"For those studying Vipassana and Path knowledge, isn't it worth asking what teachings the Mogok Sayadaw gave to Nakulapita and Nakulamata?
Nakulapita, being over 70, couldn't sit, stand, walk, or lie down for long. He requested appropriate teachings. The Buddha taught: 'Let the body be ill but not the mind.'
The 'body' here doesn't just mean limbs, but #refers_to_the_five_aggregates_which_are_signless_and_impermanent. When meditating, don't various sensations arise - stiffness, aches, heat, cold, itching?
Is this #self_or_physical_phenomena? #These_are_physical_phenomena_appearing. Isn't this taught as rūpakkhandha?
In truth, is it stiffness or change? Pain or change? Aching or change? #Not_stable_for_even_a_second_in_the_aggregates - just constant change.
Didn't the Buddha teach that in the blink of an eye, a hundred thousand koṭi arise and pass away? How incredibly fast!
When there's change, #don't_we_experience it? 'Oh, it hurts so much!' Is this a person's feeling or just feeling (vedanā)? God's feeling or just feeling? Brahma's feeling or just feeling? Just feeling. #Is_it_substantial?
When someone says 'You're crying out too much, just endure it,' don't we say 'It hurts!'? When asked where, don't we say 'stomach pain'?
Think carefully - when you check, #do_you_find_stomach_or_softness? If all softness were stomach, wouldn't everything soft have to be called stomach? Can this be so?"
Nakulapita, being over 70, couldn't sit, stand, walk, or lie down for long. He requested appropriate teachings. The Buddha taught: 'Let the body be ill but not the mind.'
The 'body' here doesn't just mean limbs, but #refers_to_the_five_aggregates_which_are_signless_and_impermanent. When meditating, don't various sensations arise - stiffness, aches, heat, cold, itching?
Is this #self_or_physical_phenomena? #These_are_physical_phenomena_appearing. Isn't this taught as rūpakkhandha?
In truth, is it stiffness or change? Pain or change? Aching or change? #Not_stable_for_even_a_second_in_the_aggregates - just constant change.
Didn't the Buddha teach that in the blink of an eye, a hundred thousand koṭi arise and pass away? How incredibly fast!
When there's change, #don't_we_experience it? 'Oh, it hurts so much!' Is this a person's feeling or just feeling (vedanā)? God's feeling or just feeling? Brahma's feeling or just feeling? Just feeling. #Is_it_substantial?
When someone says 'You're crying out too much, just endure it,' don't we say 'It hurts!'? When asked where, don't we say 'stomach pain'?
Think carefully - when you check, #do_you_find_stomach_or_softness? If all softness were stomach, wouldn't everything soft have to be called stomach? Can this be so?"
"Looking at the three Piṭakas collectively, aren't the five aggregates taught? Rūpakkhandha, vedanakkhandha, saññakkhandha, saṅkhārakkhandha, viññāṇakkhandha.
When searching for 'stomach', what's found - #stomach_or_saññakkhandha (perception)? It's perception.
When children are born, do they come with names? Parents give names. #If_you_search_for_these_names_physically_can_you_find_them? No.
#Saññakkhandha_gives_names. Therefore, it's the manager of marking/noting. Is saññakkhandha self (atta) or non-self (anatta)? If it's non-self, how could it give names alone?
Doesn't it need feeling (vedanā) as co-arising factor? Doesn't it need volition (cetanā) that conditions? Doesn't it need consciousness (viññāṇa) that knows?
#By_nature_it's_empty_phenomena_non-self. It can't name anything by itself. Only when feeling, volition, and consciousness arise can naming happen. So is it stomach or perception?
When someone says 'Shouldn't you apply some medicine?' Yes, #shouldn't_we_adjust_with_wisdom? Is the adjusting done by self or by volition (cetanā)? #It's_cetanā. Do we find stomach or cetanā? Only cetanā is found.
When there's change, isn't it known? When feeling, isn't it known? When marking, isn't it known? When prompting, isn't it known? #The_knowing_is_consciousness. These are the #five_aggregates. This is what's called 'body'. That's why 'Let the body be ill but not the mind.' Isn't this worth studying?"
When searching for 'stomach', what's found - #stomach_or_saññakkhandha (perception)? It's perception.
When children are born, do they come with names? Parents give names. #If_you_search_for_these_names_physically_can_you_find_them? No.
#Saññakkhandha_gives_names. Therefore, it's the manager of marking/noting. Is saññakkhandha self (atta) or non-self (anatta)? If it's non-self, how could it give names alone?
Doesn't it need feeling (vedanā) as co-arising factor? Doesn't it need volition (cetanā) that conditions? Doesn't it need consciousness (viññāṇa) that knows?
#By_nature_it's_empty_phenomena_non-self. It can't name anything by itself. Only when feeling, volition, and consciousness arise can naming happen. So is it stomach or perception?
When someone says 'Shouldn't you apply some medicine?' Yes, #shouldn't_we_adjust_with_wisdom? Is the adjusting done by self or by volition (cetanā)? #It's_cetanā. Do we find stomach or cetanā? Only cetanā is found.
When there's change, isn't it known? When feeling, isn't it known? When marking, isn't it known? When prompting, isn't it known? #The_knowing_is_consciousness. These are the #five_aggregates. This is what's called 'body'. That's why 'Let the body be ill but not the mind.' Isn't this worth studying?"
