From Wrong View to Right Understanding သတ္တဝါအယူကို ကျော်လွန်ခြင်း

 When we analyze the six sense-doors and categorize the aggregates, do we find various kinds of humans, devas, brahmas, animals, petas, and asuras, or do we find just the Five Aggregates?

Is it because humans, devas, brahmas, and beings don't exist that we don't find them, or because they exist? If they don't exist, is there any need to cling to concepts of humans, devas, and brahmas? What we actually find - is it beings or the Five Aggregates?

Isn't it worth examining how these Five Aggregates exist? What is the nature of the Form Aggregate? (It is a group of elements with the nature of transformation and destruction, Venerable Sir). What is the nature of the Feeling Aggregate? (It is a group of elements with the nature of experiencing, arising and passing away, Venerable Sir).

What is the nature of the Perception Aggregate? (It is a group of elements with the nature of recognition, arising and passing away, Venerable Sir). What is the nature of the Formations Aggregate? (It is a group of elements with the nature of volition and motivation, arising and passing away, Venerable Sir). What is the nature of the Consciousness Aggregate? (It is a group of elements with the nature of knowing, arising and passing away, Venerable Sir).

These Five Aggregates - they cease after seeing, cease after hearing, cease after smelling, cease after tasting, cease after touching, cease after knowing - do we find the aggregates or do we find their non-existence? When something doesn't exist, how can we cling to it?

Since beings like humans, devas, and brahmas never existed in the first place, is there any need for attachment? The Five Aggregates that do exist - don't they cease right after arising? Can they be objects of attachment? When understood this way, doesn't identity-view (sakkāya-diṭṭhi) fall away?

Will a person who has eliminated identity-view still commit unwholesome actions through body, speech, or mind? When these cease, know that the doors to the lower realms are closed.

That's why the ancient venerable teachers taught that a Stream-enterer is marked by the complete abandonment of killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, false speech, and wrong views. How encouraging this is! We need to study these aggregates with conviction.

When two forms meet at any of the six sense doors - eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind - doesn't the corresponding consciousness arise? Can it arise with just one consciousness? Isn't it worth examining why this is so? This is the characteristic of non-self (anatta). Think about it.

Therefore, don't feeling, perception, and volition arise together with consciousness? Consider: When experiencing sound through the ear, is the feeling human, deva, or brahma feeling? When perceiving sound through the ear, is the perception human, deva, or brahma perception? Is the volition that motivates feeling and perception a self?

When feeling, perception, and volition combine, don't we have all four mental aggregates? Only when these four are complete does hearing-consciousness arise. Are these mental aggregates humans, devas, or brahmas? Is the ear-sensitivity a person? Is the sound a person? When we analyze, don't we find the Form Aggregate?

When we combine the four mental aggregates with the Form Aggregate (We get the Five Aggregates, Venerable Sir). Isn't it taught that when we lose the Dhamma, look within ourselves, and when we look within, we find the Dhamma? We only find aggregates, don't we? Shouldn't we accept what we find as truth? Isn't it taught that when we know the truth, falsehood disappears? This is the difference between wisdom and ignorance.

Wrong attention is ignorance. Right attention is wisdom. In technical terms, yoniso manasikāra and ayoniso manasikāra. These are the essential points. We conceived of humans, devas, and brahmas, but what we find are the Five Aggregates. Isn't this worth examining? We must accept what we actually find, understand?

With ordinary eyes, we see people in the audience as humans. With the eyes given by our parents, we see men and women, mountains and forests, cities and villages. This cannot be eliminated in any way except by looking through the lens of wisdom. Only when listening with the ear of wisdom can we truly understand. Isn't this worth examining?

Isn't wrong attention taught as ignorance and right attention as wisdom? We need to know the truth. Only when we know the truth does falsehood disappear, understand?

The Path to Stream-entry (ခန္ဓာငါးပါး သိမြင်ခြင်း မှတည် သောတာပတ္တိမဂ်သို့)

 One becomes a Stream-enterer only by understanding the Four Noble Truths. Without understanding them, can one become a Stream-enterer? Isn't this worth contemplating?

