Do the suttas speak of bhavaïga-consciousness in the heart to move from the first jhâna to the second jhâna?


Pa-Auk teaches that in order to pass from the first jhâna to the second jhâna, one must :

1/ reach the first jhâna ;
2/ then exit the first jhâna ;
3/ then direct attention to bhavaïga consciousness at heart level;
4/ then examine the factors of the first jhâna (at the level of bhavaïga consciousness in the heart);
5/ then, understand the disadvantages of the coarse factors of the first jhâna, and understand the advantages of the factors of the second jhâna;
6/ while determined to eliminate the coarse factors of the first jhana, concentrate on patibhaga nimitta ;
7/ the second jhana appears.

This procedure is beautifully detailed and precise. Pa Auk Sayadaw seems to have an eye for detail. This makes me appreciate this teaching very much.
I wonder, then, whether the suttas speak explicitly of such a procedure?

I know that the suttas talk about factors to be let go of, and I remember that some suttas say that to go from the first jhâna to the second jhâna, you have to appease vitakka and vicara. But I don’t recall ever having read that bhavaïga consciousness should be examined at heart level.
Do you have a sutta that talks about this? Or perhaps the commentaries explained something that was obvious at the time of the Buddha?

Thanks in advance.

May all beings perfect Sila.



As you understood the Pa Auk Teaching is deep and subtle.
It is the Teaching found in Atthakathā and Visuddhimagga even though today the name “Pa Auk” is given to differenciate from other practice that are found today in the " Theravāda " field.

Suttas are not much precise. Only general guidelines are given.
At the Buddha’s time the Disciples had Teachers. Whatever they didn’t understood in Suttas they asked to Ayasmā Sariputtā ayasmā Mahā Moggalāna and so on.
These precise instructions have been recorded and transmitted from generation to generation s together with the Buddha’s words. It is called Atthakathā, Commentaries, that give practical instructions on the thousands of questions which may arise from hearing one Sutta.

That is why Commentaries are much valuable and necessary for the establishment and lasting of the correct Buddha sāsana in the world. Therefore good man, you may learn respectfully these Teachings and respect it just in the same way that you would value a pure valuable Gem.
Try to practice well by patiently following good Teachers. Meditation with correct guidelines will not be in vain, but bear great Fruits and great Benefits.

Best wishes, with Mettā


Thank you very much Venerable.


Please, does anyone know whether Pa Auk Sayadaw considers using the bhavaïga consciousness in the heart is necessary or optional for attaining the second jhâna? For example, Ajahn Brahm doesn’t mention this.

If necessary, this could mean that dhamma is really in trouble today, because I don’t see many other known teachers teaching this…

Thanks in advance.


If you find detailed explanations for kasina and how to get jhāna then this will answer your question on how detailed the suttas are. It clearly mentions them, but they were left to the commentaries. Why?
Because it is repeated throughout and it only needs to be explained in one place. The commentaries are also explained in a similar way. Instead of making commentaries for each sutta that talks about jhāna, it usually says, please refer to the vsm in pāli inside the commentary. You will find that visudhimagge is mentioned 498 times and probably a few more that our search does not pickup. Plus you can also find other variations of the word, like visudhimaggo.

If you know programming or databases, you will know it is best to put in only one place and then reference it.


Thank you very much Bhante.

1 Like

Well, it seems to me that nobody answered Lifeless Atta’s question and instead just stressed how Commentaries are important plus how obedience is crucial.

I also would like to ask for a direct reference & quote to a Pali scripture that suggests that bhavanga consciousness in the heart is a phenomenon that we should consider in our meditation. Without a reference, we can be sure it is simply not true (the safe standpoint).

We will see this attitude (if it is not in scriptures, hence it is not true) throughout the scripture of Kathāvatthu, an Abhidhamma book prepared by the Buddha and finalized by ven. Moggaliputtatissa Thera.

Therefore, again, no reference = not Theravada Buddhism.

Pa Auk Sayadaw usually provides references to his suggestions but sometimes, like when he explains the Eightfold Noble Path as actually instruction on meditation on breath, or when he suggests that light must be seen every time one enters (true) Nibbāna, he fails short to provide the reference.

