THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE ANATTALAKKHA ¤ A SUTTA

THIRD PART

(Delivered on the new moon day of Nayone 1325 M.E.)

PREFACE

We began our discourses on the Anattalakkha¼a Sutta on the 8th waxing day of Nayone and we have dealt with the sections on rþpa, matter, being no Self and Feeling being not Self. Today we will go on with perception being not Self.

Saññæ, perception, is not Self.

"Saññæ, bhikkhave, anattæ, saññæ ca h'idam bhikkhave attæ abhavissa, nayidam saññæ æbædhæya samvatteya. Labbhetha ca saññæya 'evam me saññæ hotu, evam me saññæ mæ ahositi.' Yasmæ ca kho bhikkhave saññæ anattæ tasmæ saññæ æbædhæya samvattati. Na ca labbhati saññæya evam me saññæ hotu evam me saññæ mæ ahositi."

"Bhikkhus, Saññæ, which is perception or remembering is not Self." Saññæ is sixfold in kind: 1. Perception born of eye-contact. 2. Perception born of ear-contact. 3. Perception born of nose-contact. 4. Perception born of tongue-contact. 5. Perception born of body-contact. 6. Perception born of mind-contact.

People in general think, every time an object is seen, heard, touched, known, It is 'I' who perceives; objects are perceived and remembered by 'me'.

On seeing a sight, it is remembered as a man or a woman: or as an object perceived at such and such a time, at such a place, etc. Likewise, with regard to objects of sound etc. This process of perception or remembering is wrongly held to be a personal feat, as, 'It is I who remembers, it is I whose memory is excellent.' The Blessed One explained here that this view is wrong, that there is nothing individual or personal in the process of remembering; no living entity involved, just an insubstantial phenomenon; it is of the nature of non-Self.

REASONS SHOWING THAT SAÑÑÆ IS NON-SELF

To continue to explain how saññæ is not self: "Bhikkhus, perceptions, saññæ is not self; if perceptions were self, then it would not tend to afflict, oppress; And one should be able to wish for and manage thus: "let my perception be thus (all wholesome); "let my perception be not thus (unwholesome).

Were perceptions, a living entity, one's inner substance, there is no reason for it to inflict and oppress on one's self. It is not the usual thing to cause self injury and harm. It should be possible to manage in such a way that only good things are allowed to arise to be remembered, bad things are not allowed to arise to be remembered. But since perception is oppressing and does not yield to one's wish, it is not self.

DIRECT STATEMENT OF PERCEPTION BEING NOT SELF

"But Bhikkhus, in reality, perception is not self, so it is oppressing. And no one can wish for and manage; 'let my perception be thus (all wholesome); let my perception be not thus (unwholesome).

One can view perception from the angle of its good aspects. Cognition of things and objects by way of their characteristics is certainly very useful. So also retentive memory: remembering facts and retaining what has been acquired from learning the mundane and supra-mundane knowledges is a good function of perception, beneficial and helpful. But mental retention or recalling to mind what is sad, sorrowful, disgusting, horrible etc, from bad aspects of saññæ which are distress and therefore oppressing. Some suffers from haunting memories of the departed loved ones such as sons, daughters, husbands or wives or of financial calamities that have fallen on one. These lingering memories bring about constant sorrow and consterration; only when such memories fade away, one is relieved of the sufferings. Thus saññæ whose function is manifested in recognition and remembering is truly oppressing. So long as saññæ is bringing back memories of bereavements and financial losses, so long will sorrow and lamentation cause intense suffering which may even result in death. This is how saññæ oppresses by recalling to mind the sad experiences of the past.

Suddenly recalling in mind, during a meal time of some disgusting, repulsive object is bound to impair one's appetite. Having seen a dead body earlier in the day, one may be disturbed in sleep at night by one's retentive memories of it. Through fanciful imaginations, some may have visualised a dangerous situation which they keep on anticipating with intense suffering for themselves. Thus saññæ oppress by bringing back distressing mental objects. Hence saññæ is not self, but of the nature of non-self, its appearance being dependent on conditions.

Saññæ cannot be manipulated as one wishes, so as to recall only those experiences which are beneficial and profitable suppressing those which will cause distress and suffering; it is unmanageable, ungovernable, not amenable to one's will. And because it is unmanageable, ungovernable, it is not self, nor a living entity, but mere insubstantiality, dependent on conditions and circumstances.