Who is it that doesn't understand the Four Noble Truths? (It's ignorance, Venerable Sir). Who doesn't understand the Five Aggregates? (Ignorance, Venerable Sir). Who wrongly conceives the Five Aggregates as being people, devas, or brahmas? (Ignorance, Venerable Sir).

With wrong conception, who creates desire? (Craving, Venerable Sir). What clings with the thought "must have it"? (Clinging, Venerable Sir). Isn't this taught as ignorance, craving, and clinging? As a cycle, this is the cycle of defilements. When we categorize ignorance, craving, and clinging under the Noble Truths, which Truth is it? (The Truth of Origin, Venerable Sir).

Is the Truth of Origin a person? A deva? A brahma? Sons and daughters? Is it a self that knows it as the Truth of Origin, or is it the Path? When there are causes of Origin, don't the resultant aggregates arise?

What appears - beings or Five Aggregates? Can any being who gets these aggregates escape aging, sickness, and death? Which Truth is this? (The Truth of Suffering, Venerable Sir). Isn't this taught as Origin and Suffering? This needs careful examination.

Know the Five Aggregates as impermanent, know them as suffering, know them as non-self. When the Five Aggregates are understood, doesn't wrong view fall away? Doesn't doubt cease? Origin arises because we wrongly conceive the Five Aggregates as beings.

That's why the Sayadaw Sunlun taught, "Misperceiving the five leads to overturning the five" - referring to eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body. Isn't it wrong conception to take these as being a person?

When there's wrong conception, isn't it taught "With ignorance as condition, formations arise"? One creates meritorious formations, demeritorious formations, and imperturbable formations.

"With formations as condition, consciousness" - don't we get the aggregates? Which Truth is this? (The Truth of Suffering, Venerable Sir). Isn't this worth examining? Right conception is needed.

When we know the Five Aggregates as impermanent, as suffering, as non-self, isn't that right conception? When the Five Aggregates are understood, doesn't wrong view fall away? Doesn't doubt cease?

When impermanence, suffering, and non-self are understood, doesn't craving die? Doesn't clinging fall away? Don't the four taints end? Doesn't the Truth of Origin die? Doesn't the cycle of aggregates end? Isn't this called the Truth of Cessation? Let us strive to reach this stage...

We must strive to reach this stage

 When we say we're listening to, practicing, and studying Dhamma, we need to align our understanding with the Dhamma present in our own aggregates. The "existing Dhamma" refers to the Five Aggregates that arise when sense objects meet sense doors.

Speaking technically about sense objects and doors - in common terms, when there's eye-sensitivity and visible objects, doesn't visual consciousness arise? Can it arise if there's no eye-sensitivity? Even if there's a visible object but no sensitivity, it won't work.

Visual consciousness arises only when four factors are present:
- Eye-sensitivity
- Visible object
- Light
- Attention
Isn't this worth examining?

Before these two physical elements (eye and form) meet, can you point to where that visual consciousness exists? When the two physical elements meet, doesn't it suddenly appear?

Does this arising visual consciousness have limbs or body parts? If it has no physical form, can it be a person or being? Isn't it taught as just visual consciousness (cakkhuviññāṇa in Pali)?

Can seeing occur with consciousness alone? Doesn't it include associated feeling (vedanā), perception (saññā), and volition (cetanā)? Is it a person or deity that experiences the sight, or is it feeling? Is it a self that perceives, or is it perception? Is it a being that motivates the experiencing and perceiving, or is it volition?

When feeling, perception, and volition combine, we have the four mental aggregates. Only when these four are complete does seeing consciousness occur. Are these four mental aggregates a person, deity, or brahma?

Is the eye-sensitivity a person, deity, or brahma? Is the visible object a person, deity, or brahma? When we analyze the aggregates, don't we find material form (rūpakkhandha)? Combined with the four mental aggregates, don't we have the Five Aggregates?

Are they people, or Five Aggregates? Deities, or Five Aggregates? Brahmas, or Five Aggregates? We need to understand them correctly as Five Aggregates. We used to think of them as beings, but now we see them as just Five Aggregates. Isn't this worth examining?