I’d love to have references to these points as well. If the heretics in Kathāvatthu said: “Dear Arahant venerable Moggaliputtatissa, just believe the teachers, that’s it,” they would have been rejected anyway. It is not the Theravada (Vibhajjavāda) style. Theravada Buddhism is probably the most elaborated guide to understanding the mundane & supramundane with copious references to the original Pāḷi texts and detailed explanations.

One more interesting point - we again and again explain the veracity of the Pali scriptures by the careful recitations that monks did together since the First Buddhist Council until the Fourth. As they recited the scriptures together, they corrected each other and thus maintained the precise form of the scriptures for many centuries. However, the Commentaries were not memorized, not recited. Therefore, we have no way to prove that the Commentaries were maintained without alteration. After 500 years of telling stories to each other, the monks would not be naturally able to maintain accuracy, which we find out from the discrepancies that even the great venerable Janakābhivamsa of Mahāgandhāyone Monastery pointed out. So, we need to be careful and always take seriously the main text, which is reliable. Instruction in the main text is the main and reliable, while Commentaries are secondary and unreliable. Subcommentaries, written in average about 20 centuries after the Buddha, are very helpful, but again, totally not reliable, moreover, considering the fact that they come from period when there were not at all as many Arahants (if any!) as for example during the time of inscribing the Commentaries.

“Yo vo, ānanda, mayā dhammo ca vinayo ca desito paññatto, so vo mamaccayena satthā.”
DN 16. Mahāparinibbāna Sutta


The Sri Lankan orthodox monk-scholars that I know appreciate the Vinaya, Samadhi and Commentarial bent of Paauk method over other popular methods but they disagree with their meditation method just as Burmese Sangha Council disagreed with Paauk method.

Some points of disagreement:

  • Light of wisdom is generally understood as a metaphor for the Power of wisdom, but Pauk Sayadaw interpret it as a type of Samadhi-light.

  • According to the Commentaries, there is no need of seeing rupa kalapas in its actual size by samadhi-light as a precondition for Vipassana, but Paauk Sayadaw says it is necessary. (I heard even Venerable Maggavihari at IIT mentioned this but without directly referencing to Paauk.)

  • Paauk Jhana attainments are also questioned many times by the Classical Scholars.

  • Main point was that the Paauk method’s seeing past lives (with less details) by Vipassana/Paticcasamuppada. It is not the Commentarial understanding. Paauk Sayadaw reference to Khajjaniya sutta’s Commentary as a proof for it, but the subcommentary of it and the whole of Commentarial interpretation disagree with it.

Yes bhante, but I would consider Commentarial references as well.

Yes, I also noticed his failures of providing references to some of his controversial points. And even some of reference provided by him doesn’t follow the general Commentarial interpretation.

The Dighanikaya-commentary mentions that the Commentaries were recited at the Councils.

The minor discrepancies in the Commentaries can be recorrected by the fundamentals created by the whole of the Commentaries or we can just ignore them since they are rare and not much important in main aspects of Dhamma practice.

Paauk is not a synonym for the Commentary. The Commentarial understanding is not always equal to Paauk understanding.

Therefore the people who disagree with Paauk, need not to be disagree with the Commentary.



Venerable, thank you so much for this post, it’s really very interesting and makes me deepen my understanding of things.

1 Like

Thank tou very much for your message @ekocare

I didn’t know there were disagreements on method.
But if I understand correctly, they still agree on the general description of jhânas that Pa-Auk asserts (absence of the 5 senses; nimitta makes jhana appear and is the object of attention during jhana; no vipassana during jhana; etc.)?

Wow, extremely interesting, thank you for this list!

Mmh, what do you mean by that? I’m very curious, it sounds interesting.

Perhaps, but all the same, I personally feel that the Pa-Auk method works. I know that serious proof is proof from suttas and commentaries, but Beth Upton (a former nun who mastered jhana and vipassana from the Pa-Auk method) claims to have seen her past lives (to find the article, type « Pa Auk: Recalling Past Lives Insight Myanmar » on google; I found the article very interesting).

