actually. The PÈÄi word ‘th|pika’ means something like a protuberance. ‘World Apex’ means the highest of the r|pÈvacara worlds. When you reach that stage, then that is the end of it.
“And the Path Knowledge forestalls wrong theories of means that
occur by taking to be the way of purification what is not the way of
purification and consists in devotion to indulgence in the pleasures of sense
desire and in self-mortification.” The Fourth Noble Truth is the
“As long as a man is vague about the world,
About its origin, about its ceasing
About the means that lead to its cessation,
So long he cannot recognize the truths.”
The real meaning of the verse is the other way around.
“As long as a man cannot recognize the truths,
So long as he is vague about the world,
(That means he is confused about the world.)
About its origin, its cessation, and going to cessation.”
“As to division of content: all states excepting craving and
states free from cankers are included in the Truth of Suffering.” In the Truth
of Suffering everything is included except craving and the states free from
cankers. That means the supramundane states. “The 36 modes of behavior of
craving (That just means the 36 kinds of craving.) are explained in footnote
24. First there are sense desire, craving for becoming and craving for
non-becoming. These three are multiplied by twelve, the six internal bases and
the six external bases. So they become 36.) are included in the Truth of
Origin.” ‘The Truth of Origin’ means craving. Craving may be only 3, or 18, or
36, or 108. Whatever it may be it is included in the Truth of Origin. “The
Truth of Cessation is unmixed.” So it is only one, NibbÈna. “As regards the
Truth of the Path: the heading of Right View includes the
Towards the end of paragraph 10 there is the expression ‘consciousness concentration’. What is ‘consciousness concentration’? Do you see the words? ‘Consciousness concentration’ really means the iddhipÈda (the road to power) as consciousness. There are four roads to power. What are the four? Chanda, viriya, citta and vÊmaÑsÈ. Here ‘consciousness concentration’ means citta as iddhipÈda, citta as road to power.
Then there is as to simile. It is not difficult to understand, but it is very good. “The Truth of Suffering should be regarded as the burden, the Truth of Origin of Suffering should be regarded as taking up the burden, the Truth of Cessation as the putting down of the burden, the Truth of the Path as the means to putting down the burden.” The next one is my pet example. “The Truth of Suffering is like a disease, the Truth of the Origin of Suffering is like the cause of the disease, the Truth of the Cessation is like the cure for the disease, and the Truth of the Path is like medicine.” Then there is a third simile given. “The Truth of Suffering is like a famine, the Truth of the Origin is like a drought, the Truth of Cessation is like plenty, and the Truth of Path is like timely rain.”
Paragraph 88 “As to tetrad: there is suffering that is not the Noble Truth, there is Noble Truth that is not suffering, there is what is both suffering and Noble Truth, and there is what is neither suffering nor Noble Truth.” This is just shuffling the contents of the Noble Truths. First you must understand of what consists the First Noble Truth, of what consists the Second Noble Truth and so on. Then you try to understand that there is something which is only Noble Truth, but not suffering. There is something which is suffering, but not Noble Truth and so on.
“Herein, though states associated with the Path and the Fruits of asceticism (that means Errata.) are suffering since they are suffering due to formations.” When Magga (Path) consciousness arises, there is Path consciousness and mental factors. Among the mental factors there are eight factors and they are Path. The others are called ‘states associated with the Path’. ‘States associated with the Path’ really means Path consciousness and other mental factors, all other mental factors except the eight Path factors. They are suffering because they are formations. Since they are formations, they are suffering. But they are not included in the Truth of Suffering. So they are not the Noble Truth of suffering. If you read the last portion of chapter 7 in The Manual of Abhidhamma, you will understand that. There are some states which do not belong to any of the Four Noble Truths, strictly speaking. The states associated with the Path and the states associated with the Fruits of asceticism (that means the Fruition.) are all called ‘suffering’ because they have a beginning and an end. They are impermanent. That is why they are called ‘suffering’, but they are not included in the Noble Truth of Suffering.
“Cessation is a Noble Truth, but it is not suffering.” This is easy. “The other two Noble Truths (That means the second and the fourth.) can be suffering because they are impermanent, but they are not so in the real sense of that for full understanding of which the life of purity is lived under the Blessed One.” ‘For the full understanding of which’ means for the full understanding of the First Noble Truth. That is why they are suffering, but they are not so in the real sense.
“The five aggregates of clinging, except craving, are in all aspects both suffering and Noble Truth.” All the aggregates except clinging (lobha) are both suffering and Noble Truth.
“The states associated with the Path and the Fruits of asceticism are neither suffering in the real sense of that for the full understanding of which the life of purity is lived under the Blessed One (That means the Noble Truth.), nor are they Noble Truth. Origin, etc., should also be construed in the corresponding way.” So you can say there is Noble Truth and not Origin, Origin and not Noble Truth and so on.