When this is truly understood, doesn't identity-view (sakkāya-diṭṭhi) fall away? When identity-view falls away, isn't one a Stream-enterer (sotāpanna)? How profound is this happiness! True happiness comes only with Stream-entry.

Isn't it worth examining how profound this happiness is? Could all the gold, silver, gems, rice, and wealth in all of Burma be exchanged for the wisdom of one path and fruition moment?

Can all the wealth in the country prevent aging? Prevent sickness? Prevent death? There's no escape from aging, sickness, and death, is there? Can one be certain of avoiding lower realms? No, one cannot be certain.

But doesn't the wisdom of path and fruition completely free one from lower realms? If one continues practicing, doesn't a Stream-enterer become a Once-returner (sakadāgāmī), a Once-returner become a Non-returner (anāgāmī), and a Non-returner complete the task of arahantship? We must strive to reach this stage. These are the essential points. Isn't this worth examining?

"Two Ways of Eating (စားသုံးခြင်း နှစ်မျိုး - တဏှာမှ လွတ်မြောက်ရာသို့)

 Metta (loving-kindness) is already included when one observes the Five Precepts perfectly. Particularly, as something to be avoided, we include it as Navanga Sila (Nine Precepts). Isn't this worth contemplating?

Then, didn't the Buddha clearly demonstrate victory through metta in the Eight Victories? That's conventional truth (sammuti sacca). It's not ultimate truth (paramattha sacca) seen through wisdom.

Isn't this also worth studying? Consider this too. Don't we need to understand each truth in its own context?

We must have faith in kamma and rely on wisdom. Puññābhisaṅkhāra is the path of kamma. Āneñjābhisaṅkhāra is the path of jhana. Apuññābhisaṅkhāra is indeed kamma. Don't we need to distinguish between unwholesome and wholesome kamma?

Vipassana insight and Path knowledge were only heard after the Buddha's enlightenment. Isn't this worth contemplating? So, one should reflect on Vipassana insight and Path knowledge. Think about this again.

When eating, doesn't the Buddha teach about six tastes: sweet, sour, spicy, salty, bitter, and astringent?

Among these, are vegetarian foods included? Are bananas included? Are oranges included? No, they're not.

Is chicken or pork included? No, they're not. Listen, isn't this worth contemplating?

Don't we need to understand these taste elements? For one who knows how to eat properly... if one knows how to eat properly, this leads to transcending defilements.

I've heard about a meeting between the venerable ones - Sangha Raja Sayadaw and Kyaut Mae Sayadaw. They were monastery friends and study companions.

However, the forest-dwelling monk was senior by about 5 vassa (rains retreats), being 4-5 or 6 years older. After leaving the monastery, they hadn't met for a long time. After about 10-15 vassa, news arrived.

"Venerable Sir, which day shall we come visit?" A letter was sent saying, "Please don't come anywhere." When the letter arrived, Phoe Thu Taw(Devodee) received it and read it. The Sanga Raja Sayadaw was planning to visit.

He would come with attendants, lay supporters, and the king. Ministers and generals would accompany them. "There's not even a single mat in the monastery. Shouldn't we borrow some mats from the village?" "This is a forest monastery."

"In a forest monastery, one sits as circumstances allow, isn't that what they say? Don't borrow anything."

"For drinking water, won't a coconut shell water dipper be enough? They can drink from that. Don't borrow anything," that's what was said. And so they arrived.

Upon arrival, they made offerings of various foods and drinks. They offered robes and other requisites, high-quality blankets of various kinds. Whatever was received was offered onward to the Buddha. Every offering received was dedicated to the Buddha.

Phoe Thu Taw found it difficult to understand. Instead of keeping things for himself, he wanted them kept for personal use, but everything was offered to the Buddha.

After making offerings, they engaged in friendly conversation. At mealtime, they offered the meal. They brought various foods - fried chilies and onions, fried fish, fried chicken wings, and many other delicacies. All sorts of foods and drinks.

"Chewing is suffering, swallowing is suffering, eating is suffering" - that's what the partaking monk said. Phoe Thu Taw heard this from below and said, "Oh, how I wish to experience such suffering!" That's what he said, do you hear?