We shall repeat the Myanmar translation of the Pæ¹i Text:

"Bhikkhus, perception, saññæ is not self; if perception were self then it would not tend to afflict, oppress; And one should be able to wish for and manage thus: Let my perception be thus (all wholesome); let my perception be not thus (all unwholesome).

Saññæ in one's own person, as stated in this text, is oppressing, unmanageable, not subject to one's will. This is obvious, therefore, that saññæ is not one's self, the inner core, a living entity. But people in general find, on recalling past experiences, that there are those which are retained in memory and conclude, therefore, that, "It is 'I' who have stored these experiences in mind; it is who recalls them. The same 'I' who has stored them up has also brought them back to mind now." They cling to the belief, therefore, there is only one individual, the self, who stored up and recalls past experiences. This wrong belief arises because of lack of heedful noting at the moment of seeing, hearing, etc and because of the fact that the real nature of the phenomenon is not yet known by Vipassanæ insight.

When constant arising and ceasing of the phenomenon of seeing, hearing etc., is seen as it truly is through Vipassanæ insight, then realization dawns that saññæ is also a natural phenomenon of constant arising and ceasing.

Here, it may be asked, in view of impermanent nature of saññæ , how does recollection take place of things which were cognised and known previously? The retentivity-the retentive power of preceding saññæ is handed on, passed on to the succeeding saññæs. At this retentive power increases on being inherited by the succeeding generations of saññæ , some people become equipped with the faculty of recalling past life. This is how the perception in the life-continuum or death-consciousness of past life ceases but arises again, with reinforced power of recalling, as the birth consciousness and life-continuum of the present life.

It is because of this handing over of retentive power by the pervious saññæs to the succeeding saññæs that we can recollect both what is wholesome and pleasant as well as that which is unwholesome and unpleasant. Without even thinking about them, the experience of days gone by may re-surface sometimes. The Yogøs engaged in Satipatthæna meditation may be recalling, as his concentration gets stronger, episodes which and happened earlier in his life, in childhood etc. The Yogø should dispose them off by noting them as they appear. Remorsefuless over past mistakes, faults in words and actions may lead to worry and restlessness in the course of meditation. Worry is a form of hindrance, and it should be discarded by taking note of it. Worry and restlessness may become a great hindrance deterring progress in development of concentration and Vipassanæ insight. Thus perception which recalls past incidents producing worry and fret is oppressing. For this reason, it may be taken that saññæ is not self.

As explained in the pervious discourse, there are four ways of clinging to atta and saññæ is concerned with three of them namely, Sæmi atta, Nivæsø atta and karaka atta.

Thinking that there is control over perception, remembering things as willed and not remembering things when there is no wish to do so, is Sæmi atta clinging, that is exercising control over the process of remembering. This Sæmi atta clinging is rejected by the Anattalakkha¼a Sutta which states that it is not possible to say of perception, "Let perception be thus (all wholesome), let perception be not thus (all unwholesome).

            Thinking there is Atta, living self ever present in the body, constantly engaged in the task of remembering things, is Nivæsø atta. This type of clinging can be discarded by taking note of every mental phenomenon which makes its appearance. By doing so one perceives by one's own knowledge that the remembered things keep appearing afresh and vanishing instantly. Also by taking note of the past incidents in one's life as they reappear in the mind's door, one comes to realize that there is no such thing as permanent retentive perception. There is only recurrent phenomenon renewing itself by arising and ceasing incessantly. This realization drives home the fact that there is no permanent self, living entity, residing in one's body and doing the task of remembering, recollecting.

Thinking it is I or self which is doing the action of remembering or recollection is Karaka atta clinging and this may also be removed by meditative noting. When perception takes place of every sight or sound, the meditative noting observes its arising and vanishing. When it is thus observed that perception of sight or sound arises and vanishes, there comes the realization that perception of sight and sound is merely a recurrent mental phenomenon and not the action of any abiding self or inner substance. And in accordance with the Anattalakkha¼a Sutta; it cannot be managed in such a way that only pleasant wholesome memories persist for ever and that memories of unpleasant, unwholesome incidents fade away into oblivion. Since it is thus ungovernable, uncontrollable, realization comes to Yogø that perception is not self, living entity, but merely a natural process dependent on conditions, renewing itself incessantly and vanishing. The Anattalakkha¼a Sutta was discoursed by the Blessed One specifically for the purpose of removing the Atta clinging through such personal realization of the true nature (of the khandhæs).

