The Simile of the Wax Figure and understanding ultimate reality prevents unwholesome mental states.

 "The Simile of the Wax Figure

Take a pure white block of wax, about one viss (1.6 kg).
Place it on the table.
What do people see?
#They_see_a_wax_block

Then let it soften in the sun.
Shape it into an elephant
With beautiful tusks, a royal white elephant.
Now what do people see?
They see an elephant.

If you squeeze and knead it,
#Do_you_find_elephant_or_wax?
You find wax.
Are people seeing wax or elephant?
#They_see_wax_as_elephant
#It's_just_a_shaped_form

What truly exists - elephant or wax?
#Seeing_the_non-existent_as_existent

Then reshape it into a horse.
Knead it again -
#What_truly_exists_horse_or_wax?
People see the horse,
But nobody sees the existing wax.

#This_is_how_consciousness_sees

In truth, is it wax or just visible form (rūpa)?
#Looking_however_you_want_there's_only_visible_form

Don't we wrongly perceive it as:
- Male/female
- Devas/brahmas
- Sons/daughters?
#This_is_wrong_perception

Consider this carefully..."

This simile illustrates how we misconceive reality through wrong perception and conceptualization.

"🌺The Simile of Son/Daughter🌺

When holding what you think is your daughter
And kissing her - do you find a daughter or just a smell?
When holding what you think is your son
And kissing him - do you find a son or just a smell?

#Through_conceptual_thinking:
'My daughter was born!'
'My son was born!'
#This_is_mind-consciousness
#Just_thinking_and_imagining

But when nose contacts:
Daughter or smell?
Son or smell?
Only smell is found - this is nose-consciousness
Isn't there nāma (consciousness)?
Isn't there rūpa (smell)?
#These_are_the_two_realities

Searching for son or daughter:
Can you find them?
#If_not_found_do_they_exist?
What's actually found - son/daughter or nāma-rūpa?
#When_truth_is_known_delusion_disappears

#Looking_with_parent's_eyes_sees_sons_and_daughters
#This_is_conceptual_mind-consciousness

Consider this carefully..."

This simile illustrates how we superimpose concepts of "son" and "daughter" over the ultimate reality of just nāma-rūpa (mind-matter).

🌺The Ear-Door🌺

Who knows nāma-rūpa? Not a person, but magga-sacca.
Which path? (Samādhi path, Venerable Sir)
#One_who_has_samādhi

When someone speaks harshly, insultingly:
#Mindfulness_when_hearing is taught
With mindfulness, what's found?
Just nāma-rūpa:
- Hearing consciousness (nāma)
- Sound (rūpa)
#Only_these_two_are_found

Without learning (sutavā):
When called "thief!" - anger arises
Is anger wholesome or unwholesome?
Does it bring happiness or suffering?
#The_Buddha_taught_not_to_accept_suffering

#Due_to_lack_of_learning_anger_arises
Where does it arise?
#It_arises_taking_things_personally

When investigating:
#Is_there_a_thief_or_just_sound?
When hearing "sound" - does anger arise?
When hearing "thief" - anger arises

Need to distinguish conventional/ultimate truth:
- Hearing consciousness (nāma)
- Sound (rūpa)
#Two_realities

As Mogok Sayadaw taught:
"Ear hears Dhamma, wisdom turns to khandhas"

#When_turned_to_khandhas:
- No "thief" found
- No "dog" found
#This_is_ñāta_pariññā

#To_prevent_rāga_dosa_moha
We must analyze khandhas

What appears: beings
What's found: five aggregates

When this is clearly known,
āsavas of wrong view and ignorance cease.
When suffering truth is known,
āsavas of sensuality and becoming cease..."

"Path Truth is Known by Mind

Is it a self or Path Truth that knows nāma-rūpa?

#Path_Truth_is_known_by_mind

Which path? (Samādhi path)

#It's_just_mind - consider this

Two types of mental knowing:

1. Conceptual thinking of beings (led by wrong view)

2. Mindful knowing (led by sati)

Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration

All come down to "Sati"

See how:

- Form changes and breaks up

- Mind knows and ceases

Do we see nāma-rūpa or impermanence?

