THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE ANATTALAKKHA¤A SUTTA In the personality of every common worldling or putthujano, moral defilements or human passions kilesæs, such as, greed which have a tendency to attachment, are in abundance. These kilesæs have a craving for senses arising out of the six sense-doors, such as the sense of a beautiful sight and so on. Of all these cravings while attachment occurs in respect of all what are pleasant and agreeable, attachment to atta as a 'living entity' or 'Self' is not only basically fundamental but also most difficult to be discarded. It can neither be got rid of by one's own ordinary effort or perseverence nor dispelled by others through normal strength or exertion. Pacceka-Buddhas were capable of extirpating their own feelings of attachment to 'Self' by means of adequate and deligent efforts with their will power without anyone's aid. However, they have no ability to eradicate the attachment to atta that clings others. To be able to wipe out the feeling of attachment to atta that lies close to the heart of others, one must have the real aptitude and knowledge to preach and convince others the essence and noble qualities of the Four Noble Truths. Pacceka-Buddhas have no such adequate knowledge of high intellect to teach others. That is the reason why they are destined to become a single Pacceka-Buddha without any disciples. A Pacceka-Buddha therefore enters Nibbæna singly. He is not omniscient and does not preach the Dhamma to mankind.
ATTACHMENT TO ATTA
WILL BE ROOTED OUT ONLY IF Supreme Buddhas, the Omniscients, are endowed with better intellect than Pacceka-Buddhas. The Supreme Buddhas truly realized the Four Noble Truths on their own initiative. They could also preach and teach others to understand clearly the Dhamma relating to the Four Noble Truths. That is why they became Supreme Buddhas, the fully Enlightened Ones. Therefore, the Lord Buddha was able to deliver to the First Sermon concerning the Four Noble Truths to the five ascetics who were present along with all Celestial Beings, such as, Devas and Brahmæs. The sermon is the Great Discourse on the "Setting in Motion the Wheel of Dhamma or Righteousness", popularly known as Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta. This Grate Discourse was the first Dhamma delivered by the Blessed One on the eve of Saturday night of the full moon of Wæso, exactly two months after His attainment of the Superme Enlightenment. At the close of this Great First Sermon, Ashin Kondñña, the leader of the five ascetics first became an Ariya Sotæpana. Having reached the stage of Sotæpana he has got rid of all sceptical doubts about the truth of the Dhamma and of the misconception of Sakkæya "Self" or a living entity. Nevertheless, self-pride still lingers on in his mind assuming that everything could be achieved if done or said or imagined according to his own sweet will. The rest four ascetics had not yet then realized the Special Dhamma "the awakening of higher consciousness." HEMAVATA SUTTA The sermon on Dhammacakka Sutta came to an end in the first Watch of the night on that Full Moon Day. In the middle Watch of that Saturday night, Sætægiri and hemævata Devas accompanied by their one thousand warrior attendants approached the Blessed One, paid their obeisance to Him and respectfully posed ten questions. The Lord had to preach them the Hemævata Sutta. At the end of this sermon, the dawn of enlightenment came upon them and they became Sotæpannas. Having achieved such an attainment, they were able to eliminate their clinging attachment to Atta which had beset them all throughout the whirlpool stream of past existences (Saµsaræ). THEY ALSO ATTAINED THE SPECIAL DHAMMA As self-pride or personal ego still had its grip on Ashin Kondañña; and as Ashin Vappa and the other three of the group of five Bhikkhus had not yet even obtained the 'pure and spotless Dhamma eye', the Blessed One went on preaching and urged them to contemplate and note on the lines of Vipassanæ Dhamma. They all eventually reached the stage of Sotæpanna which had caused the removal of their attachment to atta after serious meditation with diligence. Ashin Vappa gained progressive insight on the first waning day of Waso, Ashin Bhaddiya on the second day, Shin Mahænam on the third day and Shin Asaji on the fourth day. THE FIFTH WANING DAY OF WÆSO The Lord Buddha then summoned the whole group of five Bhikkhus who had already gained Sotæpanna, and preached them His Second Sermon setting forth the famous Anatta Doctrine. It was on Thursday, the 5th. Waning Day of Wæso. Having heard this Anattalakkha¼a Sutta, all five Bhikkhus attained Arahatship by virtue of which they were entirely free from human passions including mæna, self-pride. Anattalakkha¼a Sutta as its name implies clearly expounded the "Non-self" Anatta Doctrine as against the heretical or false views of "Self", with full explanations in a critical way. WITHOUT THE METHOD OF CONTEMPLATING AND NOTING The Discourse on Anattalakkha¼a is not a lengthy piece. For instance, in the original book published by the Sixth Buddhist Council, it covered only one page. In that Sutta there was no mention of method of meditation exercise and of the manner as to how contemplation and noting should be carried on. Preaching was done there-in only in respect of the nature of Dhamma. Hence, to those who have not acquainted themselves with the method of Vipassanæ exercise, it would be difficult to practise according to the right method of meditation to be able to reflect personally and appreciate the reality of Anatta as envisaged in that Sutta. It had been possible for the five ascetics to see the true light of the Anatta doctrine only because the sermon was delivered by the Lord Buddha himself and because they-the listening audience-happened to be the five ascetics of keen intellect. These five had not only been equipped with mature experience since the time of the preaching of the Dhammacakka Sutta but also had reached the stage of Sotæpanna. That is the reason for their speedy attainment of Arahatship after making progressive strides towards realization of the awakening higher consciousness of Dhamma.