Here question may arise what difference exists between perception at the moment of contact and heedful note-taking at the moment of occurrence according to the Satipatthæna. The answer is that there is a world of difference between the two. In fact it may be said that the two are diametrically opposed to each other in purpose of objective. Saññæ perceives so as to retain every thing that is seen, heard etc, in memory so that it may be recalled. It may take in the form, shape or condition of the object observed; whereas meditative note-taking according to the Satipatthæna method is concerned just with the passing events of the næma, rþpa so as to realize the impermanent nature, unsatisfactoriness and insubstantiality.

This should be sufficient elaboration on the aggregates of perception being not self. We shall go on to explaining how sa³khæras, the aggregates of mental formations or concomitants is not self.

SA£KHÆRAS ARE NOT SELF, THE LIVING ENTITY OF ATTA

"Sa³kharæ, bhikkhave, anattæ. Sa³khæra ca h'idam bhikkhave attæ abhavissamsu nayidam sa³hæra æbædhæya samvat-tayum labbhetha ca sa³hæresu evam me sa³hæra hontu evam me sa³hæra ma ahesumti. Yasmæ ca kho bhikkhave sa³hæra anattæ, tasmæ sa³hæra abædhæya samvattati; na ca labbhati sa³hæresu evam me sa³khæra hontu, evam me sa³khæra mæ ahesumti."

"Bhikkhus, sa³khæras are not self."

Here, it should be noted that sa³khæras are of two kinds: Conditioned things and Conditioning things. The conditioned things are those aggregates that have arisen through such causes as kamma (volitions activity), mind, climate (seasonal conditions) and nutriments. Immediately after the rebirth consciousness, mental and material phenomena arising as resultants of kamma spring up. Vipæka types of consciousness with its concomitants and Hadaya rþpa together with kamma produced rþpas such as eye, ear, nose, tongue and body spring up in this way. They are all conditioned things, resultant effects of kammic activities and are called resultant sa³khæras as conditioned by kamma.

Likewise, mind produced rþpas and also resultant sa³khæras. Physical changes involved in acts of bending, stretching, moving, going, standing, sitting, talking, smiling are examples of such resultant sa³khæras. Being born of thoughts generated by a person, they are known as resultant sa³khæras conditioned by mind.

With regard to mind and its concomitants, they are both mutually conditioned and conditioning and we have thus sa³khæras as causal agents as well as sa³khæras as resultants.

Rþpas produced by climatic conditions are resultant sa³khæras conditioned by climatic conditions. Rþpas that arise through intake of food are resultant sa³khæras conditioned by nutriments.

Finally all the succeeding mental states with all their concomitants are resultant sa³khæras being dependent on the preceding mental conditions and their concomitants for their arising. All such aggregates which arise because of kamma, mind, seasonal conditions and food are resultant sa³khæras as conditioned by their respective causes. This is summarised in the famous formula:

Sabbe sa³khæræ aniccæ; Sabbe sa³khæras dukkhæ--

All things conditioned by respective causes are impermanent; all things conditioned by respective cause are suffering, dukkha.

These are aggregates of næma, rþpa which manifest themselves when seeing, hearing etc, the five groups of grasping which must be realized by Vipassanæ insight as being impermanent, unsatisfactory and insubstantial. The Blessed One has exhorted in the above formula that they should be seen as such. In order to see them in such light, one must take heedful note of every arising of these aggregates as they appear. While observing them in this way, as concentration gets strengthened one becomes aware that the aggregates are arising and vanishing incessantly. In accordance with the Commentary statement, Hutvæ abhavato, it is impermanent because it perishes after having arisen. And in accordance with the Commentary statement, Udayabbaya patipilanato, it is fearsome being oppressed by constant arising and perishing. This is the manner of contemplation conforming to the words of the Blessed One.

