Ledi Sayadaw’s note on momentariness

Abhidhamma
1

I just thought to make a new topic rearding the Ledi Sayadaw’s note on momentariness.

I think this quote of Ledi Sayadaw is about the people who try to see the actual speed of impermanence.

I remember the Abhidhamma Analyzer Ven. Maggavihari (who has extensively learned Commentaries and Ledi Sayadaw’s manuals) discussed the following points.

  • "One doesn’t need to see the actual rupa kalapas. The requirement is understanding characteristics of dhammas."
  • "One doesn’t need to see the actual speed of impermanence. The requirement is understanding impermanence."
  • "One doesn’t need to see the actual present moment. No mind-moment can see itself. When we see the present moment, it has already been past. There are 3 types of present moments mentioned in Patisambhidamagga and 2 of 3 are considerably long present-moments."
  1. Khana paccuppanna (present instant)
  2. Santati paccuppanna (a generation of instants)
  3. Addha paccuppanna (present life)
  • The phrase “paccuppannam ca yo dhammam tattha tattha vipassati” found in Bhaddekaratta sutta does not only mean the 1st type of present moment.

Pārājikakaṇḍa-aṭṭhakathā:
Paccuppannañca nāmetaṃ khaṇapaccuppannaṃ, santatipaccuppannaṃ, addhāpaccuppannanti tividhaṃ. Tattha “Khaṇapaccuppannaṃ” nāma uppādajarābhaṅgasamaṅgi, taṃ voropetuṃ na sakkā. Kasmā? Sayameva nirujjhanato. “Santatipaccuppannaṃ” nāma sattaṭṭhajavanavāramattaṃ sabhāgasantativasena pavattitvā nirujjhanakaṃ, yāva vā uṇhato āgantvā ovarakaṃ pavisitvā nisinnassa andhakāraṃ hoti, sītato vā āgantvā ovarake nisinnassa yāva visabhāgautupātubhāvena purimako utu nappaṭippassambhati, etthantare “santatipaccuppanna”nti vuccati . Paṭisandhito pana yāva cuti, etaṃ “Addhāpaccuppannaṃ” nāma. Tadubhayampi voropetuṃ sakkā. Kathaṃ? Tasmiñhi upakkame kate laddhupakkamaṃ jīvitanavakaṃ nirujjhamānaṃ dubbalassa parihīnavegassa santānassa paccayo hoti. Tato santatipaccuppannaṃ vā addhāpaccuppannaṃ vā yathāparicchinnaṃ kālaṃ apatvā antarāva nirujjhati . Evaṃ tadubhayampi voropetuṃ sakkā, tasmā tadeva sandhāya “Santatiṃ vikopetī”ti idaṃ vuttanti veditabbaṃ.

My poor translation:
The Present (paccuppanna) is threefold as “instant-present”, “generational-present” and “extended-present”. Therein instant-present is in arising-decaying-ceasing; it can not be deprived. Why? Because it ceases by itself. Generational-present is seven Javana terms long and having existed as similar generation, it ceases; untill the darkness is present in the one who came from …

According to Patisambhidamagga, “the contemplation of Udaya vaya (arising and passing)” is not just noting the arising and passing.

Udaya is to be understood in terms of Paccayasamudaya (arising due to arising of causes) and the Nibbattilakkhana (Characteristic of arising) both.
There are 4 ways for Paccayasamudaya and 1 way for Nibbattilakkhana.
So 5 ways for Udaya and 5 ways for Vaya.

In order to see Udaya-vaya of Pancakkhanda, there are 50 ways to be concerned. (5*5 *2 = 50)

eg:
Udaya of Rupa:

  1. Avijjā samudayā rupa samudayo (arising of rupa by arising of Ignorance)
  2. Tanhā samudayā rupa samudayo (arising of rupa by arising of Craving)
  3. Kamma samudayā rupa samudayo (arising of rupa by arising of Kamma)
  4. Ahāra samudayā rupa samudayo (arising of rupa by arising of Nutriment)
  5. Nibbatti lakkhanā (the characteristic of arising)

Vaya of Rupa is also taken in the same way but replacing “Samudaya” with “Nirodha” and “Nibbatti” with “Vipariṇāma”.

For Vedana, Sanna and Sankhara, the 4th point becomes “Phassa”.

For Vinnana, the 4th point becomes “Namrupa”.