AWAKENING OF HIGHER
CONSCIOUSNESS CANNOT BE ACHIEVED During the life time of Lord Buddha people with great intellect who possessed adequate and mature paramitas (perfections) just like the five ascetics, had achieved magga-phala while listening to the sermon delivered by the Blessed One. Of course, such an achievement was gained not without deligently practising Vipassanæ contemplation and noting. The special Dhamma was attained only because they had been able to devote themselves to serious meditation with deep concentration and accelerated contemplation and noting with such a speed so that it would appear as if they had not absorbed themselves in contemplation and noting with intent. Only a few who had good knowledge of adequate past perfections were capable of doing so. A good many could not possibly contemplate and note with great speed. Despite this fact, there are some idlers who will knowingly say: "If one understands the nature of anatta from the preaching made by the other, it is not necessary to practise; and one could achieve magga-phala by merely listening to preaching" with wishful thinking placing themselves on the plane of Ariya which they aspire to reach. Such concept having been entertained by the class of lazy-bones, the number of people who have so become self-made Ariyas after just listening to the sermon, will not be few. The kind of knowledge of Anatta Dhamma known by those who by merely listening to the sermon without practising Vipassanæ meditation and doing contemplation and noting, is not a true personal realization but mere book-knowledge only. If magga-phala ñæ¼a can be realized in the manner as stated, almost every Buddhist who knows what is Anatta doctrine, may be considered to have become an Arahat. However, as such people have not been found to be endowed with the real attributes of an holy Arahat, it is obvious that they are not the real Arahats. Referring to such improper and wrongful acts, the Venerable Mahæsø Sayædaw has given precise and clear instructions in this great Anattalakkaha¼a Sutta to put these people on the right path. FULL COMPLIMENTS OF THE METHOD OF CONTEMPLATING AND NOTING The Anattalakkaha¼a Sutta preached by the Load Buddha being the desanæ describing the nature and characteristics of anatta does not imbibe the method of meditation with emphasis on contemplation and noting, the bhævanæ. This present book on Anattalakkaha¼a Sutta Dhamma however contains the full exposition of the method of contemplating and noting, and explains in detail how Anatta is reflected leading to the attainment of Nibbæna through magga-phala. It has not been so preached just wishfully without reference to the scriptural texts. Neither has it been preached prompting others to meditate without having had any personal experience in the practical exercise of Vipassanæ. This has been expounded and preached to the congregation after acquiring personal experience and knowledge in meditational practice under the methodical instructions of the competent teacher and after consultations being made referring to various relevant Pæ¹i Scriptures and Commentaries. At the time when delivering his sermon to the listening audience, the Venerable Sayædawpa-yagyø had fully elaborated with his deep compassion, on the brief account of Anattalakkaha¼a Sutta preached by the Lord Buddha. This Sutta, when produced in type-written copy, was a lengthy piece comprising 420 pages in all because it was truthfully taken without omitting a word or phrase from the tape recorded originally by U Thein Han, retired Judge.U Thein Han had put up type-written copy to the Venerable Sayædawpayagyø to seek permission for printing and publication in a book from for the benefit of those who have not heard of this Sermon. The Sayædawpayagyø gave his kind permission to print and publish this Sutta only after summarising this long Sutta into a compendium having 152 pages instead of 429 pages, lest the book should become too bulky in view of the shortage of printing paper. EXTREMELY PROFICIENT Indeed, the Venerable Sayædawpayagyø is an adept in amplifying what is concise and in shortening what is lengthy. He has not only abbreviated the lengthy version of the Anattalakkaha¼a Sutta and the "method of vipassanæ meditation", but also the Dhammacakka Sutta Dhamma at the time of his preaching. In doing so he is capable of making them comprehensible to all those who might prefer to read or hear the Dhamma irrespective of whether it is in a concise or an unabbreviated form. This serves as a boon to all concerned. MORE SIGNIFICANCE IS ATTACHED TO ITS NATURAL MEANING Whenever he preaches or writes, the Venerable Sayædaw Payagyø lays more emphasis on the essence and true meaning rather than on the principles of grammer. Despite the fact that some Nissaya Sayædaw might have mentioned "Bærænasiyam", as "At Benares" putting more stress on the grammatical sense-though it