When studying the scriptures again, it's good to learn about burial (saṅgahita) and faith (saddhā). Isn't this worth examining? It's good to analyze the meaning of 'burial.'
When people die, don't we perform burial rites? Some cremate, some bury in the ground, some feed to fish in water, and some place bodies in tree forks for birds and animals to eat.
Whether it's cremation, burial in the ground, or placing in tree forks - 'burial' means disposing of the physical remains. Isn't this worth contemplating?
Similarly now, don't we need to 'bury' (let go of) the mental states that arise - whether it's greed (lobha), hatred (dosa), or delusion (moha)?"
This teaching uses the metaphor of physical burial to illustrate the Buddhist practice of letting go of unwholesome mental states. Just as we properly dispose of physical remains, we should learn to properly handle and release unwholesome mental states when they arise.
The parallel between physical saṅgahita (burial/disposal) and the spiritual practice of letting go of defilements shows how everyday concepts can help us understand deeper Dhamma principles.
The Nature of Greed
Isn't it worth understanding about greed (lobha)? Is wanting 'me' or is it craving (taṇhā)? Isn't it taught as 'greed-craving' (lobha-taṇhā)? When we understand it as taṇhā, does the 'I' remain? No, it doesn't. Isn't this worth contemplating? Is wanting 'me' or taṇhā?
Isn't taṇhā taught as sakkāya (personality belief)? See how wrong view (diṭṭhi) falls away? It falls away, doesn't it? And when that taṇhā arises and wants something, doesn't it cease? Do we see taṇhā or do we see impermanence (anicca)? Isn't it taught that #only_when_we_see_impermanence_can_we_be_confident?
Then, when we understand non-existence as anicca and knowing as magga (path), does taṇhā come again? Without taṇhā, can there be clinging (upādāna)? Without upādāna, can there be kamma? Will there be another aggregates (khandha)? This is #nirodha_sacca (the Truth of Cessation).
This is how we need to 'bury' (let go of) these states. Isn't this worth contemplating? Study this thoroughly and precisely."
This teaching explains how understanding the true nature of craving leads to the cessation of suffering through:
1. Seeing craving as impersonal (not-self)
2. Understanding its impermanent nature
3. Breaking the chain of dependent origination
4. Realizing the Truth of Cessation
Isn't it worth understanding about greed (lobha)? Is wanting 'me' or is it craving (taṇhā)? Isn't it taught as 'greed-craving' (lobha-taṇhā)? When we understand it as taṇhā, does the 'I' remain? No, it doesn't. Isn't this worth contemplating? Is wanting 'me' or taṇhā?
Isn't taṇhā taught as sakkāya (personality belief)? See how wrong view (diṭṭhi) falls away? It falls away, doesn't it? And when that taṇhā arises and wants something, doesn't it cease? Do we see taṇhā or do we see impermanence (anicca)? Isn't it taught that #only_when_we_see_impermanence_can_we_be_confident?
Then, when we understand non-existence as anicca and knowing as magga (path), does taṇhā come again? Without taṇhā, can there be clinging (upādāna)? Without upādāna, can there be kamma? Will there be another aggregates (khandha)? This is #nirodha_sacca (the Truth of Cessation).
This is how we need to 'bury' (let go of) these states. Isn't this worth contemplating? Study this thoroughly and precisely."
This teaching explains how understanding the true nature of craving leads to the cessation of suffering through:
1. Seeing craving as impersonal (not-self)
2. Understanding its impermanent nature
3. Breaking the chain of dependent origination
4. Realizing the Truth of Cessation
Anger
Is anger 'me' or is it just dosa (hatred)? Isn't dosa taught as sakkāya (personality belief)? Think about it. When we don't understand the true nature of dosa, don't we say things like 'don't mess with my mind' or 'I am very short-tempered'? Doesn't this create diṭṭhi (wrong view)? Doesn't dosa become sakkāya? Doesn't this become #sakkāya_diṭṭhi (personality belief)? It's because we're identifying with it.
Isn't it taught that when 'I' is involved, it becomes like a guest's dog that creates trouble and suffering wherever it goes? #When_wrong_view_enters_can_one_escape_31_realms? #Path_and_fruition_are_blocked. Isn't this worth investigating?
Is anger 'me' or just dosa? When we see it as dosa, does 'I' remain? When that angry mind arises, doesn't it cease? When it ceases, do we see anger or do we see non-existence? Isn't non-existence taught as anicca (impermanence)? Isn't knowing taught as magga (path)? Will anger come again? Isn't this worth studying?
Whether good or bad states arise, whatever dhamma appears, sabbe saṅkhārā (all formations are impermanent). See how everything ends in impermanence? #When_we_see_impermanence_everything_ceases. Isn't this worth examining? We need to see this impermanence.
Isn't the characteristic of impermanence taught as dukkha sacca (Truth of Suffering)? Isn't the characteristic of suffering taught as dukkha sacca? Isn't the characteristic of non-self taught as dukkha sacca? #We_need_to_reach_the_Truth.