"Is that crying out a person, a deva, or a brahma? #It's_vedanā. Isn't it taught as consciousness, mind-matter, six sense bases, contact, feeling?
When we label it vedanakkhandha, aren't other aggregates co-arising? #What's_prominent_is_vedanā. When we know it's vedanā, we might think 'person' but find vedanā, think 'deva' but find vedanā, think 'brahma' but find vedanā. Is vedanā taught as sakkāya (personality belief)?
#Do_we_find_actual_humans? Devas? Brahmas? Who proves they don't exist? (Vedanā proves it, Lord). Ah, vedanā is sakkāya. Isn't it clear? #Doesn't_wrong_view_fall_away?
When wrong view falls away, will we still believe in creation by Great Brahmas, Eternal God, or Vishnu? #Doesn't_doubt_cease? Isn't it taught that the āsavas of wrong view and ignorance cease?
When vedanā ceases, do we find vedanā or its absence? We find its absence.
#We_don't_find_vedanā_itself. Do we find vedanā or anicca? Isn't it taught as the characteristic of impermanence as suffering, characteristic of suffering as suffering, characteristic of non-self as suffering?
When we find impermanence, do we still find vedanā? When we find suffering, do we find vedanā? When we find non-self, do we find vedanā? #No_owner_exists.
If there's no owner, #can_we_command 'Don't feel pain, I don't like it'? #We_experience_it_because_there's_no_owner.
This is #the_nature_of_non-self, isn't it taught?
Don't we need to distinguish between impermanence and vedanā? Between suffering and vedanā? Between non-self and vedanā? This is #tīraṇa_pariññā (full understanding by investigation).
When finding impermanence, suffering, and non-self, do we find vedanā? Perception? Volition? Consciousness? Form? We only find impermanence, suffering, and non-self.
When finding vedanā, do we find persons or beings? This is #ñāta_pariññā (full understanding of the known).
When we combine impermanence, suffering, and non-self, isn't it taught as arising and passing away? Is this happiness or suffering? Isn't this worth knowing truly? This is #yathābhūta_ñāṇa (knowledge of things as they really are)."
When we label it vedanakkhandha, aren't other aggregates co-arising? #What's_prominent_is_vedanā. When we know it's vedanā, we might think 'person' but find vedanā, think 'deva' but find vedanā, think 'brahma' but find vedanā. Is vedanā taught as sakkāya (personality belief)?
#Do_we_find_actual_humans? Devas? Brahmas? Who proves they don't exist? (Vedanā proves it, Lord). Ah, vedanā is sakkāya. Isn't it clear? #Doesn't_wrong_view_fall_away?
When wrong view falls away, will we still believe in creation by Great Brahmas, Eternal God, or Vishnu? #Doesn't_doubt_cease? Isn't it taught that the āsavas of wrong view and ignorance cease?
When vedanā ceases, do we find vedanā or its absence? We find its absence.
#We_don't_find_vedanā_itself. Do we find vedanā or anicca? Isn't it taught as the characteristic of impermanence as suffering, characteristic of suffering as suffering, characteristic of non-self as suffering?
When we find impermanence, do we still find vedanā? When we find suffering, do we find vedanā? When we find non-self, do we find vedanā? #No_owner_exists.
If there's no owner, #can_we_command 'Don't feel pain, I don't like it'? #We_experience_it_because_there's_no_owner.
This is #the_nature_of_non-self, isn't it taught?
Don't we need to distinguish between impermanence and vedanā? Between suffering and vedanā? Between non-self and vedanā? This is #tīraṇa_pariññā (full understanding by investigation).
When finding impermanence, suffering, and non-self, do we find vedanā? Perception? Volition? Consciousness? Form? We only find impermanence, suffering, and non-self.
When finding vedanā, do we find persons or beings? This is #ñāta_pariññā (full understanding of the known).
When we combine impermanence, suffering, and non-self, isn't it taught as arising and passing away? Is this happiness or suffering? Isn't this worth knowing truly? This is #yathābhūta_ñāṇa (knowledge of things as they really are)."
"Isn't it taught that when Dhamma is lost, search in the body, and when searching in the body, Dhamma is found? Is what's found happiness or suffering? Now you truly know it's suffering.
When you know it's suffering, does the wrong perception (avijjā) of human happiness, deva happiness, or brahma happiness cease or not? Avijjā ceases.
#When_the_root_falls_don't_the_branches_wither? As the great teachers taught.
Avijjā (ignorance), taṇhā (craving), upādāna (clinging) - aren't these taught as kilesa vaṭṭa (cycle of defilements)? If avijjā ceases among these three, will taṇhā come? Will upādāna come? Will kamma come?
See, when the root falls, the branches wither. Will there be future aggregates? No more.
Then #can_2_still_lead_to_3? No more. Isn't this worth studying?"
When you know it's suffering, does the wrong perception (avijjā) of human happiness, deva happiness, or brahma happiness cease or not? Avijjā ceases.
#When_the_root_falls_don't_the_branches_wither? As the great teachers taught.
Avijjā (ignorance), taṇhā (craving), upādāna (clinging) - aren't these taught as kilesa vaṭṭa (cycle of defilements)? If avijjā ceases among these three, will taṇhā come? Will upādāna come? Will kamma come?
See, when the root falls, the branches wither. Will there be future aggregates? No more.
Then #can_2_still_lead_to_3? No more. Isn't this worth studying?"