Is impermanence happiness or suffering?

Is suffering controllable? Following beings' wishes?

This is #anatta

When seeing:

- Impermanence - no more nāma-rūpa

- Suffering - no more nāma-rūpa

- Non-self - no more nāma-rūpa

This is #Investigation_Knowledge

When seeing nāma-rūpa:

- No devas or brahmas

- No Venerable Ānanda

- No 31 planes

#This_is_voidness_of_nāma-rūpa

In samādhi:

#No_more_concepts_and_signs

Only characteristics appear clearly

With strong concentration:

Seeing three characteristics

Leading to #Knowledge_of_Things_as_They_Really_Are

Then #Knowledge_of_Disenchantment arises

Behavior changes, becoming more refined"

"Third stage:
Still seeing arising-passing (dukkha sacca)
Search the entire body
Not even a needle-point of happiness found
#When_vipassana_matures_path_knowledge_arises

Perfect sīla test:
When deeply insulted:
- No thought of revenge
- No mental kamma
- No verbal kamma
- No physical kamma
#This_is_complete_sīla

With all 8 path factors:
- No more aggregates seen
- No more arising-passing
#This_is_lokuttara
#Direct_realization_of_nibbana

Stream-entry eliminates:
- Wrong view (diṭṭhi)
- Doubt (vicikicchā)
But not yet:
- Sensual desire (kāmarāga)
- Ill-will (byāpāda)
#The_root_is_caught

Three full understandings:
1. Of the known (ñāta pariññā)
2. By investigation (tīraṇa pariññā)
3. By abandoning (pahāna pariññā)

All past unwholesome kamma
Becomes ineffective (ahosi-kamma)

In daily life:
#Must_perfect_sīla_factors
Look with #Two_eyes:
- Conventional truth
- Ultimate truth"

The Discourse on the Characteristic of Non-Self (Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta)

The Blessed One said to the group of five monks: “Monks, form (rūpa) is not self (anattā). If form were self, then it would not lead to affliction, and one could say of form: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.’ But because form is not self, it leads to affliction, and one cannot command: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.’ Similarly, monks, feeling (vedanā) is not self. If feeling were self, it would not lead to affliction, and one could say: ‘Let my feeling be thus; let my feeling not be thus.’ But because feeling is not self, it leads to affliction, and one cannot command it. Perception (saññā) too is not self. If perception were self, it would not lead to affliction, and one could say: ‘Let my perception be thus; let my perception not be thus.’ But because perception is not self, it leads to affliction, and one cannot command it. Mental formations (saṅkhārā) are not self. If they were self, they would not lead to affliction, and one could say: ‘Let my mental formations be thus; let them not be thus.’ But because they are not self, they lead to affliction, and one cannot command them. Consciousness (viññāṇa) is not self. If consciousness were self, it would not lead to affliction, and one could say: ‘Let my consciousness be thus; let it not be thus.’ But because consciousness is not self, it leads to affliction, and one cannot command it.” Then the Blessed One asked: “What do you think, monks? Is form permanent or impermanent?” “It is impermanent, Lord,” they replied. “Is what is impermanent, suffering or happiness?” “It is suffering, Lord.” “Is it fitting to regard that which is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change as: ‘This is mine; this I am; this is my self’?” “No, Lord.” “Is feeling permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, Lord.” “Is what is impermanent, suffering or happiness?” “Suffering, Lord.” “Is it fitting to regard that which is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change as: ‘This is mine; this I am; this is my self’?” “No, Lord.” “And the same applies to perception, mental formations, and consciousness—is each of these permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, Lord.” “Is what is impermanent, suffering or happiness?” “Suffering, Lord.” “Is it fitting to regard what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change as: ‘This is mine; this I am; this is my self’?” “No, Lord.” “Therefore, monks, all material form—past, future, or present; internal or external; gross or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near—should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine; this I am not; this is not my self.’ All feeling, all perception, all mental formations, and all consciousness—past, future, or present; internal or external; gross or subtle; inferior or superior; far or near—should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine; this I am not; this is not my self.’ When one sees thus, monks, the noble disciple becomes disenchanted with form, with feeling, with perception, with mental formations, and with consciousness. Being disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, his mind is liberated. When it is liberated, there comes the knowledge: ‘It is liberated.’ He understands: ‘Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming back to any state of being.’” The Blessed One spoke this discourse. The group of five monks was glad, and they rejoiced in the Blessed One’s words. While this discourse was being given, the minds of the five monks were freed from the taints through non-clinging. Thus there were six arahants in the world. The sermon to the group of five monks was complete.