When we know something as suffering, does taṇhā (craving) that delights in it still come? No, it doesn't. Without taṇhā, can there be upādāna (clinging)? Without upādāna, can there be bodily, verbal, or mental kamma? Without these, doesn't the cycle of aggregates end? This is #nirodha_sacca (Truth of Cessation). Isn't this worth investigating? Think about it. Remember, thinking this way is doing the practice."
This teaching explains:
1. How identifying with anger creates personality belief
2. The importance of seeing anger's impermanent nature
3. How understanding leads to the cessation of suffering
4. The practical path to liberation through direct observation
The emphasis is on direct investigation and understanding rather than theoretical knowledge.
Perception's Veil
Isn't it worth examining wrong perception, wrong understanding, and wrong view? Perception (saññā) veils what we see. When seeing occurs, do we see a person or just visible form (rūpa-dhātu)? Isn't it taught that perception veils what we actually see? We only see visible form, but perception labels it as 'person', 'woman', 'man', 'deva', 'brahma'.
#If_we_remove_saññākkhandha (aggregate of perception), does 'person' still exist? Without perception, do devas or brahmas exist? However, this happens because of #wrong_attention (ayoniso manasikāra). Isn't this worth investigating? That's why it's taught that perception veils seeing, and only by clearing up doubt about perception can doubt be eliminated.
When we look through the glasses of wisdom given by the Buddha, do we see people or just visible form? #We_only_see_form, right? Is it a deva or just form? A brahma or just form? Isn't this worth examining?
Isn't this rūpakkhandha (form aggregate) taught to be like a foam bubble? When we see and know it as a bubble, do we still find anything to love? Anything to hate? #Aren't_we_free_from_love_and_hate?
Doesn't this form aggregate change and cease? When it ceases, do we see form or do we see non-existence? Isn't non-existence taught as anicca? Knowing this is magga (path). Isn't this worth contemplating?
We need to realize the voidness (suññatā) of one form, the voidness of one mind. Isn't it taught as #the_voidness_of_mind_and_matter? Isn't this worth investigating? Think about it. Remember, thinking this way is practicing. Think thoroughly.
In summary, we only find mind (nāma) and matter (rūpa). Are there persons and beings, or just mind and matter? These are the essential points, understand?"
This teaching explains:
1. How perception veils reality
2. The importance of seeing beyond conceptual labels
3. Understanding the empty nature of form and mind
4. The path to freedom through correct understanding
The emphasis is on direct investigation of reality as it is, rather than how it appears through the veil of perception.
Delusion
When greed or anger arises, is it because of knowing or not knowing? #Not_knowing_is_moha (delusion). Isn't this worth contemplating? If this delusion is penetrated by light, will craving (taṇhā) still come? Will anger (dosa) still come?
We need to examine this delusion. We need to know when delusion appears as delusion. Let's use an example: You're sitting by a wide road, and there are 3-4 people talking. Among the travelers, 4-5 people are walking while talking. There's a friend of yours named Ba Aung. You want to greet him, but you can't recall his name. You want to greet him, right?
After about one or two minutes, the person disappears, and only then does 'Ba Aung' appear in your mind. Could you think of it earlier? Isn't this worth investigating? #This_is_delusion_appearing.
When not knowing appears, is it persons and beings or is it the phenomenon of delusion? That's delusion appearing. When it appears, can the knowing mind that knows 'Ba Aung' arise? #Can_two_appear_simultaneously?
The state of not knowing is appearing, understand? #The_state_of_forgetting_is_appearing. Isn't this worth investigating as the appearance of delusion? Only when it reaches impermanence does 'Ba Aung' appear. Could it appear while delusion was present?
Doesn't delusion have impermanence? Doesn't greed-craving have impermanence? Doesn't anger-defilement have impermanence? Doesn't delusion-defilement have impermanence? Sabbe saṅkhārā (all formations are impermanent).
See, when impermanence is seen, do we still find greed? Do we still find anger? Do we still find delusion? #This_is_how_to_comprehend_it. Isn't this worth contemplating?
Isn't it taught: 'The destruction of lust is Nibbāna, the destruction of hatred is Nibbāna, the destruction of delusion is Nibbāna'? That's what we need. Isn't this worth contemplating?"
This teaching explains:
1. The nature of delusion and how it operates
2. How delusion prevents clear knowing
3. The impermanent nature of all defilements
4. The path to Nibbāna through understanding
The emphasis is on recognizing and understanding delusion as it actually is, leading to its cessation.
Faith (Saddhā)
We need to develop saddhā (faith). Saddhā means confidence. #When_seeing_the_aggregates, do we find people? Devas? Brahmas? The 32 parts of the body? What we find - is it a person or the four great elements (dhātu)? We only find the four elements, right? Isn't this worth investigating?