"How I wish to experience such suffering!" Hmm, isn't this worth contemplating? Consider this too, study it thoroughly.

Now, one who knows how to eat says it's suffering. One who knows how to chew says it's suffering. Doesn't the Buddha teach that chewing and swallowing are suffering? Is there craving in this? No, there isn't. Isn't this worth contemplating? Well, doesn't the Buddha teach "Rāgakkhayo Nibbānaṃ" (the destruction of lust is Nibbana)? That's how one who knows how to eat properly understands.

Can one truly know how to eat without seeing mind-and-matter (nāma-rūpa)? Hmm, can one know how to eat without seeing mind-and-matter? Just knowing the physical mouth and mental states isn't enough. Can the Five Aggregates be understood through mere perception?

Didn't the Mogok Sayadaw teach that it can't be achieved through textual Dependent Origination alone? It must be through understanding the Aggregates in Dependent Origination. Think about this. You must understand the Aggregates. Isn't this worth examining carefully?

When there is true knowing, there is abandoning. Will unwholesome states still arise? Will they manifest even at the level of verbal conception? They won't arise anymore. Don't physical behaviors change? Don't verbal behaviors change? Everything must transform...

"မဂ်စိတ် ဖိုလ်စိတ်နဲ့ ဝိညာဏ်ချုပ်ခြင်း" "Cessation of Consciousness with Path and Fruition Mind"

 "We need to make this life valuable, right?

At minimum, we need wholesome kamma and consciousness to cease properly.

About wholesome kamma... now, when listening to Dhamma... one needs to be mindful of this especially near death. Be mindful of having observed Uposatha, be mindful of meditation practice, be mindful of listening to Dhamma...

Whether few or many offerings made... doesn't this generate wholesome mind states? One sees visions of past donations, service rendered, Uposatha observances... these are wholesome kamma-nimitta...

When these kamma-nimitta appear, the gati-nimitta for someone destined for human rebirth appears as reddish maternal fluid... that's the gati-nimitta. Only after this does consciousness cease. For those heading to deva realms, they see devas, devīs, celestial mansions and gardens - consciousness ceases only after these appear... like that.

Consciousness ceases only after the gati-nimitta appears, do you hear?

First, the kamma-nimitta of one's wholesome actions appears...
Regarding unwholesome kamma-nimitta - past lies, thefts, killings, drinking, various torments - these appear as if happening right now... these are unwholesome kamma-nimitta. All kinds of killing, stealing appear... that's unwholesome kamma-nimitta.

For gati-nimitta, those heading to hell realms see black dogs, do you hear? They see flames... see hell beings... that's gati-nimitta. Then consciousness ceases... that's hell.

Those becoming petas see great cliffs and ravines...

Those becoming animals see vast forests and mountains... consciousness ceases only after this, do you hear? Isn't it frightening? It is frightening.

We shouldn't live heedlessly... isn't this worth studying?"

"At the moment near death, if one has saṃvega ñāṇa (sense of spiritual urgency) and when various painful feelings arise... one decides 'I will end this cycle of aggregates with these feelings, I won't recover anymore.' Then, turning attention to Dhamma, consciousness ceases with path and fruition knowledge.

Look... even when their body was kept in cold storage for two nights, it remained soft and flexible, not stiff... While others become hard like stone or wood...

Isn't this worth examining? How beneficial is this? We need to take this as an example, do you hear? We need to analyze this carefully...

Though we couldn't take photos, in Nammatee, Moe Kaung... the Buddhist nun... she too died well, do you hear? She died beautifully... Near death, she turned her wisdom to the aggregates, her body remained soft and flexible, could be moved and positioned... How smoothly it went... Don't we need to examine this?

This is about consciousness ceasing with path and fruition consciousness.

Faith (saddhā) is lacking, do you hear? Isn't this worth studying? If one truly believes, it's possible...

However, regarding this teaching, when there's time for practice... it doesn't take long... The matter of practicing Dhamma is worth considering...

To teach true Dhamma doesn't take even five minutes, do you hear? True Dhamma can be realized in two or three minutes... Don't we need faith for this? We need faith..."