GOING AGAINST THE WORDS OF THE BLESSED ONE

There are people who are damaging and harming the Buddha's Dispensation by teaching in a way diametrically opposite to what the Buddha had taught. In the above formula of 'Sabbe sa³khæræ etc' they are teaching sa³khæræ to mean "not conditioned things as explained above, but as "activities". Thus according to them, the above formula means 'All activities are dukkha'. Hence they admonish against any kind of activity such as giving alms, keeping precepts and practising meditation. These activities will produce only dukkha. They advise, therefore, to keep the mind as it is. Such preachments find ready acceptance by uninstructed persons and by those who are not keen to put in efforts in meditation practice. It can be seen by any one, even with a limited knowledge of the teaching, that such preachments are going against the words of the Buddha. Accepting such preachments which go against the words of the Buddha amounts to rejecting the teaching of the Blessed One. Once the teaching is rejected, one will find oneself outside the dispensation of the Buddha which is a matter for serious consideration.

In this Pæ¹i text, Sabbe sa³khæræ dukkha, sa³khæra means 'conditioned things', resultants of determining conditioners and not 'activities' of 'making efforts'. To recapitulate: In Sabbe sa³khæræ dukkha, sa³khæræ means resultant aggregates produced by conditioning circumstances. It does not mean 'activities' or 'efforts' to make good deeds. All sa³khæras as conditioned things are to be contemplated on as impermanent and suffering. It is wrong to interpret 'sa³khæræ' in this context, as meritorious activities. What is required here is to observe and note carefully all the conditioned aggregates in one's own body until their real nature is seen and dispassion developed over them.

SA£KHÆRA IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS SUTTA

The sa³khæras we have described so far, the conditioned things produced by kamma, mind, seasonal changes and food have no connections with the sa³khæra mentioned in this Sutta. In the context of this Sutta, sa³khæra means one of the five aggregates, namely, mental formations or mental activities which condition things and produce kammic efforts.

The Khandavagga Samyutta Pæ¹i text gives the following definition: That which brings about physical, vocal and mental activities is sa³khæra (of sa³khærakkhandæ). Of the five aggregates, the aggregates of matter has the quality of being changed or transformed by opposing circumstances. It cannot by itself bring about any action or change, but it has substantive mass, the actions of the sa³khæras are manifested in its material body which then appear to be doing the action. The aggregates of sensations (vedanæ) experience the sensations, pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. It cannot effect any action productive of results. Neither can the aggregate of perception which merely recognizes or remembers things, just like a clerk in a office records his note in the note book for future reference. The aggregate of consciousness also just knows that a sight is seen, a sound is heard, etc. It is not capable of causing any action. It is the aggregate of sa³khæra which is responsible for physical, vocal or mental deeds such as going, standing, sitting, laying down, bending, stretching, moving, smiling, talking, thinking, seeing, hearing, etc. The wish to go, stand, sit or sleep is expressed by this sa³khæra. All the three kinds of physical, vocal, mental activities are instigated and organized by this sa³khæra.

To think that all these activities are carried out by one's self is to hold the wrong view of self in the sa³khæra and is known as Kæraka atta clinging.

To think that this self, doing all the activities resides all the time as a living entity in one's body is to hold the wrong view of Nivæsø atta clinging.

Thinking that this self, living entity in one's body can act according to its wishes; that its actions are subject to its will is Sæmi atta clinging.

The sa³khæra are held to by all these three modes of clinging. In reality, however, there is no self, no living entity to cling to but merely natural processes happening according to their own conditions and circumstances. The Blessed One, therefore, taught that sa³khæras are not living entities that carry out these activities. From the viewpoint of common man, there obviously exists a living entity that executes the actions of going, standing, sitting etc. But the Blessed One refutes his belief by stating:

REASONS WHY SA£KHÆRAS IS NOT SELF

"Bhikkhus, were sa³khæras, volitional activities, self, inner core, they would not inflict and it should be possible to say of sa³khæras, 'Let sa³khæras be thus' (all wholesome); let sa³khæras be not thus (unwholesome); and manageable as one wishes."