To summarize: Basically, first make an offering to the Buddha. Then you sit down to meditate and develop a very strong concentration. Then, you have to start looking at the previous mental processes that existed just before you started meditating (for example, the vision of the meditation cushion with the will to sit and meditate). Then, you have to look at the previous mental processes of the moment when you made the offering to the Buddha. Then, one continues to look at the mental processes of even earlier moments, and so on, until one recalls a previous life.

She also says that she can’t have imagined/hallucinated her past lives, because the concentration she is using to see her past lives is extremely powerful, so this concentration would have allowed her to know whether her mind is imagining past lives or actually seeing them. I found this very convincing and very solid to show on the Pa-Auk method works to see past lives! She seems so experienced and dedicated to the Pa-Auk method… She seems to have a deep admiration for Pa Auk Sayadaw… I’d find it hard to believe that the Pa-Auk method is flawed.

… Very subtle.

Interesting that you confirm this !!!

Thanks again to @monkSarana and to you @ekocare . Your messages nuance my understanding of things. I believe that it is through knowledge that we can move towards nibanna, so please don’t hesitate to correct me.

1 Like

Okay, here let us clarify according to what is in the texts and not " they said that this teacher said that the commentary said…"

Firstly, the point about the light is not correct. Visuddhimagga clearly mentioned the light in Vipassanā. Where? At the chapter of maggāmaggañāṇadassanavisuddhiniddeso the stage of Vipassanupakkilesa.

“so kho panāyaṃ obhāso kassaci bhikkhuno pallaṅkaṭṭhānamattameva obhāsento uppajjati. kassaci antogabbhaṃ. kassaci bahigabbhampi. kassaci sakalavihāraṃ, gāvutaṃ, aḍḍhayojanaṃ, yojanaṃ, dviyojanaṃ, tiyojanaṃ…pe… kassaci pathavītalato yāva akaniṭṭhabrahmalokā ekālokaṃ kurumāno. bhagavato pana dasasahassilokadhātuṃ obhāsento udapādi.”

" And for one Bhikkhu at the place where he seats , brightness occurs. For another in the room. For another outside. For another the whole monastery… Five kilometers, 10 kilometers, 20 kilometers, 40 kilometers…
For another he can spread light from the ground of the earth up to the Akaniṭṭha-Brahma realm… But for the Blessed one, in the 10000 world systems brightness occurs."

And so on. Brightness is described as most of the other Vipassanupakkilesa (Subdefilements of insight) as a normal and necessary phenomenon, but at a certain stage it becomes sub defilement if the yogi clings to it and interpret it wrongly.


Second point. According to Vipassanā method found in Visuddhimagga the yogi discern each materiality present in rūpa kalāpas. It implies to sea rūpa kalāpa as well.

Here the beginning of the nāmarūpapariggaha chapter: "athassa yāthāvasarasalakkhaṇato āvibhūtāsu dhātūsu kammasamuṭṭhānamhi tāva kese “catasso dhātuyo, vaṇṇo, gandho, raso, ojā, jīvitaṃ, kāyappasādo"ti evaṃ kāyadasakavasena dasa rūpāni (…)”

“Then when the elements have become clear with their function and characteristics the elements in the kamma produced (materiality) of the hair firstly " four elements, colour, smell, taste, nutritive essence, life faculty, bodily sensitivity, thus the 10 materiality in the bodily decad (kalāpa) (…)”

Then in this chapter of the delimitation of the materiality Visuddhimagga describes each rūpa in each kalāpa and where it is located.
It is repeatedly mentioned that these rūpas should be seen by the yogi, using different words. Obviously the meaning is one discern these rūpa inside kalāpas.


Third point: Jhāna.

Please where do you see any contradiction or difference between the Jhāna as teached in Visuddhimagga and practiced in Pa Auk?
If there is a precise point let’s discuss about it.
Actually, in the Samādhi also, Pa Auk method is the deepest and the most comprehensive Inthe world .
The Pa Auk method teaches the 4 rupāvacara jhāna and arūpavacara jhāna , with all meditation objects. The Pañca vasī, five masteries, with all meditation objects that allows Jhāna Attainments are teached.
Also, some Supernormal Knowledge (Abhiññas) are attained naturally by certains yogis after Jhāna or are teached after Vipassanā (not before).
If the Samādhi would be wrong they would not be able to get some abilities such as Dibba Cakkhu, Divine Eye. In Pa Auk and related monasteries it is found in certain capable Yogis.