Paṭisambhidāmaggapāḷi - Udayabbayañāṇaniddesa:

Kathaṃ paccuppannānaṃ dhammānaṃ vipariṇāmānupassane paññā udayabbayānupassane ñāṇaṃ? Jātaṃ rūpaṃ paccuppannaṃ, tassa nibbattilakkhaṇaṃ udayo, vipariṇāmalakkhaṇaṃ vayo, anupassanā ñāṇaṃ. Jātā vedanā…pe… jātā saññā… jātā saṅkhārā… jātaṃ viññāṇaṃ… jātaṃ cakkhu…pe… jāto bhavo paccuppanno, tassa nibbattilakkhaṇaṃ udayo, vipariṇāmalakkhaṇaṃ vayo, anupassanā ñāṇaṃ.

Pañcannaṃ khandhānaṃ udayaṃ passanto kati lakkhaṇāni passati, vayaṃ passanto kati lakkhaṇāni passati, udayabbayaṃ passanto kati lakkhaṇāni passati? Pañcannaṃ khandhānaṃ udayaṃ passanto pañcavīsati lakkhaṇāni passati, vayaṃ passanto pañcavīsati lakkhaṇāni passati; udayabbayaṃ passanto paññāsa lakkhaṇāni passati.

Rūpakkhandhassa udayaṃ passanto kati lakkhaṇāni passati, vayaṃ passanto kati lakkhaṇāni passati, udayabbayaṃ passanto kati lakkhaṇāni passati? Vedanākkhandhassa…pe… saññākkhandhassa…pe… saṅkhārakkhandhassa…pe… viññāṇakkhandhassa udayaṃ passanto kati lakkhaṇāni passati, vayaṃ passanto kati lakkhaṇāni passati, udayabbayaṃ passanto kati lakkhaṇāni passati? Rūpakkhandhassa udayaṃ passanto pañca lakkhaṇāni passati, vayaṃ passanto pañca lakkhaṇāni passati; udayabbayaṃ passanto dasa lakkhaṇāni passati. Vedanākkhandhassa…pe… saññākkhandhassa… saṅkhārakkhandhassa… viññāṇakkhandhassa udayaṃ passanto pañca lakkhaṇāni passati, vayaṃ passanto pañca lakkhaṇāni passati; udayabbayaṃ passanto dasa lakkhaṇāni passati.

Rūpakkhandhassa udayaṃ passanto katamāni pañca lakkhaṇāni passati? Avijjāsamudayā rūpasamudayoti – paccayasamudayaṭṭhena rūpakkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Taṇhāsamudayā rūpasamudayoti – paccayasamudayaṭṭhena rūpakkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Kammasamudayā rūpasamudayoti – paccayasamudayaṭṭhena rūpakkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Āhārasamudayā rūpasamudayoti – paccayasamudayaṭṭhena rūpakkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Nibbattilakkhaṇaṃ passantopi rūpakkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Rūpakkhandhassa udayaṃ passanto imāni pañca lakkhaṇāni passati.

Vayaṃ passanto katamāni pañca lakkhaṇāni passati? Avijjānirodhā rūpanirodhoti – paccayanirodhaṭṭhena rūpakkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Taṇhānirodhā rūpanirodhoti – paccayanirodhaṭṭhena rūpakkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Kammanirodhā rūpanirodhoti – paccayanirodhaṭṭhena rūpakkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Āhāranirodhā rūpanirodhoti – paccayanirodhaṭṭhena rūpakkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Vipariṇāmalakkhaṇaṃ passantopi rūpakkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Rūpakkhandhassa vayaṃ passanto imāni pañca lakkhaṇāni passati. Udayabbayaṃ passanto imāni dasa lakkhaṇāni passati.

Vedanākkhandhassa udayaṃ passanto katamāni pañca lakkhaṇāni passati? Avijjāsamudayā vedanāsamudayoti – paccayasamudayaṭṭhena vedanākkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Taṇhāsamudayā vedanāsamudayoti – paccayasamudayaṭṭhena vedanākkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Kammasamudayā vedanāsamudayoti – paccayasamudayaṭṭhena vedanākkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Phassasamudayā vedanāsamudayoti – paccayasamudayaṭṭhena vedanākkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Nibbattilakkhaṇaṃ passantopi vedanākkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Vedanākkhandhassa udayaṃ passanto imāni pañca lakkhaṇāni passati.

Vayaṃ passanto katamāni pañca lakkhaṇāni passati? Avijjānirodhā vedanānirodhoti – paccayanirodhaṭṭhena vedanākkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Taṇhānirodhā vedanānirodhoti – paccayanirodhaṭṭhena vedanākkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Kammanirodhā vedanānirodhoti – paccayanirodhaṭṭhena vedanākkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Phassanirodhā vedanānirodhoti – paccayanirodhaṭṭhena vedanākkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Vipariṇāmalakkhaṇaṃ passantopi vedanākkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Vedanākkhandhassa vayaṃ passanto imāni pañca lakkhaṇāni passati. Udayabbayaṃ passanto imāni dasa lakkhaṇāni passati.