These sa³khæras are mental states headed by cetanæ, volition. There are fifty-two kinds of mental states; excepting the two states of sensation and perception, the remaining fifty mental states constitute the aggregate of mental formations, sa³khærakkhandæ. In Sutta discourses, only cetanæ, the volition is enumerated as representing the sa³khæra activities. But according to Abhidhammæ, we have other mental formations such as attention (manasikæra), initial application of thought (vitakka), sustained application (vicæra), zest (pøti), greed (loba), hate (dasa), delusion (moha), non-greed, non-hate, non-delusion etc., that can produce kammic effects. These fifty kinds of mental formations are responsible for all kinds of activities. It is these fifty mental formations which instigate and direct actions such as going, standing, sitting, sleeping, bending, stretching, smilling, speaking, etc. These actions are being carried out as directed and motivated by the sa³khæras which also instigate and direct mental activities such as thinking, seeing-consciousness, hearing-consciousness.

HOW SA£KHÆRAS OPPRESS

The Blessed One had urged us to reflect in this way: Were sa³khæras, which are responsible for all the actions self, the living entity, in one's self, they would not have been oppressing. Actually they are oppressing in many ways. Engaging in activities out of desire or greed, one finds oneself exhausted and distressed. Speaking something which should not be spoken, one find oneself embarassed. Doing things which should not be done one gets punished for criminal offences. One burns oneself with longing desires for which one suffers loss of appetite, loss of sleep etc. Doing evil deeds such as stealing or telling lies, one lands up in states of woe undergoing intense miseries.

Likewise, volition accompanied by hate motivates actions, vocal as well as physical, which are not wise and produce distress and suffering. Volition accompanied by delusion, conceit and wrong views leads one similarly to distress and suffering in the present life and in the states of woe. These are various ways by which sa³khæras oppress. Were sa³khæras self, it would not be oppressive in the manner.

SA£KHÆRA IS NOT AMENABLE TO ONE'S WILL

Were Volitional activities, sa³khæras, self, one's inner substance, it should be possible to arrange and organise in such a way that wholesome activities productive of beneficial results only are carried out as one wishes, and not those activities which will harm oneself. Actually it is not possible to manage their activities as one wishes. One will find oneself engaging in activities one should not do, speaking of things one should not speak of, thinking of thoughts one should not think about. In this way it could be seen that sa³khæra is not amenable to management and control and is therefore not self, not one's inner core. And the Blessed One had, to enable one to see thus, taught directly:

"Bhikkhus, in reality, sa³khæras are not self, not one's inner core. For this reason, they tend to inflict distress. Furthermore, it is not possible to manage and say of sa³khæra: 'Let sa³khæra be thus (all wholesome); let it not be thus (all unwholesome).

Volitional activities are, therefore, not self, not inner core, but of the nature of insubstantiality occurring in accordance with their own conditions and circumstances. These volitional activities, accordingly, are oppressing; how they are oppressing has been described above. Through bad companions, through defective guidance of poor teachers and through wrong attitude of mind, one gets involved in activities which one should not do, one should not speak of, nor think about. With respect to mundane affairs, one gets engaged in blame worthy actions, illegal activities and indulge in bad habits, drinking, drug taking and gambling. Also because of greed or anger, one speaks out that which should not be spoken about. Such activities result in destruction of one's prosperity, punishment by legal authorities and loss of friends and associates. From spiritual and moral standpoint, bad deeds of killing, telling lies etc produce bad results, leading even to miseries in woeful states. Thus volitional activities oppress by producing bad kamic effects.

Here we must recount a story of how unwholesome volitional activities of slandering result in dire distress.

STORY OF A PETA WHO WAS TORMENTED BY PINS AND NEEDLES

Once the Venerable Lakkhana and Venerable Moggalæna came down from the Peak of the Vultures to go round for alms-food. On their way down, the Venerable Moggalæna saw a Peta by means of his celestial eyes. He saw needles piercing and passing through the body of the Peta. Some needles entered from his head to emerge from his mouth. Some entered from the mouth and came out from the chest; some entered from the chest and left from the stomach. Some pierced through the stomach leaving from the thigh; some came in by the thigh and left by the legs. Some entered by way of the legs and left from the feet. The Peta was subjected to great suffering and was running about with intense pain.