Next point: Paticca samuppāda, and the Vipassanā Knowledge associated with, called kankhāvitaraṇavisuddhi or Paccayapariggaha ñāṇa.
The whole Visuddhimagga and Commentaries speak only the Paticca Samuppāda as a three periods process, past present and future lives.
In the chapter of kankhāvitaraṇavisuddhi it is explained in various ways how a Yogi discern cuti and patisandhi citta (death and rebirth consciousness).

“tassevaṃ kammavaṭṭavipākavaṭṭavasena nāmarūpassa paccayapariggahaṃ katvā tīsu addhāsu pahīnavicikicchassa sabbe atītānāgatapaccuppannadhammā cutipaṭisandhivasena viditā honti, sāssa hoti ñātapariññā.”

" When he has understood the round of kamma and the round of kamma result in this way, having discerned the mentality and materiality he abandons the three kind of doubts about past future and present death and rebirth, this is the full Understanding of the known".

And so on. Again and again Visuddhimagga repeats it in various ways.
Please read it.
Not only that, but Paticca Samuppāda has never been explained in the texts as one-life process, either in Mūla or Atthakathā, therefore how it’s discernment would be only related to one life process?
This modern shortcut when it comes to practice is like that : " let’s discern Paticca Samuppāda in present only, the knowledge of past and future is obtained by inference" this does not find support in the texts in any way. And it does not match the fundamentals of Buddha’ s Teachings found in Pāḷi Texts.
That is Paticca samuppāda always implies 3 separated time periods.


There are many references, Bhante.
Just this quote in the Visuddhimagga:

yathā ca rūpaṃ sammasantena rūpassa, evaṃ arūpaṃ sammasantenapi arūpassa nibbatti passitabbā. sā ca kho ekāsīti lokiyacittuppādavaseneva.seyyathidaṃ – idañhi arūpaṃ nāma purimabhave āyūhitakammavasena paṭisandhiyaṃ tāva ekūnavīsaticittuppādappabhedaṃ nibbattati. nibbattanākāro panassa paṭiccasamuppādaniddese vuttanayeneva veditabbo. tadeva paṭisandhicittassa anantaracittato paṭṭhāya bhavaṅgavasena, āyupariyosāne cutivasena. yaṃ tattha kāmāvacaraṃ, taṃ chasu dvāresu balavārammaṇe tadārammaṇavasena.pavatte pana asambhinnattā cakkhussa āpāthagatattā rūpānaṃ ālokasannissitaṃ manasikārahetukaṃ cakkhuviññāṇaṃ nibbattati saddhiṃ sampayuttadhammehi. cakkhupasādassa hi ṭhitikkhaṇe ṭhitippattameva rūpaṃ cakkhuṃ ghaṭṭeti. tasmiṃ ghaṭṭite dvikkhattuṃ bhavaṅgaṃ uppajjitvā nirujjhati. tato tasmiṃyeva ārammaṇe kiriyamanodhātu āvajjanakiccaṃ sādhayamānā uppajjati. tadanantaraṃ tadeva rūpaṃ passamānaṃ kusalavipākaṃ akusalavipākaṃ vā cakkhuviññāṇaṃ. tato tato paraṃ kāmāvacarakusalākusalakiriyacittesu ekaṃ vā upekkhāsahagatāhetukaṃ cittaṃ pañca satta vā javanāni. tato kāmāvacarasattānaṃ ekādasasu tadārammaṇacittesu javanānurūpaṃ yaṃkiñci tadārammaṇanti. esa nayo sesadvāresupi. manodvāre pana mahaggatacittānipi uppajjantīti. evaṃ chasu dvāresu arūpassa nibbatti passitabbā. evañhi arūpassa nibbattiṃ passanto kālena arūpaṃ sammasati nāma.evaṃ kālena rūpaṃ kālena arūpaṃ sammasitvāpi tilakkhaṇaṃ āropetvā anukkamena paṭipajjamāno eko paññābhāvanaṃ sampādeti.