Saññākkhandhassa…pe… saṅkhārakkhandhassa…pe… viññāṇakkhandhassa udayaṃ passanto katamāni pañca lakkhaṇāni passati? Avijjāsamudayā viññāṇasamudayoti – paccayasamudayaṭṭhena viññāṇakkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Taṇhāsamudayā viññāṇasamudayotipaccayasamudayaṭṭhena viññāṇakkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Kammasamudayā viññāṇasamudayoti – paccayasamudayaṭṭhena viññāṇakkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Nāmarūpasamudayā viññāṇasamudayoti – paccayasamudayaṭṭhena viññāṇakkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Nibbattilakkhaṇaṃ passantopi viññāṇakkhandhassa udayaṃ passati. Viññāṇakkhandhassa udayaṃ passanto imāni pañca lakkhaṇāni passati.

Vayaṃ passanto katamāni pañca lakkhaṇāni passati? Avijjānirodhā viññāṇanirodhoti – paccayanirodhaṭṭhena viññāṇakkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Taṇhānirodhā viññāṇanirodhoti – paccayanirodhaṭṭhena viññāṇakkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Kammanirodhā viññāṇanirodhoti – paccayanirodhaṭṭhena viññāṇakkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Nāmarūpanirodhā viññāṇanirodhoti – paccayanirodhaṭṭhena viññāṇakkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Vipariṇāmalakkhaṇaṃ passantopi viññāṇakkhandhassa vayaṃ passati. Viññāṇakkhandhassa vayaṃ passanto imāni pañca lakkhaṇāni passati. Udayabbayaṃ passanto imāni dasa lakkhaṇāni passati.

Pañcannaṃ khandhānaṃ udayaṃ passanto imāni pañcavīsati lakkhaṇāni passati, vayaṃ passanto imāni pañcavīsati lakkhaṇāni passati, udayabbayaṃ passanto imāni paññāsa lakkhaṇāni passati. Taṃ ñātaṭṭhena ñāṇaṃ, pajānanaṭṭhena paññā. Tena vuccati – “Paccuppannānaṃ dhammānaṃ vipariṇāmānupassane paññā udayabbayānupassane ñāṇaṃ”. Rūpakkhandho āhārasamudayo. Vedanā, saññā, saṅkhārā – tayo khandhā phassasamudayā. Viññāṇakkhandho nāmarūpasamudayo.

3 Likes
2

My understanding is that we cannot actually see the particular moments, but we can see the bulks of moments (khandha paccuppanna) on a very subtle level, to the level where we realize there is no self - we see the basic mechanics of the processes - what arises that must pass, all experience is made up of short conditioned & impersonal moments like pictures (frames) that make up a seemingly continuous film.

We have already discussed the sharpness of mindfulness in a different post here in the Classical Theravada forum. I believe that it is possible to see the present moment, except that what we see is a bulk inside a bulk. Mindfulness is interlaced with the observed phenomena -

Present moment bulk one’s snippet:
mindfulness bulk one’s particle one - mind-phenomena bulk one’s particle one - mindfulness bulk one’s particle two - mind-phenomena bulk one’s particle two - mindfulness bulk one’s particle three - mind-phenomena bulk one’s particle three

After that follows the next moment bulk, bulk two’s snippet:
mindfulness bulk two’s particle one - mind-phenomena bulk two’s particle one - mindfulness bulk two’s particle two - mind-phenomena bulk two’s particle two - mindfulness bulk two’s particle three - mind-phenomena bulk two’s particle three

The Buddha never suggested that seeing the present “moment” is impossible. Except that the Buddha did not describe what “moment” is. From Majjhima Nikaya several suttas, such as the Bhaddekaratta Sutta (MN 131), we can see that being in the present moment is of utmost importance. The wrong view that we should observe the past moment has been a huge obstacle to meditation students.

We can look at the progressive instruction from the Buddha, which clearly shows us that the Buddha trains His students to be in the present moment (and not otherwise). The training is gradual, probably because it is expected that some will come up with this non-Dhamma idea that observing the present moment is not possible. According to Ganakamoggallana Sutta, MN 107, the Buddha first teaches the student to observe the postures and activities in the present moment. So, the student observes standing up during standing up, sitting down during sitting down, etc. Later the Buddha teaches him to observe breath - breathing in during breathing in, breathing out during breathing out.