“As to void, singlefold, and so on: firstly as to void: in the ultimate sense all the Truths should be understood as void because of the absence of any experiencer, any doer, anyone who is extinguished, and any goer. Hence this is said.” This is a very popular saying quoted by many authors.
“For there is suffering, but no one who suffers;
There is only doing, but no doer;
There is only extinction, but not the person who is extinguished
or not a person who experiences the extinction;
There is a path, there is no goer.
Or alternatively:
So void of lastingness, and beauty, pleasure, self,
Is the first pair (The ‘first pair’ means the First Noble Truth and the Second Noble Truth.), and void of self the deathless state (The Third Noble Truth is void of self.)
And void of lastingness of pleasure and of self
Is the Path too (The Fourth Noble Truth is devoid lastingness, void of pleasure, void of self, but not void of beauty because it is wholesome.) for such is voidness in
these four.” This is as is according to void.
“Or three are void of cessation, and cessation is void of the other three.” Here ‘void’ means different from. The three are different from cessation, from the third. The first, second and fourth are different from the third. And the third is different from the other three.
“Or the cause is void of the result, because of the absence of suffering in the origin, and of cessation in the Path; the cause is not gravid with its fruit like the Primordial Essence.” Here also the reference is to Samkhya philosophy. In Samkhya philosophy they say that fruit is inherent in the cause. According to Buddhist philosophy cause and effect are two separate things. Cause is one thing and effect is another thing. Cause originates fruit, but cause is not the fruit and fruit is not the cause. They are two separate things. In Samkhya philosophy they say that fruit is already inherent is the cause, only it is not manifest. When you make a pot out of clay, actually the pot is in the clay. If there is not a pot in the clay, you cannot make a pot out of the clay. So the pot is existent in the clay in an unmanifest form. You pick up the clay and make it into a pot. So it becomes a pot. Their view is that the result is already contained in the cause in an unmanifest form. “The cause is not gravid with its fruit like the Primordial Essence of those who assert the existence of Primordial Essence.” In Sanskrit it is called ‘asakariavada’. ‘A’ means not. ‘Sa’ means existing. ‘Karia’ means fruit. So we get fruit existing in the cause.
There is another philosophy. “The fruit of a cause does not have its cause inherent in it, like the two atoms, etc., of those who assert Inherence.” It refers to the Vaishishikya philosophy. In that philosophy they almost say the same thing that the result is already in the cause. They say that cloth is already in the threads because without threads there can be no cloth. If you take the threads out one by one, there is no cloth. That means that cloth and threads are related. Their relation is by inherence. Also they explain the beginning of the world as combining of two atoms, three atoms and so on. When two atoms combine, it becomes a dyad. They say that two atoms is inherent in each atom because when they come together, they become two. Two does not exist without one and one put together. So two must be in one also. It is called ‘The Doctrine of Inherence’. They are rejected here. “The fruit of cause does not have its cause inherent in it, like the two atoms, etc., of those who assert Inherence.”
Paragraph 14 “As to singlefold and so on: and here all suffering is one kind as the state of occurrence.” As a state of occurrence it is only one, but it is of two kinds as mentality-materiality (nÈma-r|pa). “It is of three kinds as divided into rebirth-process-becoming, in the sense sphere, fine material sphere, and immaterial sphere.”
“Also origin is one kind as making occur.” That means producing something. “It is of two kinds as associated and not associated with [false] view. It is of three kinds as craving for sense desires, craving for becoming and craving for non-becoming.” We will find these three kinds of craving later. “It is of four kinds as abandonable by the four Paths. It is of five kinds classed as delight in materiality, and so on. It is of six kinds classed as the six groups of craving.”
“Also cessation is of one kind being the unformed (or unconditioned) element. But indirectly it is of two kinds.” You already know the two kinds of NibbÈna - NibbÈna experienced during the life of the Arahant and the NibbÈna at his death. The first is called ‘NibbÈna with the aggregates remaining’. The second is called ‘NibbÈna without the aggregates remaining’. When a person becomes an Arahant, he eradicated mental defilements, but he still has his body and his mind which are the results of his past kamma. He still has the remainder of aggregates. With remainder of the aggregates he experiences NibbÈna. So the NibbÈna experienced by an Arahant before his death is called ‘NibbÈna with the aggregates remaining’. At death there is cessation. When an Arahant dies his remaining aggregates disappear. That NibbÈna is called ‘NibbÈna without the remaining aggregates’. There are two kinds of NibbÈna.