Is there any description in the scriptures about the physical appearance of the relics of arahants?

🙏 Venerable Sir ❗ Is there any description in the scriptures about the physical appearance of the relics of arahants? ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖ The scriptures only describe the size and color of the Buddha’s relics. There is no mention of the relics of arahants in those texts. However, there is a statement made by the respected Mahasi Sayadaw regarding the relics of arahants. To support better understanding, here is a clear explanation: “What we call arahant relics are actually just bones. In Myanmar, many people commonly assume that relics—like those of the Buddha—are always small round bead-like objects. But in reality, that is not the case. The Buddha’s relics became bead-like due to his spiritual power (adhiṭṭhāna). In contrast, the relics of arahants are in their natural form—as ordinary bones. How do we know this? Because monks traveled specifically by plane to Kālakaṭṭhā (Kalakatta) in India, to receive and carry the relics of Venerable Sāriputta and Venerable Mahā Moggallāna. During that trip, they clearly saw their relics inside the relic chamber, and they were in natural bone form. The color was an ash-white hue. The shape resembled finger bones. The ends (joints) were large, and the middle was narrow. If even the relics of Venerables Sāriputta and Mahā Moggallāna remain as natural bones, then certainly the relics of other arahants should also be in natural bone form, without any doubt. So, when a revered Sayadaw in Myanmar passes away and after cremation there are small stone-like bead relics, we should be cautious and not blindly believe without examination.” 👑 #Scriptural Reference: Compilation of Teachings and Advice by the Sayadaws of Min Nan (Mawgyun) Sao Dhammasami

"သဗ္ဗလောက-ဗျသန-ယုဒ္ဓ-ပီဠိတသတ္တာနံ မေတ္တာ-ကရုဏာ-ပဏိဓာန"

"သဗ္ဗေ သတ္တာ ဒုက္ခပ္ပတ္တာ - ပကတိဗျသနေန စ ယုဒ္ဓကိလေသေန စ ပီဠိတာ - အဝေရာ ဟောန္တု၊ သုခိတာ ဟောန္တု၊ အဘယာ ဟောန္တု၊ ခေမီ ဟောန္တု.

တေသံ သဗ္ဗဒုက္ခ ဝူပသမေန္တု၊ သဗ္ဗသန္တာပ ဝိဂစ္ဆန္တု၊ သဗ္ဗဘယာ မုဉ္စန္တု၊ သဗ္ဗရောဂါ ဝိနဿန္တု.

လဒ္ဓလာဘသမ္ပတ္တိတော မာ ဝိဂစ္ဆန္တု၊ ကလျာဏမိတ္တာ လဘိတွာ၊ သီဃံ ဒုက္ခသမုဒ္ဒါ ဥတ္တရန္တု."

 ဘိက္ခု ဓမ္မသမိ (ဣန္ဒသောမ သိရိဒန္တမဟာပါလက)