It is ridiculous to suggest we observe breathing out when we are breathing in or observe breathing in when we are breathing out. In the same way, thinking we observe the past mind should be preposterous. We are always in the present moment and no other way.

But of course, I understand that the concept of “mental bulk” is not directly mentioned by the Buddha. My own experience says that I can observe the present moment vaguely and sharply. As I meditate, my mindfulness gets sharper and sharper, and the bulks that I can distinguish become smaller and smaller. When I do not meditate, the bulks are bigger. The smaller is the bulk, the sharper and clearer is the recognition of the present situation. When the bulks are big, there is more delusion and vagueness of my mindfulness.

1 Like
3

I believe that sutta mentions sitting and attaining the different jhānas… Therefore we can assume that the your example of present moment with the breath does not apply. This is because this sutta mentions breath as it pertains to the attainment of jhāna and the practice of vipassana on real objects because paññatti objects are object of jhāna and not vipassana objects.

1 Like
4

That’s an interesting point. Taking the Buddha’s decision that ānāpānassati represents all four satipaṭṭhānas as actually not at all talking about vipassana. :thinking:

But I understand your view - the Buddha explained that breath is to be observed as the 42nd part of the body, as the element of air (e.g., in MN 62 Mahārāhulovāda Sutta).

My point however was not at all related to vipassanā or samatha nature of breath. I have shown that the Buddha lead His students in observing the present moment already from the beginning of their practice. As they gradually trained in observing the present moment, they went through practices that did not require as much sharp mindfulness to practices that required it sharper and sharper.

The idea that we do not need to be in the present moment and that we can consider past and the future as well has been already very strictly rejected by the leading monks of Myanmar. A famous monk you know of was prohibited to publish his books just because he suggested that considering Dependent Origination with its past and future segments is a suitable meditation practice. The prohibition was based on the fact that observing the past and future is discouraged by the Buddha in, specifically, Bhaddekaratta Sutta. Or so I was told by one of the members of the committee that issued the prohibition.

:sun_with_face:

2 Likes
5

A great topic. Ledi Sayadaw is correct in this case, IMO. He states
As for the exact nature, i.e., the swiftness, of mental phenomena, the understanding of which is the domain of the wisdom of the All-knowing Buddha, one has to accept the authority of the scriptures. Any talk about contemplating the three characteristics of mental phenomena is mere humbug. It is never based on practice, but only on hearsay from the scriptures. If someone were to try it, it would be a far cry from insight

So we hear of people thinking that because they feel ’ bodily vibrations’ that this is experiencing the actual rise and fall of the the elements…

We know that rise and fall is only known after the first stage of vipassana , and even that stage must be like a flash when the mind -door shows itself clearly and nama is understood as differentfrom rupa… And so anatta.

For the present moment: during the development of satipatthana the processes that understand an element know the nimitta of the reality-. So the actual reality has just fallen away but we still consider it as present moment.

2 Likes
6

Very interesting! I thought that the Pa Auk method is entirely based on the idea that actually you must see the three characteristics of mental phenomena as well as all the material elements, in the present moment, by yourself.

The Pa Auk belief is that if you do not see the body and mind all as they are arising-passing, you have not achieved even the first vipassanā-ñāṇa.

Here is more of the citation from Ledi Sayadaw + exact reference:

“The fleeting nature of phenomena is, therefore, aptly compared in the scriptures to a flash of lightning. However, the rapidity of the occurrence of mental phenomena is far greater than that. Their arising and vanishing may even be reckoned in hundreds of thousands of times within a flash of lightning. The rapidity is beyond human comprehension. Therefore, it is not advisable to make such subtle phenomena the object of one’s contemplation. Try as one might, these phenomena will not be comprehended even after contemplating for a hundred or a thousand years. The meditator who tries this will not gain a single ray of insight, but will be beset by more befuddlement and despair. The scriptures say that mental phenomena take place billions and trillions of times within the blink of an eye, a flash of lightning, or the snap of your fingers. Now, the duration of the blink of an eye itself is so fleeting that attempting to contemplate the occurrence of mental phenomena to the billionth or trillionth part of that duration becomes sheer folly. Therefore, one should be satisfied with comprehending the unreliable and transient characteristic of all phenomena, which, after all, is the main purpose. As for the exact nature, i.e., the swiftness, of mental phenomena, the understanding of which is the domain of the wisdom of the All-knowing Buddha, one has to accept the authority of the scriptures. Any talk about contemplating the three characteristics of mental phenomena is mere humbug. It is never based on practice, but only on hearsay from the scriptures. If someone were to try it, it would be a far cry from insight.”