“Also the Path is of one kind as to what should be developed. It is of two kinds classed according to serenity and insight.” Now it is important here, samatha and vipassanÈ. The Path can be classed as samatha and vipassanÈ. When it is samatha, it may mean mundane path and insight is also mundane path actually. “Or (it may) be classed according to seeing and developing.” Here seeing and developing have a special meaning. ‘Seeing’ really means the First Path and ‘developing’ means the other three Paths. They are mentioned in the Abhidhamma.
The word ‘aggregates’ is not so good here. We should substitute some other word like group. Then it would be sÊla group, samÈdhi group, paÒÒÈ group or something like that. The PÈÄi word is khandha, but here it does not mean the same thing as r|pa khandha, vedanÈ khandha, and so on. Here it is saying sÊla khandha, samÈdhi khandha, and paÒÒÈ khandha. I think ‘group’ is a better word than aggregate here. “It is of three kinds classed according to the three groups; for the [Path], being selective, is included by the three groups, which are comprehensive, as a city by a kingdom, according as it is said” and so on. What is the meaning of the Path being selective? ‘SÊla group’ means both mundane and supramundane. There is mundane sÊla and supramundane sÊla. When we say ‘sÊla group’, we include both mundane and supramundane sÊla. So it is more comprehensive, but magga is only supramundane. Therefore it is called ‘selective’ here. There may be a better word than ‘selective’. I don’t know. The supramundane Path is just a part of the whole group of sÊla. ‘SÊla group’ means both mundane and supramundane sÊla, but ‘Magga’ means only supramundane. So it is less comprehensive.
The quotation is from a Sutta in the Majjhima NikÈya. “The three groups are not included in the Noble Eightfold Path, friend VisÈkha, but the Noble Eightfold Path is included by the three groups.” That means the three groups are more comprehensive than the Noble Eightfold Path. So it is not said that these three groups are included in the Noble Eightfold Path. However the Noble Eightfold Path is included by the three aggregates.
“Any right speech, any right action, any right livelihood: these are included in the virtue group.” When we divide the eight factors into three groups, right speech, right action and right livelihood fall under the virtue (sÊla) group. “Any right effort, any right mindfulness, any right concentration: these are included in the concentration group.” These three belong to concentration group. “Any right view, any right thinking: these are included in the understanding group.” So we have sÊla, samÈdhi and paÒÒÈ.
“As to the three beginning with right effort, concentration cannot of its own nature cause absorption through unification on the object.” This explanation is very important when you try to explain how these factors work during meditation. Here it is said that concentration alone by its nature cannot cause absorption through unification on the object. “But with energy accomplishing its function of preventing wobbling, it can do so.” That means samÈdhi when helped by energy and mindfulness can really penetrate. So if we want samÈdhi, we must make effort. We must have mindfulness. Only when there is effort and mindfulness can there be concentration. So concentration is helped by effort and mindfulness. That is explained in this paragraph. Then a simile is given. Three people go to a garden and pick fruit.
Paragraph 99 here also paÒÒÈ is assisted by vitakka or right thinking. That is why right thinking is included in the paÒÒÈ group. “As regards right view and right thinking, understanding cannot of its own nature define an object as impermanent, painful, not self. But with applied thought (That is vitakka.) giving [assistance] by repeatedly hitting [the object] it can.” That means right thought or initial application takes the mind to the object, mind together with the concomitants. Only when vitakka takes the mind to the object can paÒÒÈ or understanding penetrate it. It is like if you do not take a person to a certain place, he will not know anything about that place. You have to take him there. Then he sees it and knows everything about it. If you do not take him there, he will not know about it. In the same way if vitakka or here right thought does not take the mind to the object, then paÒÒÈ cannot do anything. PaÒÒÈ is assisted by vitakka or right thinking. So they are grouped together in the understanding group. Once again a simile is given.
Paragraph 103 as to similar and dissimilar - they are something like playing with the different meanings of the Noble Truths. “All truths are similar to each other because they are not unreal, are void of self, and are difficult to penetrate according as it is said ‘What do you think, Œnanda, which is more difficult to so, more difficult to perform, that a man should shoot an arrow through a small keyhole from a distance time after time without missing, or that he should penetrate the tip of a hair split a hundred times with the tip [of a similar hair]? - This is more difficult to do, venerable sir, more difficult to perform, that a man should penetrate the tip of a hair split a hundred times with the tip [of a similar hair]. - They penetrate something more difficult to penetrate than that, Œnanda, who penetrate correctly thus ‘This is suffering’.” It is more difficult to penetrate the Four Noble Truths than to penetrate the tip of a hair split a hundred times with the tip of another hair.
Student: It’s a real challenge.
Teacher: That’s right. The first two are similar since they are profound and so on. They are similar in one sense and dissimilar in another sense. This is like shuffling the Four Noble Truths as to similarity and dissimilarity.