The needles chased him whenever he ran and pierced his body. On seeing his plight, the Venerable Moggalæna reflected on the fact that he had become divested of all kammic effects that would land him in the existence of Petas. Pleased with the thought of self-liberation, he made a smile which was duly noticed by his companion the Venerable Lakkhana who asked him the cause of his smile.

The Venerable Lakkhana was not developed enough to see the Petas; he may disbelieve the story about Peta and cast doubt on the words of Moggalæna. So the Venerable Moggalæna did not tell him then what he saw of the Peta; he just told him to ask about it again when they got to the presence of the Blessed One.

After the meal and when they reached the presence of the Buddha, the Venerable Lakkhana repeated the question why the Venerable Moggalæna had made a smile as they were coming down from the vulture peak. The Venerable Moggalæna said then that he saw a Peta being inflicted with piercing needles and he smiled because he realized on reflection that he had become free from such unwholesome volitional activities.

Then the Blessed One said in admiration, "my disciples are well equipped with penetrative insight, (mind's eye). I had seen this Peta on the eve of my enlightenment while seated on the throne of wisdom. But since there was no other eye witness of him, I have not said a word about this Peta. Now that I have the Venerable Moggalæna to corroborate me, I shall tell about him."

The Blessed One said that while in human existence, that being had committed the grievous misdeed of slandering for which unwholesome sa³khæras he had to undergo intense suffering, miseries for many lakhs and lakhs of years. Having come up from that abode, he had become this Peta to suffer for the remaining portion of the resultant sa³khæras.

The Peta was invisible to the ordinary vision. Hence the Venerable Lakkhana did not see him. The needles that kept on piercing and pestering the Peta did not fall upon other creatures or beings. They were inflicted only on the Peta who had done unwholesome volitional activities before. This is then an example of how sa³khæra is oppressing.

There were other Petas also visible to the Venerable Moggalæna. For example, there was the cattle slaughterer who had become a Peta chased by vultures, crows, and eagles, who attacked him with their beaks. The poor Peta was shrieking wildly and running about to escape from the merciless attacks of the birds. Then there was the bird hunter who had become a Peta in the shape of a piece of meat. He was similarly pestered by vultures crows and eagles and he was also wailing and fleeing from the attacking birds. The sheep slaughterer had no outer skin covering in his body. A bloody, messy lump of flesh, he was also target of attack by vultures, crows and eagles and he too was shrieking and fleeing from the birds. The Peta who was the pig slaughterer before had knives and two edged swords falling upon him and cutting him up. The hunter of wild animals had spears piercing him. They were all running about wildly, shrieking and bewailing. Furthermore, the Venerable Moggalæna saw Petas who were suffering because of unwholesome sa³khæras such as torturing others and committing adultery. They serve as further examples of oppressive nature of unwholesome sa³khæras.

The denizens of the lower worlds, creatures of the animal world, are undergoing sufferings because of unwholesome sa³khæras which they had done in the past. In this human world, miseries due to difficulties of earning livelihood, to illness and diseases and to maltreatment by others have their origin in the past unwholesome sa³khæras. These sa³khæras are oppressing because they are not self, not one's inner core. It is not possible to manage so as not as to let unwholesome sa³khæras to arise and to let only wholesome sa³khæras to appear. This is within the personal experience of practising Yogøs. They want to develop only the Vipassanæ sa³khæras, volitional activities confined only to meditation; but they find, especially at the initial stages of meditation, undesirable distractions making their appearance. Under the guidance of loba, greed, various thoughts suggesting different procedures for meditational practices keep on arising. Other thoughts under the guidance of dosa, mæna (hate and conceit) make their appearances to do this way, or that way etc. The Yogøs had to discard these distractive thoughts by noting 'liking, desiring, thinking etc.'

As stated above, all these volitional activities tend to afflict one; they are unmanageable as one wishes, therefore not self, not one's inner core, but mere insubstantiality dependent on respective conditions. They may be likened to the rain, the sun or the wind. We have nothing with the rain, no control over it. When we wish for the rain, we may not get it unless such conditions as rain, clouds, humidity wind elements etc permit. When the conditions are right, we may get rain even if we do not want it. Likewise with the sun; when covered by clouds, there is no sunshine even though we wish for it. In the absence of the covering clouds, the sun shines brightly whether we want it or not. The wind blows only when atmospheric conditions are right. When conditions are not favourable, there is no wind however much we wish for it. These external phenomena have nothing to do with us; we have no control over them. Similarly, the volitional activities are the internal phenomena over which also we have no control. They are happening in accordance with conditions and are, therefore, not self.