The Manual of Light and The Manual of the Path to Higher Knowledge (Alin-Kyan and Vijjamagga Dipani) by Ledi Sayadaw, BPS, Sri Lanka; 2007 (1996) ; p. 45. (Free for download from here: https://www.bps.lk/olib/bp/bp426s_Ledi_Manual-Of-Light.pdf

1 Like
7

Much of the pa-auk method is actually with past objects and replaying in the mind (at least just before the real vipassana stage…–after paticcasamuppada is complete and lakkhaṇarasapaccupaṭṭhānapadaṭṭhānā stage). It is also mostly like this for the vipassana stage in Pa-Auk as well.

However, past present future are taken.
However, the three time periods are often in reference to the 3 lives periods. past present future lives.
By taking past objects (even in this life as present objects), one can see things as they are.
Just as you can control a video when playing it back, to even see how fast light moves, one can do the same with the mind.
There is also a stage when the mind takes the knowing of the mind of the knowing of the mind etc.

It is best to discuss this with a paauk teacher.
You can reference Knowing and Seeing.
You can reference Wisdom Wide and Deep by Shaila Catherine if you want to explain the Pa-Auk course.
Of course, since you read mm, you can reference Sayadawgyi’s Big Nibbāna books. But I’m not sure if that is a course book. There are course books where you can see what is taught, but they are sometimes useless if you don’t know what the instructions are. They will often just be abhidhamma charts that have no meaning to an outsider.

1 Like
8

@monkSarana Are you saying that if you see the breath inhale (arise) and exhale (pass away), or the belly rise and fall, or your footsteps rise and fall, that this is knowledge of arising and passing?

In a preview of your introduction to meditation video, I do remember you talking about momentary awareness and the rapidity of the mind that changes and “refreshes”. It compared that to the ability for use to perceive motion; the difference between a photo and video. I thought that was the best part of the video and I was impressed that you would mention that in an introduction to meditation. I also mention things like that in my abhidhamma book.

In the same way, the higher the refresh rate, the more realistic and smooth things “appear”. While the mind door is mentioned in the abhdhamma to occur hundreds or billions more times compared to the eye door, the refresh rate is still quite fast.

9

My understanding is in line with Ledi Sayadaw, who explains that we can see impermanence either at the conventional level or on the ultimate level.

“if you see the breath inhale (arise) and exhale (pass away), or the belly rise and fall, or your footsteps rise and fall, that this is knowledge of arising and passing?”

→ This would be the conventional observation of impermanence.

The ultimate level of impermanence is much deeper; it shows that every single moment of consciousness arises and then is totally destroyed to be never recovered again. Then a totally new moment arises, which is also destroyed, unrecoverable. Like this, there arise moments of consciousness, which is actually a mind-object relationship. Namatīti nāmo, because it bends (towards an object), it is called the mind. All mental moments are relationships with an object. All of those moments are related to an object, including bhavaṅga, which is related to the object of the existential sphere (such as human existence).

These moments arise billions of times per second. We can only see chunks, as I have explained in a different post, and those chunks can be narrowed down with sharper and sharper consciousness, like if we pointed a torch at a stream of water spurting from a garden hose in the dark night. We can see a certain width of the water stream based on the width of the light of our torch. If we can sharpen the light of the torch, we can see more detail and clearer. However, no torch will allow us to sharpen the light to the atomic scale. Likewise, the mind of a non-Buddha cannot see the separate moments as they arise and pass. :sun_with_face:

2 Likes
10

In regards to what Buddha can do is true for present moment but it is possible for nonBuddhas to do as past objects.

11

@bksubhuti @monkSarana @RobertK

Dear venerables, there is this opinion among some Abhidhamma scholars in this regard.

What would be your comments, if one said that

“Vipassana” is not

  • seeing the reality (by mind/vinnana)

but

  • understanding the reality (by panna-cetasika).

In other words

"Vipassana is not

  • seeing the actual speed or a slow speed of impermanence

but

  • understanding impermanence

What if he shows the following 4 out of 5 ways of seeing Udayabbaya as in patisambhidamagga as a proof?

2 Likes
12

If you check out the Commentaries, you will see that the 50 kinds of arising-passing are for Arahants. For others who don’t know them, they are 5 kinds of arising of the body (arising of the avijjā & saṅkhāra & kamma in the next life, āhāra (food) during this life, and nibbatti (simply arising) in the present moment) + 5 kinds of passing away of the body (the three as before arising in the past life and passed upon birth; passing away of āhāra during this life; and vipariṇāma (passing away in the present moment). These ten (5 arising & 5 passing) are observed in the body, feelings, perceptions, intentions, and consciousness (i.e., in all the five aggregates) → (5+5) * 5 = 50.