Dhamma talk

"Though we think we see humans, don't we perceive them as humans? Don't we accept their existence? When we observe with the wisdom given by the Buddha - from head to toe, toe to head, in forward and reverse order - do we find humans or heat? Do we find humans or cold? There's hot element (Uṇha-tejo) and cold element (Sīta-tejo). Is it a person who knows hot and cold, or is it body-consciousness (kāya-viññāṇa)? Does it arise from just one consciousness and contact alone? If not, aren't there accompanying feeling (vedanā), perception (saññā), and volition (cetanā)? When experiencing hot and cold, is it a human's feeling, a deva's feeling, or a brahma's feeling? When perceiving hot and cold, is it a human's perception, a deva's perception, or a brahma's perception? That which motivates the experience and perception - is it human volition, deva volition, or brahma volition? When these three - feeling, perception, and volition - combine, don't they complete the four mental aggregates (nāma-khandha)? Isn't the collection taught as consciousness-aggregate (viññāṇa-khandha)? Are these four mental aggregates human, deva, or brahma? Is the body-sensitivity (kāya-pasāda) human? Is the experience of hot and cold human? When we analyze the aggregates, don't we find the material aggregate (rūpa-khandha)? Combined with the four mental aggregates, we have the five aggregates (pañca-khandha). Isn't it taught that when the Dhamma is lost, seek it in your body, and when you seek in your body, you find the Dhamma? So now, what we find - is it humans, devas, and brahmas, or the five aggregates? We imagine humans, devas, and brahmas, but what we find are the five aggregates. Isn't it taught to seek the Dhamma in our body when it's lost? We meditate to understand these aggregates. If we don't understand these five aggregates, is there any benefit in sitting meditation? Is there benefit in walking meditation? Is there benefit in standing meditation? We meditate to understand these aggregates. Isn't it worth investigating like this? Think about it." This teaching emphasizes the importance of understanding the five aggregates (pañca-khandha) through direct experiential investigation, rather than getting caught in conventional concepts of beings (humans, devas, brahmas). It's a practical instruction for vipassanā meditation focusing on the ultimate reality (paramattha-sacca) rather than conventional reality (sammuti-sacca). "In Uggatena village, while collecting alms at sixty bamboo lengths, the Buddha gave a teaching. Look how they progressed from Stream-enterer to Once-returner, from Once-returner to Non-returner, completing the monk's duties. Listen, Uggatena! That's turning wisdom toward the aggregates. Isn't it taught that while the ear hears the Dhamma, wisdom turns to the aggregates? Regarding the āsavas (mental defilements), isn't it worth examining which ones are eliminated by the Stream-entry path and fruition? The āsava of wrong view (diṭṭhāsava) and the āsava of ignorance (avijjāsava) cease. When the five aggregates are understood, don't these āsavas cease? Once wrong view falls away, will you still believe in creation by the Four Great Brahmas, an Eternal God, or Vishnu? Doesn't doubt (vicikicchā) cease? Isn't this worth investigating? Isn't it worth continuing the practice? Doesn't the material aggregate (rūpakkhandha) change and dissolve? Don't feelings cease after being experienced? Don't perceptions cease after noting? Don't volitions cease after motivating? Doesn't consciousness cease after knowing? Do we find the five aggregates or impermanence (anicca)? Do we find the five aggregates or suffering (dukkha)? Do we find the five aggregates or non-self (anatta)? Is the nature of impermanence happiness or suffering? Is suffering called sukha or dukkha? Does this suffering have an owner? Does it follow beings' wishes? Does it conform to preferences? Isn't it taught as anatta (non-self)? When we see impermanence, do we still see the five aggregates? When we see suffering, do we still see the five aggregates? When we see non-self, do we still see the five aggregates? Don't we need to distinguish between impermanence and the five aggregates? Between suffering and the five aggregates? Between non-self and the five aggregates? This is Tīraṇa Pariññā (knowledge of investigation). When we