And just as one should see the generation of the materiality, in the same way the generation of the immaterial (i. e mentality) should be seen. That is the 81 mundane consciousnessess(…) That same as life continuum as well, starting from consciousness next to rebirth linking, and as death consciousness as the termination of the life span.(…) This is how the occurence of the immaterial should be seen in the 6 doors.
One who sees the generation of the immaterial thus is said to comprehend to material at time. That is how, having comprehended the materiaity at time and the immateriality he applies the three characteristics successively, accomplishing the development of wisdom".

As I have only limited time I have written some limited translation. It is at the chapter
“arūpanibbattipassanākārakathā”, describing on how the immaterial states based on the material bases (vatthu) are discerned and seen as anicca dukkha and anatta.
Even though the method is detailed for the eye door only for the sake of being concise, still it implies bhavaṅga as well, based on hadayavatthu.
It is still described in other places by different ways.

Sorry to give only short answer without full translation but my time is limited :pray::sunrise_over_mountains:

Respectfully :pray::innocent:



note 48 XVII Bhadantácariya Buddhaghosa

This structure of conditions is present not only in (a continuity period consisting **
** of) multiple consciousnesses but also in each single consciousness as wel
l” (Vibh-a
199–200).Also the Patisambhidámagga gives five expositions, **four describing **
dependent origination in one life, the fifth being made to present a special inductive **
> generalization to extend what is observable in this life (the fact that consciousness is

always preceded by consciousness, cf. this Ch. §83f.—i.e. that it always has a past and
is inconceivable without one) back beyond birth, and (since craving and ignorance
ensure its expected continuance) on after death. There are, besides, various other,
differing applications indicated by the variant forms given in the suttas themselves.

Even in the suttas we see this: Nidana- Vagga of the Samyutta Nikaya:

The Buddha said: I will teach you, monks, the origin of repeated
birth and
passing away of beings in this world. What, monks, is the origin of
On account of the eye base and visible object, eye consciousness
Contact (phassa) is the conjunction of the three; through contact,
arises; through feeling desire arises; through desire attachment
arises; through attachment bhava (process of becoming) arises;
becoming birth arises; through birth decay and DEATH, SORROW,
pain, grief and despair…The sutta repeats for ear, nose, tongue,
and mind)>

So the point of the teaching is to see that there is no self anywhere in this round.

SN 35.154
Cakkhundriye ce, bhikkhu, udayabbayānupassī viharanto
If, bhikkhu, while one dwells contemplating rise and fall in the eye faculty
SN 35.72
Sādhu, bhikkhu, ettha ca te, bhikkhu, cakkhu ‘netaṃ mama, nesohamasmi na meso attā’ti evametaṃ yathābhūtaṃ sammappaññāya sudiṭṭhaṃ bhavissati.
Good, bhikkhu! And here, bhikkhu, you should clearly see the eye as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’



Brightness is described as most of the other Vipassanupakkilesa (Subdefilements of insight) as a normal and necessary phenomenon, but at a certain stage it becomes sub defilement if the yogi clings to it and interpret it wrongly.

Exactly. It is a defilement of vipassana. However, Pa Auk Sayadaw explains it as the necessary factor whenever one enters phalasamāpatti:

“The element of Nibbāna is so excellent, that a phenomenon more shining, a phenomenon more radiating, a phenomenon more pure, clear(er) phenomenon does not exist in the world. Nibbāna is the most radiating-shining phenomenon. Thus (the Commentary) explains. /But it does not explain it so. See this portion transcribed and translated to English here. (Ashin Saraṇa)/ So, in Nibbāna, regarding the presence of the color of light, quite a lot of the modern meditation masters do not want to agree. Why they don’t want to agree? There is a reason. What reason? After meditating very hard, (they) get so tired, that even while sitting (they) fall asleep. When they fall asleep, (they) do not dream. Bhavaṅga (moments of unconscious life-continuum) happen in succession, and because (the moments) of bhavaṅga happened, (they) abruptly awake from the bhavaṅga and (it) is like waking up from being asleep. So, there he (the meditation master) is sleeping, hence (he) doesn’t encounter any light.”