The Commentaries explain that the Arahants can see the arising of avijjā, taṇhā, and kamma in their previous life (as remembering their past lives) and (for our topic, more importantly) the no-more arising of their avijjā-taṇhā-kamma in the Arahants’ next life because they are Arahants, free from rebirth.

So, those who have udayabbaya ñāṇa must have already been liberated from the next birth so that they can see that their avijjā-taṇhā-kamma of their next life won’t arise anymore simply because they are clear about their Arahanthood. Here taṇhā & kamma refer to saṅkhāra, the second point of the Dependent Origination. Here I need to note that the avijjā & saṅkhāra (taṇhā & kamma) points of the Dependent Origination are understood as happening in a previous life, as conditions for rebirth (rebirth then starts by the “viññāṇa” point of the Dependent Origination).

Interestingly, the Paṭisambhidāmagga is the only Mūḷa Pāḷi text that discusses the vipassanā ñāṇas systematically. In the Commentaries, we will find the vipassanã ñāṇas discussed at length by Visuddhimagga only, where we get all 16 levels.

I wonder if Visuddhimagga is actually not just the first, but actually, the only Pāḷi text that discusses Vipassanā ñāṇas for puthujjanas (non-Enlightened persons) & sekhas (Enlightened non-Arahants). Be as it may, the 16 levels of vipassanā ñāṇa are rooted in the original Pāḷi text of Rathavinīta Sutta, so I personally like them. Note, however, that you can “jump over” some stages between 5 & 11, and some go so fast that you are not even expected to notice, such as magga and phala! Or so I have learned from the great Burmese masters. :blush:

The great sayadaw Ashin Paṇḍābhivaṃsa explains in his book “Paṭipattikkama Ṭīkā” (“The Subcommentary about (Meditation) Practice”), p. 369, that Muñcitukamyatāñāṇa, Paṭisaṅkhāñāṇa, Saṅkhārupekkhāñāṇa are different as words, but they are the same in their meaning:

“မုဉ္စိတုကမျတာဉာဏ်၊ ပဋိသင်္ခါဉာဏ်၊ သင်္ခါရုပေက္ခါဉာဏ် ဟူသော နာမည် ပညတ်တို့သည်ကား သဒ္ဒါမျှသာထူး၍ အတ္ထကား တူကြလေသည်။”

And then, on page 370, he adds that Vipassanā ñāṇas are only the way how nature is. No one can experience them one after another.

“ဤသို့ ပြဆိုအပ်ပြီးသော အဆင့်ဆင့်သော ဉာဏ်စဉ်တို့သည်ကား ပုဂ္ဂလကိစ္စနှင့် မရောမယှက်ဓမ္မကိစ္စ သက်သက်မျှသာ ဖြစ်လေသည်။ ထို့ကြောင့် တစ်ခုသောဉာဏ်ဆင့်မှ သည်တစ်ခုသော ဉာဏ်အဆင့်သို့ ရောက်အောင် ပုဂ္ဂိုလ်အနေအားဖြင့် ဘယ်သူမှ မစွမ်းဆောင်နိုင်ကြချေ။”

The meditation master “Vipassanā Pāragū,” apparently a senior student of Ledi Sayadaw, wrote in his “Vipassanā Hsayar Pshit Thintan, Vipassanā Pāragū Kyam” (“The course on becoming a Vipassanā master, the book of those accomplished in Vipassanā”) on page 82 that because gotrabhū, magga, and phala ñāṇas take altogether only around 5 mind-moments they may feel indistinguishable, as a single, unified experience of mind directed toward Nibbāna.

“ဤဂေါတြဘူ, မဂ်ဖိုလ်, ဉာဏ်သုံးပါးသည်လည်း စိတ္တက္ခဏ လေးကြိမ် ငါးကြိမ်မျှသာ ကြာရသောကြောင့် ဘယ်ဉာဏ်က ဘယ်လို နေသည်ဟု ယောဂီ၏ စိတ်၌ မခွဲခြားတတ်ပေ။ သို့ရာတွင် ထိုဉာဏ် သုံးပါးမှာ လောကြီးကို အာရုံ မပြုဘဲ နိဗ္ဗာန်ကို အာရုံပြုတာချင်းကလည်းတူ၊ တစ်ဆက်တည်းကလည်း ဖြစ်ကြရ၍ သုံးပါးစလုံးကို တစ်ပေါင်းတည်း ပြု၍မူကား သိသာလှပါ၏။”

More commonly, however, students happen to stay in the phalañāṇa for a number of minutes. According to the Commentarial explanation, phala ñāṇa takes two mind-moments. Vipassanā Pāragū explains that the additional moments of phalañāṇa are javana moments.