saw the five aggregates, did we see humans, devas, or brahmas? This is Ñāta Pariññā (knowledge of the known). When we see anicca, dukkha, anatta, do we still see the five aggregates? This is Tīraṇa Pariññā. When we combine anicca, dukkha, anatta, isn't it taught as arising and passing away? Which Noble Truth is this? (It's the Noble Truth of Suffering, Venerable Sir). This is the Noble Truth of Suffering. Understanding this as it truly is - this is Yathābhūta Ñāṇa. Is there anything other than suffering? Isn't it necessary to truly understand that this is suffering?" "In the time of Kassapa Buddha, a lay follower, due to his merits of dāna and sīla, was reborn as a deva in the six deva realms. When Gotama Buddha appeared, this deva's lifespan was ending. Didn't he meet the wisdom-foremost Venerable Sāriputta? Didn't he ask, 'Venerable Sir, may I ask a question?' When they met, didn't he ask to explain the nature of happiness (sukha) and suffering (dukkha)? Wasn't he answered that 'Getting another set of aggregates is suffering, not getting another set of aggregates is happiness'? When the five aggregates arise and pass away, which Noble Truth is this? (The Noble Truth of Suffering, Venerable Sir). Is there anything else besides suffering? Isn't it taught that one shouldn't cling to present aggregates or desire future ones? Continue practicing, and you'll only see arising and passing away. Which Noble Truth? (The Noble Truth of Suffering, Venerable Sir). Secondly, doesn't the mind develop a desire for liberation from these aggregates? Isn't this called Nibbidā Ñāṇa? Notice how the practice transforms, how behavior and demeanor change. Thirdly, with continued practice, don't we only see arising and passing away? Which Noble Truth? (The Noble Truth of Suffering, Venerable Sir). Search from head to toe - can you find even a needle-point of happiness? If not, isn't this determined as complete suffering? When this is determined, don't the three moral factors of the Noble Eightfold Path enter - Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood? Combined with the five aspects of insight, don't they complete the Eightfold Path? At this point, do you still see the five aggregates or arising and passing away? Isn't this called lokuttara (supramundane)? Isn't it worth considering what Stream-entry path and fruition eliminate? Aren't wrong view and doubt (anusaya kilesas) eliminated? When these are eliminated, do mental defilements still arise? If mental defilements don't arise, do physical and verbal misconduct occur? If they don't occur, aren't the kammas leading to lower realms exhausted? Don't the aggregates leading to lower realms end? Isn't this called the Noble Truth of Cessation? This is Pahāna Pariññā, following Ñāta Pariññā and Tīraṇa Pariññā. For one who attains these three insights, do their countless past unwholesome kammas from beginningless saṃsāra still have the chance to give results? Don't they all become ahosi-kamma (ineffective kamma)? Consider Aṅgulimāla - the murderer. When he met the Buddha and heard the teachings about the Noble Truths, aggregates, and Dependent Origination, didn't he attain path and fruition? Continuing practice, didn't he complete the monk's duties from Stream-entry to Arahantship? Did his past unwholesome kammas have a chance to give results? Didn't they all become ahosi-kamma? Let's strive to attain this wisdom. This wisdom is only heard when a Buddha appears. Without a Buddha's appearance, people only practice dāna, sīla, and samatha. These practices exist whether a Buddha appears or not. But vipassanā insight and path knowledge are only heard when a Buddha appears. This wisdom is crucial to attain." The present aggregates arise and pass away What Noble Truth is this? (It's the Noble Truth of Suffering, Venerable Sir) The knowing is (The Noble Truth of the Path, Venerable Sir) The craving is (The Noble Truth of Origin, Venerable Sir) The non-arising of future aggregates is (The Noble Truth of Cessation, Venerable Sir) How many sections are there in Dependent Origination? (There are four sections, Venerable Sir) How many factors in each section? (Five factors, Venerable Sir) Five times four equals (Twenty) These eight aspects (Should be easily memorized as the way to liberation from saṃsāra) Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu!