may not be regarded as incorrect the Venerable Mahæsø Sayædaw has described is as "in the neighbourhood of Benares", in as much as Buddha had temporarily resided in Migadævum forest near the City of Benares (or rather in the province of Benares). And also in order to fall in line with the factual truth without, of course, causing deviation from the viewpoint of the grammer. In the same manner in his "Mahæ Satipatthæna Sutta New Nissaya", he had mentioned about "Kurusu" as "the Country of Kurþ". PREFERS TRUTH TO TRADITION Although significance is said to have been given to nature, the Venerable Sayædaw Payagyø is not used to describing the meaning aloof from the point of grammer which he never fails to attach its importance. In other words, he treats grammer as it deserves giving it the role of its own significance. More than that paramount importance is given to the natural sense in giving interpretation. Hence, in his interpretation of the meaning he does not strictly follow the traditional method; and also when sitting is done, he sticks to the truth of the meaning once he has found it accurate and then expresses his candid opinion in writing, accordingly. This is clearly evident from his writings and expressions given in the first Volume of the "Method of Practising Vipassanæ Meditation" in the chapter relating to "Søla" (moral conduct) at pages 13 to 23. In that chapter though some of the ancient texts had stated as amounting to "repaying the debt" when referring to the use of four main requisites needed for a monk, namely, dwelling-place (monastery), robes, food and medicine, he had refuted the said statement as being erroneous citing concrete examples in support. Moreover, in this Anattalakkha¼a Sutta Dhamma at page 10 of the Myanmar version, he had expressed his opinion as follows: In this regard, the teachers of the old days had explained the meaning of the word 'Abædaya' as 'pain' in Myanmar. This explanation appears wrong from the point of view of grammer and of its intrinsic meaning. The reason being, the word 'Abædaya' with the syllable 'a' prefixed to it, cannot be interpreted and spoken as 'pain'. It only conveys the meaning as 'ill-treating'. The meaning 'injury' for the word 'æbæda' has therefore been rendered in accordance with the Myanmar terminology currently in use. It is so interpreted not because it has been preached as 'likely to cause pain'. As such, the meaning referring to the word 'æbædæya' as 'pain' is regarded as unrealistic particulary because it is not only contrary to the innate meaning of 'bæda' which conveys the meaning of 'ill-treating', but also go out of tune with the principles of grammer. Furthermore, the material body or the rþpa as well as saññæ, Sa³khæra and viññæ¼a, do not have the characteristic of 'pain', etc., etc. SEEMINGLY EASY BUT DIFFICULT The Dhamma relating to Anicca, Dukkha and Anatta is in fact, very familiar to all Buddhists who get it by heart, and is often at the tip of their tongue. Whenever any accident happens, such interjections are used to be casually muttered by a person all of a sudden invoking his mindfulness of the Dhamma. Such being the case, it might be considered as the Dhamma which is generally known and understood. Undoubtedly, referring to this statement, the Dhamma has been known through hearsay or book knowledge; but in reality it is a difficult Dhamma to be truthfully grasped though seemingly easy. Among these, the Dhamma on "Anatta" is more difficult and profound. For this reason, the Blessed One had to face very serious opposition from such persons as Saccaka Paribbæjako (wandering religious mendicant) and Baka Brahmæ who entertained the diametrically opposite view of Atta. Prior to the preachings made by the Buddha, this Anatta Dhamma not being clearly understood, was considered as closely related to Atta connected with rþpa and næma. As against the wrong belief in Atta in respect of rþpa and næma, the Lord Buddha had elucidated these two-the physical and mental phenomena-as truly "Anatta". It is most difficult to preach this Dhamma convincingly to show that it is "Anatta" in reality, to make these persons realize the truth, since Atta has been firmly rooted in them throughout the samsaræ, the round of existence. If this Anatta Dhamma could be easily known without difficulty, there would be even no need for the appearence of a Buddha, the Enlightened One. Nor would it be required for the Buddha's disciples like the venerable Mahæsø Sayædaw to preach and write this kind of Anattalakkha¼a Sutta with great pains. The relentless efforts that have to be made to elucidate this Dhamma evidently stand witness to the quality of this deeply profound doctrine. Even among the heretics, exceptionally few persons really understand what is "Self" or "Atta" far less "Anatta Dhamma". The "Thanks-Worthy" Venerable Mahæsø Sayædaw has lucidly explained the Anatta Doctrine in this