We need to examine these as four elements. Where there are four great elements, aren't there four secondary elements? When these eight elements contact each other, doesn't sound arise? These are the nine types of matter (navakalāpa). In summary, we only get #rūpakkhandha (form aggregate).
Whenever two forms contact, doesn't consciousness arise? Can consciousness arise alone? There are four mental aggregates (nāmakkhandha). Are they beings or four mental aggregates? Just four mental aggregates.
Is the eye-sensitivity a person? Is visible form a person? When we analyze the aggregates, don't we find form aggregate? Four mental aggregates plus form aggregate makes (five aggregates, Venerable Sir). These aggregates appear at the eye.
When the dhamma disappears, look in the body. Isn't it taught that when you look in the body, you find the blocks? #When_we_find_aggregates_we'll_find_dhamma. Will we find dhamma if we find people? Now we're seeing aggregates, right? Doesn't faith arise? Isn't it taught that when the object is right, faith is right?
The object of observation is the five aggregates. Now #we_have_faith. Whether they say people, devas, or brahmas exist, will we accept it? What we find are the five aggregates. Isn't this worth contemplating? When the object is right, faith is right. The five aggregates are the object of observation. Now we have faith.
Shouldn't we continue practicing? Are these five permanent or impermanent? Don't they cease after arising? The object shows impermanence, doesn't it? Doesn't wisdom know it as impermanence? The object shows suffering, doesn't it? Doesn't wisdom know it as suffering? The object shows non-self, doesn't it? Doesn't wisdom know it as non-self? Think about it. #Object_and_Observer.
Isn't it taught that when the object is right, faith is right? The object is impermanent, suffering, non-self. Together, isn't this taught as arising and passing away? What truth is this? (The Truth of Suffering, Venerable Sir). Is human happiness or suffering truth? Deva happiness or suffering truth? Brahma happiness or suffering truth? #We_only_find_suffering_truth. Isn't it taught that when the object is right, faith is right?
No matter how they say human, deva, or brahma happiness exists, will we accept it? What we've found is the truth of suffering. We won't accept it, understand? #When_we_know_we_abandon. Don't we abandon? This is what we need to study..."
This teaching emphasizes:
1. The development of authentic faith through direct observation
2. Understanding the five aggregates as they really are
3. The relationship between correct objects and correct faith
4. How understanding leads to abandonment of wrong views
We need to develop saddhā (faith). Saddhā means confidence. #When_seeing_the_aggregates, do we find people? Devas? Brahmas? The 32 parts of the body? What we find - is it a person or the four great elements (dhātu)? We only find the four elements, right? Isn't this worth investigating?
We need to examine these as four elements. Where there are four great elements, aren't there four secondary elements? When these eight elements contact each other, doesn't sound arise? These are the nine types of matter (navakalāpa). In summary, we only get #rūpakkhandha (form aggregate).
Whenever two forms contact, doesn't consciousness arise? Can consciousness arise alone? There are four mental aggregates (nāmakkhandha). Are they beings or four mental aggregates? Just four mental aggregates.
Is the eye-sensitivity a person? Is visible form a person? When we analyze the aggregates, don't we find form aggregate? Four mental aggregates plus form aggregate makes (five aggregates, Venerable Sir). These aggregates appear at the eye.
When the dhamma disappears, look in the body. Isn't it taught that when you look in the body, you find the blocks? #When_we_find_aggregates_we'll_find_dhamma. Will we find dhamma if we find people? Now we're seeing aggregates, right? Doesn't faith arise? Isn't it taught that when the object is right, faith is right?
The object of observation is the five aggregates. Now #we_have_faith. Whether they say people, devas, or brahmas exist, will we accept it? What we find are the five aggregates. Isn't this worth contemplating? When the object is right, faith is right. The five aggregates are the object of observation. Now we have faith.
Shouldn't we continue practicing? Are these five permanent or impermanent? Don't they cease after arising? The object shows impermanence, doesn't it? Doesn't wisdom know it as impermanence? The object shows suffering, doesn't it? Doesn't wisdom know it as suffering? The object shows non-self, doesn't it? Doesn't wisdom know it as non-self? Think about it. #Object_and_Observer.
Isn't it taught that when the object is right, faith is right? The object is impermanent, suffering, non-self. Together, isn't this taught as arising and passing away? What truth is this? (The Truth of Suffering, Venerable Sir). Is human happiness or suffering truth? Deva happiness or suffering truth? Brahma happiness or suffering truth? #We_only_find_suffering_truth. Isn't it taught that when the object is right, faith is right?
No matter how they say human, deva, or brahma happiness exists, will we accept it? What we've found is the truth of suffering. We won't accept it, understand? #When_we_know_we_abandon. Don't we abandon? This is what we need to study..."
This teaching emphasizes:
1. The development of authentic faith through direct observation
2. Understanding the five aggregates as they really are
3. The relationship between correct objects and correct faith
4. How understanding leads to abandonment of wrong views