“When he has understood the round of kamma and the round of kamma result in this way, having discerned the mentality and materiality he abandons the three kind of doubts about past future and present death and rebirth, this is the full Understanding of the known”.

It is true that the bodhisatta Gotama first saw his past lives, then the conditional nature of kamma-vipāka in past & present lives of other beings, and then only He became a Buddha. However, we do not hear about this ever whenever someone becomes a Stream-Enterer or a Once-Returner. Only Anagami and Arahants get these psychic powers (and some of them don’t get them anyway).


“And just as one should see the generation of the materiality, in the same way the generation of the immaterial (i. e mentality) should be seen. That is the 81 mundane consciousnessess(…) That same as life continuum as well, starting from consciousness next to rebirth linking, and as death consciousness as the termination of the life span.(…) This is how the occurence of the immaterial should be seen in the 6 doors.”

Thank you, this is very helpful. I remember, however, that this process can be known to this level only by the Buddha. We get that information in Majjhima Nikāya 12. Mahāsīhanāda Sutta Commentary, explained further in detail by the relevant Sub-Commentary:

“Evaṃ santepi tesaṃ vāro paññāyatīti tesaṃ bhikkhūnaṃ ‘‘ayaṃ paṭhamaṃ pucchati, ayaṃ dutiya’’ntiādinā pucchanavāro tādisassa paññavato paññāyati sukhumassa antarassa labbhanato. Buddhānaṃ pana vāroti īdise ṭhāne buddhānaṃ desanāvāro aññesaṃ napaññāyanato buddhānaṃyeva paññāyati. Idāni tameva paññāyanataṃ yuttito dassento ‘‘vidatthicaturaṅgulachāya’’ntiādimāha. Accharāsaṅghāṭamatte khaṇe aneka-koṭisahassa-cittapavattisambhavato ‘‘vidatthicaturaṅgulachāyaṃ atikkamanato puretaraṃyeva bhagavā…pe… kathetī’’ti vatvā tato lahutarāpi satthu desanāpavatti atthevāti dassento ‘‘tiṭṭhantu vā tāva ete’’tiādimāha.” (MNṬ 12. Mahāsīhanādasuttavaṇṇanā, MM MNṬ 2.39)

It talks about time and the Buddha’s perception of time, which others cannot perceive. There is specifically mentioned the several thousands of ten-millions (several tens of billions) of moments that happen within a snap of fingers and that only the Buddha can perceive them. (As soon as our project for MNA starts to get rolling, we will surely soon get to translate Sub-Commentaries like this word-by-word as well.)

So, the idea of Visuddhimagga that a meditator (who is not a Buddha) can see the citta-vīthi is not acceptable. Only the Buddha can see citta-vīthi. It is also the reason why meditators are supposed to see the 4 aggregates of mind arising simultaneously and not in order, because only the Buddha can see them arising in order. I think Ledi Sayadaw was also very outspoken about the impossible dream to see all moments of mind, but we discussed this elsewhere here in the Clasical Theravada forum.


Ñāṇa (Paññā) also is sub defilement of insight, as well as very important factors.
It becomes defilements of insight only when the meditator feels he has already attained Magga Phala because of it and come to wrong conclusion. Please read this chapter Bhante, you will understand the nature of Vipassanupakkilesa.

Now āloka is cittajjarūpa ( mind born materiality) the colour in these rūpas becomes bright because of the powerful kusala citta. Therefore it is there at Upacāra, Jhāna, Vipassanā and even more with powerful consciousness such as Phala Samāpatti.

Okay, that is a point where many people get misleaded.
In Vipassanā, the Yogi is able to see past and future phenomena. The same vīthi he can focus again and again in various ways. This is the reason why it is possible to know precisely these things. With one object many vīthi arise, bit with the power of meditation he sees again and again the next citta, and then again comes back to see the next citta, and so on.
What is not possible is to know one vīthi without break in one sequence.