Conventional and ultimate truth

"The eyes given by our parents see people and beings - this cannot be eliminated. #Only_the_eye_of_wisdom_can_eliminate_this. When looking with our parents' eyes, we see persons and beings. During the Buddha's time, weren't there terms like 'Brother Ānanda,' 'Son Rāhula,' 'dear sons and daughters'? These are #conventional_designations_and_names. Did the Buddha reject these conventional terms? #No_he_didn't. Similarly, when we have a family and children, don't we give them names? Are these names present from birth or given by parents? Try touching a name. #The_visible_form_is_just_color. Let's say there are four sons: Ba U, Ba Aung, Ba Maung, and Ba Htwe. We give them conventional names. When they grow up, don't we take 'Ba U' as really existing? #We_take_it_as_real. When we examine 'Ba U' with Buddha-given wisdom-hands, from head to toe, #do_we_find_Ba_U_or_hardness_and_softness? Hardness is pathavī (earth element), softness is pathavī. Is it self that knows hardness and softness, or body-consciousness? Don't we find mental phenomena? Aren't hardness and softness material phenomena? These are mind and matter. We think 'Ba U' but find (mind and matter, Venerable Sir). #Only_mind_and_matter_are_found. If we can't find Ba U, can we find Ba Aung? Ba Maung? Ba Htwe? What's found is (mind and matter, Venerable Sir). #Shouldn't_we_take_what's_found_as_truth? When truth is known, doesn't delusion disappear? #When_truth_is_known_wrong_view_falls_away. However, do we reject the conventional usage? What exactly is rejected? When we examine what we think is 'Ba U', do we find 'Ba U' or just hardness and softness? #Mind_and_matter_only. Is it 'Ba U' or mind and matter? Why can't we find 'Ba U'? What's found - 'Ba U' or mind and matter? Is mind and matter found because 'Ba U' exists or doesn't exist? That's what we mean by rejection. #Because_it_doesn't_exist. What's found is mind and matter. On these two phenomena of mind and matter, don't we conventionally call them Ba U, Ba Aung, Ba Maung, Ba Htwe? Do we reject these conventional designations? Isn't this worth studying? This is 'Ba U' conventionally. There are conventional designations like 'Brother Ānanda.' Without such conventions, how could people communicate? This is #knowing_conventional_truth. #In_ultimate_truth_seen_by_wisdom_only_mind_and_matter_are_found. When mind and matter are found, is it because 'Ba U' exists or doesn't exist? If there's no attachment to 'Ba U', can we find humans? Devas? Brahmas? The 31 planes of existence? What's found is mind and matter. See, only mind and matter are found. Nothing we imagine is found. Why? When someone truly understands non-existence, listening to Dhamma, doesn't the Mogok Sayadaw teach in recordings that wisdom revolves around the aggregates?" "When someone curses you, hear it? When cursed, #when_you_hear_it_as_conventional_designation_you_understand. Doesn't Buddha teach this as mind and matter? Doesn't he teach to turn towards the aggregates? Listen to the Dhamma - doesn't he teach that wisdom revolves around the aggregates? When hearing Dhamma, #is_it_person_or_sound? Sound is correct. This is Dhamma. If it's a person, can it be Dhamma? Isn't sound correct? Isn't ear-consciousness that knows sound mental phenomena? Isn't sound material phenomena? These are mind and matter. When expanded, they're Five Aggregates. Doesn't he teach that wisdom revolves around aggregates? Isn't it worth examining what we find when revolving around aggregates? Doesn't sound-form cease after hearing? Doesn't hearing-consciousness cease after knowing? #Finding_mind_and_matter_is_impermanence. Is impermanence happiness or suffering? Is suffering pleasant or unpleasant? #Don't_we_need_to_truly_understand_suffering? When truly understanding suffering, do we still want this kind of aggregate? This true understanding is vijjā (knowledge). Taking it as beings is avijjā (ignorance). Taking human happiness, deva happiness, brahma happiness as real is wrong attention. When understanding suffering, don't misconceptions about happiness disappear? Does craving still come? Clinging? Kamma? Don't the three types of Dependent Origination cease? Craving-dependent origination, clinging-dependent origination, kamma-dependent origination - all three cease. Doesn't the cycle of aggregates end? #This_is_cessation_truth. Strive to reach this state. When hearing, aggregates arise and cease What truth is this? (Truth of Suffering, Venerable Sir) Understanding is (Truth of Path, Venerable Sir) Craving is (Truth of Origin, Venerable Sir) No more aggregates arising is (Truth of Cessation, Venerable Sir) How many sections in Dependent Origination? (Four sections, Venerable Sir) How many factors in each section? (Five factors, Venerable Sir) Five times four (Twenty) These eight should be (easily memorized as the way to liberation from saṃsāra) Sadhu! Together let us keep the Dharma wheel rolling.