ဤသို့ ဂေါတြဘူ, မဂ်, ဖိုလ်, ဖိုလ် ဟူသော စိတ္တက္ခဏလေးငါးချက်ဖြင့် နိဗ္ဗာန်ကို မျက်မှောက်ပြုသွားရင်း ဖိုလ်ဇောတွေ ဆက်၍ မိနစ်ပေါင်း အတော်ကြာအောင် ဆက်၍ ကျသွားသော ယောဂီများမှာမူ ပို၍ ထင်ရှားလှပါ၏။"

Abhidhammatthasaṅgaha lists only ten kinds of Vipassanā Ñāṇa (insight knowledges) :

“Sammasanañāṇaṃ udayabbayañāṇaṃ bhaṅgañāṇaṃ bhayañāṇaṃ ādīnavañāṇaṃ nibbidāñāṇaṃ muccitukamyatāñāṇaṃ paṭisaṅkhāñāṇaṃ saṅkhārupekkhāñāṇaṃ anulomañāṇañceti dasa vipassanāñāṇāni.” (Abhidhammatthasaṅgaha - 9. Kammaṭṭhānaparicchedo - Vipassanākammaṭṭhānaṃ - Visuddhibhedo - par. 46, MM Abhs 63)

4 Likes
22

Nikolai has been suspended so he cannot rejoin because he refused to answer if he was a previously suspended user. His posts have been deleted to discourage the effort of joining again which is against the Terms of Use and FAQ . Please flag suspect posts as soon as you see them. We will investigate.

23

Okasa bhante,

Let’s assume Vipassana is only about the Present.

  • The Bhaddekaratta Sutta says that the Vipassana is done in the Present moment.

  • The Aṭṭhakathā says that there are three types of Present moments. (as khana, santati and addha)

Though Khaṇa-paccuppanna (exact present moment) is considered hard or impossible to catch, Santati-paccuppanna (some seconds) and Addhā-paccuppanna (this lifetime) can be caught by the mind.

If one were to notice the Arising of the Addhā present moment (our birth), then it is clearly a contemplation about a past moment.

What do you think about it?

Vandami!

24

What do you think the Buddha would answer to your question? :thinking:

1 Like
25

Bhante, I think all the three Paccuppannas (present moments) are allowed.

Reason is the Suttas like Mahapadana and Mahanidana mention that the Bodhisatta’s Vipassana approach (just before the Buddhahood) includes the “Soka-parideva-dukkha-dukkha-domanassa-upayasa” as well. If it is only about Khana and Santati Paccuppannas, then it can not be about “Soka-parideva”.

Other reason is the Atthakatha and Visuddhimagga explains Vipassana regarding all the three Paccuppannas.

(The Paauk claims of vipassana about seeing past lives without Abhinna is a different case.)

And I would like to know what you think about the following explanation of Venerable Maggavihari.

The Paccuppanna taught in Theravada has no any relation with “Current moment (now)”.

Paccuppanna means a Dhamma in Khanattaya (Uppada-thiti-bhanga).

No matter a dhamma be present, past or future, if it is in Khanattaya for the meditator’s mind, then it is Paccuppanna.

In other words when a vipassana meditator considers any Sankhata paramattha dhamma of past, present or future with regard to Khanattaya, then it is in Paccuppanna.

26

For the time being, I will stick to the consensus of the 15 Tipitakadharas of Myanmar, who agree that we should meditate in the present moment, namely, not in the past, not in the future. And therefore, I continue rejecting Pa Auk Sayadaw and other people of “other view” (aññavāda) whose ideas are rejected by the 15 Tipitakadharas of Myanmar.

In my opinion, we need to follow our meditation teacher. All Buddha’s teachings is based on teacher-student. As soon as we go into our ideas, especially in meditation, we are making our own Buddhism, which is not right. Therefore, let’s stick to what our teachers teach and what their teachers taught them.

Pa Auk Sayadaw’s idea of three times applied to meditation was not taught to him by his teacher (and if it was, I’d like to know who was that teacher). It is his own first idea, which is not supported by the lineage of Enlightened masters of Myanmar. Therefore, I reject it on the grounds of “non-practical” (no practical reason to accept this idea, because we have no evidence of anyone’s Enlightenment that way).