Anattalakkha¼a Sutta to make those persons who entertain a wrong conception of this Dhamma to be able to tread on the right track. SHOULD NOT UNDERESTIMATE The believers in Paramattha who care more for Abhidhammæ, the Paramattha desanæ, are generally inclined to look upon sutta-desanæ with underestimation. They generally assume it to be quite easy too. As all Buddha's desanæs or teachings were preached with Superme Wisdom after Enlightenment, it might not be within easy comprehension by common worldlings with ordinary knowledge. If both the nature of common usage and Abhidhammæ become involved in Anattalakkha¼a Sutta, the exponents of Paramattha may have to give up not knowing distinguishingly the source from which the terminology is derived wavering whether the derivation is from Abhidhammæ or from Sutta Dhamma. Abhidhammæ Desanæ has stated that there is no sensation of suffering (dukkha) and of pleasure (sukha) at the moment of seeing, hearing, and knowing the taste, and that only the neutral sensation (upekkhæ) is present. However, according to Sutta Desanæ, all sensations arising out of the six sense-doors at the moment of seeing, hearing, etc, should be contemplated and noted in respect of all three Vedanæs, viz; whether pleasurable (sukha), or suffering and unpleasantness (dukkha), or neutral feeling. When such a controversial view arises, it is extremely difficult to draw a line and form an opinion so as not to contradict the expression contained in both Abhidhammæ and Sutta, Such difficulties may arise in Sutta desanæ which the Paramattha believers hold in low estimation. This sort of difficulty has been found to have been competently dealt with by the Venerable Mahæsø Sayædaw Payagyø in the Anattalakkha¼a Sutta Dhamma at page 34 (of the Myanmar version) reconciling the two divergent views without any contradiction. COMMON USAGE OR TERMINOLOGY IS NOT EASY Because of the numerous display of common usages, the Sutta Desanæ has been given the name of Desanæ of Common Usages, by the people of the present day Sæsanæ. To make this Desanæ of Common Usage to be understood methodically various texts of grammer have been compiled. Considering this fact, it can be clearly known that the usage of common terminology is not at all easy. Pakokku Aletaik sayædaw U Paññæ in the course of his explanation given in connection with the subject of grammer while teaching the famous Tøkæ, had once stated, "One can be fairly conversant with Abhidhammæ in three years time of his constant study whereas he cannot possibly become a competent grammarian though he may have seriously devoted himself to the study of grammatical texts for ten years in succession." The common terminology used relating to grammer is merely derived and adopted from the vocal sound commonly spoken by people of different races whose languages may be quite different from one another depending upon the places where they reside. Dialectic differences may also occur according to times and hence, the common usages may vary or alter as time goes on gradually. Therefore, Texts such as, Vohæra Døpanø have to be published. To the extent the Vohæra or the commonly used grammatical terms is difficult, the Vohæra desanæ which is Suttam desanæ is extremely difficult. Now that over 2500 years have elapsed since the Dhamma have been personally preached by the Buddha Himself, and it has been ages ago. As such, in some of the expressions, the Pæ¹i usages and Myanmar usages have become different from one another in vocabulary, grammer and synthesis. As an example, in Dighanakha Sutta called "Sabbam me nakhamati" (ma-2-165), an expression of Pæ¹i sentence as spoken by Diganakha Paribbajako to the Lord Buddha, may be cited. This Pæ¹i statement is quite different from the common usage and the word "Sabbam" in Pæ¹i, the subject, has become an object in Myanmar language while the word 'me' has become a subject in the grammatical sense. Despite all these differences and discrepancies, the Venerable Mahæsø Sayædaw has been able to explain the usages in explicit terms in this Anattalakkha¼a Sutta Dhamma. I HAPPENED TO RECOLLECT It was at the time when I first arrived at Wetlet Masoyein Monastery. The Venerable "Shwezedi" Sayædaw Payagyø was then at Wetlet town where he had visited to deliver a sermon. While conversing with Sayædawgyø, I happened to ask him; "Were there such a thing as uccheda, the doctrine of extinction of existence after death, and Nibbæna, which has a special feature; and whether these two might be construed as being the same?". To this query the Sayædaw Payagyø replied, "Of course, there is Nibbæna has its own quality and attributes. How could it be without any speciality?" As the conversation had ended abruptly. I have no chance of following up with a question as: "What is the kind of its special characteristic?" The Sayædaw Payagyø might have forgotten this insignificant episode. However, when