Dear venerable sir, please, kindly provide the reference to
(a) any Pali scripture that suggests we observe specifically the past (such as the past cittavithi) as a meditation practice and help me understand why did the Buddha suggested to not observe the past in several Majjhima Nikaya suttas, such as MN 131. Bhaddekaratta Sutta.
(b) any Pali scripture which specifically says that anyone who enters phala samāpatti always upon entry must experience light.

Thank you very much for your explanations and references so far. :sun_with_face:


Okasa Dear Bhante, Visuddhimagga doesn’t consider the mentioned light as “light of wisdom” which is mentioned in the Suttas. It is mentioned as just a light which is a defilement for Vipassana.

According to the classical interpretation of Visuddhimagga, “discern” means “understand” (discern by wisdom). It doesn’t necessitate a “seeing by a light of mind”, but to see by wisdom. Mind and wisdom are two different Paramatthas which have two different functions.

Yes, elements become clear in terms of their function and characteristics. (aka “understanding elements”)

Any kind of mental energy like samadhi/light etc (if they are not hallucinations) can be a support for wisdom to understand elements, but mind or other Cetasikas can’t do the function of Wisdom.

Bhante, it was about whether many of the Paauk yogis’ attainments are real or not.

We and many other scholars and Theros have met and seen many of Paauk and Nauyana accepted Kammatthanacariyas and senior yogis who claim attainments, but still taking medicine for mental instabilities and disorders. They believe that it is not an indicator of invalidity of many of their superhuman attainments.

And many bad guys and the monks whom we know well, could become accepted attainers of Paauk and Nauyana.

One is ex-soldier of special forces who can sit many hours forcefully due to his SF training. One decade back, he was regarded as one of the best yogis of Paauk. Even he himself has later said that he doesn’t believe his attainments.

Another one is a famous blackmagic-monk who maintained a monastery for blackmagic services in Galle area. Later he was captured by the police with the accusations of female-abuse, after his behavior was revealed by a famous FM radio channel. He was believed to be an Abhinna attained monk by pauk and nauyana including even Venerable Ariyananda, the head monk of Nauyana. Just some months before he was captured by the police, Ven. Ariyannanda said in his public speech at the Late Mahathero’s funeral that “one of the Abhinna attained monk told him that the Mahathero was reborn in Tusita heaven”. This monk is that notorious monk.

One decade back, the Nauyana Kammattana-acariya for lay people was a lunatic monk who was sending to mental-hospital time to time. Whenever he was returning from the mental hospital Ven. Ariyananda repeatedly appoints him again to the position of Kammatthana-acariya.

During the last decade, the main two Nauyana Kammatthana-acariyas (for the monks) were said to be Taking medicine for mental instabilities like depression while continuing giving Kammatthana. They don’t believe it is an obstacle to attainments and say those disseases are the attacks of Mara.

There are many other paauk attainers that we know as well. They are either mentally unstable or directly lunatic or at least childish. But many of them are good monks in terms of behaviour.

The Nauyana nuns (as well as pauk nuns I guess) always have more superhuman attainments than male monks. The critics say the more one is mentally weak (not morally) the more he will be attained modern attainments. This criticism is not only about paauk. The reason they say is that the mentally-weak people are vulnerable to see what they believe as happenning real in meditation.

Some monks said that his friend monks (of nauyana and paauk) can’t see the body-parts that they have not previously seen by physical eye, when they are doing 32parts meditation using the samadhi-light they believe. Yet they could see the body-parts that they have seen previously atleast in pictures. So the critics say it is a mental imagination.

One of the Abhidhamma scholar thero (ordained in Nauyana) once said, I believe the Paauk attainments are conceptual.

Because of such observations, many paauk and nauyana monks who initially had faith in Visuddhimagga have gone to Non-Classical teachers (like EBT), thinking that Visuddhimagga is wrong. But they don’t know the classical scholars’ approach to Visuddhimagga is different.

But many of us still respect Paauk because of their classical bent, methodical meditation, monk life and respect for sila-samadhi-panna.