Note, that Pa Auk Sayadaw several years ago, when visiting the USA, clearly stated he is not Enlightened. We need to be clear about these things, otherwise people get wrong in their meditation practice, which is not good for them and for the Sasana.

I hope that the Buddhist tradition as is will prevail, so that many more people can become Enlightened. With new ideas on how to meditate the Path to Nibbana will be closed very soon. :sun_with_face:

1 Like
27

Dear bhante,

I am very much thankful for your input (honestly) and would like to ask permission to reply according to my view for the time being.

I like this phrase and believe any Puthujjana’s view (including myself) is not guaranteed to be unwavering until Sotapanna.

I will stick to the consensus of the Commentaries over any type of Personal Opinion.

I continue rejecting any type of Personal Opinion whose ideas are rejected by the Commentary.

In my opinion, and in Commentary’s opinion, the precedence is Sutta-Suttanuloma-Acariyavada-Attanomati.

I think the Omniscient Buddha said it regarding the “Buddha-student relationship”. The Omniscient One recorrected Venerable Ananda by saying it.

I agree.

Yes, the Commentary is the teacher (after the Sutta and Suttanuloma) of any modern teacher.

I don’t tend to reject anything that is supported by the commentary, even if it is coming from controversial teachers.

The Tipitaka and Commentaries doesn’t allow any other Authority than themselves.

There’s no way of proving someone is enlightened and no evidences found to prove there is a lineage of Enlightened masters of Myanmar.

Thai Forest Tradition which is advocating a semi-eternalism also claim like that.

Anyone who don’t adhere to the Commentarial Strict Vinaya and anyone who don’t adhere to the Commentarial interpretation of meditation, can not be enlightened, according to the Commentary.

I know that and I believe the same about many other modern popular meditation masters.

Completely agree.

And Bhante,

I see most of your (and some other people’s here) views are based on the Confidence about an assumed Enlightenment or attainment of a modern Master or lineage.

Therefore their interpretation of the Tipitaka also biased towards that direction. This is a serious mistake that shortens the longevity of the Sasana, I think.

Such a position is not allowed by the Ancient Theravada.

Furthermore I don’t think such a position is sensible either.

Vandami.

(Non of these comments are written with any ill will and I like to read your posts as well.)

28

I see most of your (and some other people’s here) views are based on the Confidence about an assumed Enlightenment or attainment of a modern Master or lineage.

Therefore their interpretation of the Tipitaka also biased towards that direction. This is a serious mistake that shortens the longevity of the Sasana, I think.

Such a position is not allowed by the Ancient Theravada.

Let’s examine this your “non-allowance”. Let me know the exact citation where this is not allowed in the scriptures. As far as I understand, if students of venerable Sāriputta and venerable Moggallāna believed the same thing as you do, they would have never become their students and never become Enlightened based on their instructions.

You may like to know that the Arahanthood of Mahasi Sayadaw was approved by gods themselves. Similarly, Webu Sayadaw and Sun Lun Sayadaw were visited by deities for teaching about Dhamma, likewise Maha Bodhi Myaing Sayadaw and Mrauk Oo Sayadaw, two masters who live until today. In fact, I myself met with Mrauk Oo Sayadaw and discussed with him the visits of deities who come to hear his Dhamma Teaching. A medical doctor was present himself when deities visited Maha Bodhi Myaing Sayadaw for Dhamma teaching, I have myself read his account of this experience in the original Burmese language.

In SN 3.11, the Buddha says that a wise person should check an Arahant himself.

If I understand your suggestion correctly, you say that we should actually not check monks whether they are Arahants and we should not assume whether they are Arahanats or not. However, it seems to me that this your proposition does not seem to be in accordance with the Sattajatila Sutta. In fact, it runs very much contrary to the way lay people, monks, and even kings dealt with their teachers. There were quite a few cases in Myanmar when monks where checked for their attainments, but let me share them with you in a different post if you ask for that.

:sun_with_face:

29

Bhante, I meant the “Interpretation of the Tipitaka” is not done according to the personal confidences about monks. I didn’t mean every confidence is mistaken or monks should not be checked.

Mahapadesa sutta only allow us to accept any Thera’s opinion after checking with Dhammavinaya.

And the Commentary only allow us to accept any Thera’s opinion after checking with the Commentary.

Once even a Sotapanna Thera had not been allowed by the Sangha to interpret Tipitaka because he had not learned in the traditional way. (according to the Commentary)

I like to hear it bhante.