We shall recite again the summary of the Pæ¹i text:

"Bhikkhus, sa³khæras are not self, the inner core; were sa³khæras volitional activities, self, inner core they would not tend to afflict and it would be possible to say of them, "Let sa³khæras be thus (all wholesome); let sa³khæras be not thus (all unwholesome) and controllable by one as one wishes."

In reality, however, sa³khæras are not self, not one's inner core. For this reason, they tend to inflict distress. Furthermore, it is not possible to manage and say of sa³khæras. 'Let sa³khæras be thus (all wholesome); let sa³khæras be not thus (all unwholesome) and controllable by one as one wishes.'

HOW REALIZATION OF NON-SELF COMES ABOUT

For the Yogøs constantly taking note of the phenomena of næma, rþpa, it becomes very obvious how sa³khæras are not amenable to will, how they are unmanageable. While contemplating on the movements of the abdomen and the bodily motions and noting them as 'rising, falling, sitting, touching etc', when stiffness arises, it has to be noted as 'stiffness, stiffness.' Then the desire to change postures follows. This desire is nothing but mental activity headed by cetanæ, volition. It is cetanæ which is giving silent instructions, 'Now, change the posture, change the posture.' The Yogø wants to continue on noting without changing position but because of the insistent urgings of cetanæ, he changes the posture. This is an unwanted sa³khæra.

Likewise, while noting the feelings of 'pain, heat, itchiness', posture is changed as directed by the ungovernable sa³khæra. Again during the course of meditating, thoughts on sensual pleasures may appear. This is sa³khæra which the Yogø does not wish for. These have to be banished by incessant noting. At the same time sa³khæras may urge the Yogø to go and interview some one, to talk to some one, to look around here, there or to do some work. These are all undesirable sa³khæras which rise up all the same whether one likes it or not. These are instances of unmanageable, uncontrollable nature of sa³khæra. They should not be welcomed but discarded by heedful noting.

'To think that there is a manageable, controllable self, inner core, is to hold to Sæmi atta clinging.' The Yogø who takes notes of the processes of næma, rþpa as they take place, notices clearly that what one desires does not happen, what is not desired is happening. In this way he can get rid of the Sæmi atta clinging. As he observes the processes of origination and dissolution taking place in quick succession, and sees that which is desired to be maintained getting dissolved, Sæmi atta clinging abandoned. Nothing is seen to remain stable; everything is dissolving, perishing. In this way, the Nivæsø atta clinging which believes in permanent existence of self or inner substance can be banished too.

'Belief in permanent existence of self, a living entity in one's body is called Nivæsø atta clinging.'

Then the Yogø perceives also that any event takes place only when various factors concerned with the event come together to fulfill the necessary conditions for its happening. Take for instance the arising of eye-consciousness. There must be the eye, the object of sight, as well as sufficient light. Then there must be the intention to look. When there is the eye and the object of sight, very clearly visible, the act of seeing is bound to ensue. Likewise a sound is heard, only when there is ear, sound, obstructionless space and intention or bending the mind, to hear. When there is ear and a clearly audible sound, act of hearing will surely take place. An act of touching will take place when there is object, tactile body, bodily impression and intention to touch.

Seeing that respective resultant events of seeing, hearing, touching take place when corresponding factors necessary for the arising of the event have come together the Yogø decides that no self nor living entity capable of causing to see, hear or touch exists, He thus banishes the Kæraka atta clinging which holds there is self or living entity masterminding over seeing all kinds of activities. In order to remove this Kæraka atta clinging, the Blessed One had taught that sa³khæra, volitional activities are not self, living entity. We have fairly fully dealt with the exposition on sa³khæra not being self. We shall end the discourse here for today.

By virtue of having given respectful attention to this discourse on the Anattalakkha¼a Sutta, may you all attain and realize soon, the Nibbæna by means of the Path and Fruition as you wish.

Sædhu! Sædhu! Sædhu!

End of the Third Part of the Discourse on
The Anattalakkha¤a Sutta.