"နားက တရားကိုနာ..ဉာဏ်က ခန္ဓာလှည့်" "Listen with your ears, turn wisdom to the aggregates"

 When one turns wisdom towards the aggregates...

In turning wisdom, he faced various experiences and made decisions... encountered different kinds of vedanā...

Frequently hospitalized, surgeries, operations, intestinal surgeries two or three times
Many different experiences...

So looking at the aggregates, he concluded "I won't escape death"
Having made this determination, he focused on Dhamma practice until attaining path and fruition, and died peacefully... do you hear?

Isn't this worth examining?

Well... what we mean by "dying peacefully" - his body was kept in the morgue for two nights... while others would be stiff, he remained soft and flexible...

Even the injection sites were still bleeding. See? No stiffness even in the morgue.

So, isn't it necessary to know how to shift attention? (Yes, Venerable Sir) This is necessary, do you hear?
That's why when we structure teachings about aggregates and noble truths... what we thought were different kinds of humans, devas, brahmas, animals, petas, asuras, hell beings... what we actually find are just aggregates...

We think of 31 planes... humans, devas, brahmas... but what we find are just aggregates. Shouldn't we take what we actually find as truth? (Yes, Venerable Sir) When truth is known, falsehood disappears, do you hear?

That's why teaching about aggregates...
It's to understand how to remove sakkāya-diṭṭhi (personality view)...

Well... when someone speaks harmful words or acts improperly... at such times, don't we need to turn wisdom to the aggregates? (Yes, Venerable Sir)

"Listen with your ears, turn wisdom to the aggregates"

When we say "seeing," is it a person, a being, or just visible form? (It's visible form, Venerable Sir)
When seeing form, does consciousness arise alone? (No, Venerable Sir)

If not, aren't feeling, perception, and volition arising together? (Yes, Venerable Sir)
Is it a person experiencing the form, or is it feeling? (It's feeling, Venerable Sir)
Is it a deva or feeling? (It's feeling, Venerable Sir)
Is it a brahma or feeling? (It's feeling, Venerable Sir)

The perceiving of form - is it done by humans, devas, brahmas, or by perception? (By perception, Venerable Sir)
What prompts the experiencing and perceiving - is it a self or volition? (It's volition, Venerable Sir)

When feeling, perception, and volition combine, don't they complete the four mental aggregates? (Yes, Venerable Sir)
Only when these four are complete does seeing-consciousness arise, right? Is it humans, devas, brahmas, or four mental aggregates? (Four mental aggregates, Venerable Sir)

Is the eye-sensitivity a person? (No, Venerable Sir)
Is visible form a person? (No, Venerable Sir)
When analyzing aggregates, don't we find material aggregate? (Yes, Venerable Sir)

Four mental aggregates plus material aggregate makes... (Five aggregates, Venerable Sir)
Condensed, it's mind and matter; expanded, it's five aggregates. Is it impropriety or mind-matter? (It's mind-matter, Venerable Sir)

When looking at mind-matter, when seeing mind-matter, can lust, anger, and delusion arise? (No, Venerable Sir)

That's why the Mogok Sayadaw taught "Listen to Dhamma with your ears, turn wisdom to the aggregates," didn't he? (Yes, Venerable Sir)

When turning to aggregates, one is freed. When seeing persons and beings, can we find aggregates? (No, Venerable Sir)

Though aggregates exist, they're not found
Though found, they're not understood
That's why the ancient Ledi Sayadaw taught:
"Seeing ultimate reality daily yet not finding it"
Daily encountering but not knowing
Finding but not understanding
Seeing daily but not finding

Therefore, "Not knowing the five aggregates leads to going about like dogs, pigs, buffalos, and cattle - upside down in five ways," isn't that what was taught? (Yes, Venerable Sir)

This happens due to wrong attention to the aggregates... With right attention comes path and cessation. Isn't this worth examining?

So we need to analyze aggregates at all six doors... from eye-door to mind-door... analyze the aggregates carefully... (Yes, Venerable Sir)

If done too quickly, it becomes like mere recitation...