I was reading through this Anattalakkha¼a Sutta, I happened to recollect the said old-time conversation as I came upon the special explanation relating to Uccheda, the belief that there is no future existence and Nibbæna. In this Anattalakkha¼a Sutta Dhamma at pages 56 of Myanmar version, clarification has been made by the Sayædaw Payagyø elucidating the distinguishing features between Ucchedadi¥¥hi, a wrong belief that nothing remains after death and the existence of a being is completely annihilated, and Nibbæna which has the peculiar characteristics quite different from Uccheda. The believers of this false belief have erroneously thought that the annihilation of existance and Nibbæna are the same. This concept is entirely wrong. The two are, in fact, entirely different. NO FUTURE EXISTENCE There is something which ought to be known regarding Ucchedadi¥¥hi. About the year 1333 M.E, I managed to convene a congregation for preaching sermons on Satipatthæna Dhamma after inviting the Mahæsø Dhammakatthikas U Samvara and U Zawtika to enable my relatives and friends of my own native village to have the benefit of hearing the sermon. I had arranged for delivering a sermon at Inchaung village where many of my relatives were then residing. At this congregation, one Maung Kyi was present among the listening audience. This man being a leader of the Red Flag Communist Party, was a staunch believer in the doctrine of no new life after the present life existence. It seemed that he had come over to join the congregation sponsored by me out of sheer courtesy as he happened to be one of my relatives. U Samvara and the other preacher had delivered their sermons bearing in mind the mental attitude of that person. Since, the preaching made having had some sort of bearing on him, the listening audience comprising the village folks were apparently interested. As this man was asked to assume the role of a stand-by supporter at the time of delivering the Dhamma, there was no wonder that people got interested knowing him well as a person who had held a wrong belief in "No future existence". The next day, early in the morning, Maung Kyi appeared at the house where I was invited for a meal offered by a donor, an alms-giver. On the said occasion. Maung Kyi told me "Reverend Sir, I accepted the point of Dhamma touched upon by U Samvara on the previous night, but please do not take it amiss that I have become a convert a believer in the doctrine of Næma. Since you all Buddhists have believed in the next existances, you are performing meritorious deeds with all your cravings for existence. On our part, not having entertained such a belief, we have no craving whatsoever for existence. We have extinguished all such clinging attachment to existence. "Then, I was perforce to remark as "This would depend on one's own view. According to Buddha Sæsanæ, desire to cling to existence will only cause or be rooted out when one becomes an Arahat. Without being actually devoid of craving instincts for existence if one takes it for granted that existence completely annihilated after demise, he will go down to Niraya, the Nether World, in the next existence after passing away from this life existence with this false belief of Uccheda stuck in his mind on the eve of his death, and with this consciousness, he would die. This is exactly in accordance with what the Lord Buddha has preached". Although Maung Kyi had severed his ties with his "life existence", his wife not being able to do so, started making preparations for novitiating her grown-up children into priesthood. Plunged in his bigotry Maung Kyi then said to his wife, "You need not do anything in my favour for my next existence. If you prefer to perform the pabbajja mingalæ (ordination) by novitiating the children into priesthood, you may do so on your own. Only when the embryo sæma¼era is to be escorted to the monastery, I cannot possibly take the role of a benefactor by carrying the big begging bowl and the fan". In retaliation to this statement made by Maung Kyi, his wife respond "Without the benefactor (donor), I cannot lead the would-be sæma¼era. If you cannot act as a donor (benefactor), I will invariably have to get another benefactor on hire and carry on with the performance of the necessary religious rites". Having heard this retort, Maung Kyi, the great Believer of Uccheda Doctrine became very much perturbed and fidgety, and not being able to tolerate or connive at the presence of a hired benefactor in his place, he was said to have been put in a dilemma. I have heard of this incident from the lay devotees of the village. I am fully confident that going through this great Anattalakkha¼a Sutta Dhamma, will add to enhance the treasures of faith and bring about much benefit to all reading public as had been similarly derived by them after they had read other Dhammas preached by the illustrious Mahæsø Sayædaw Payagyø.
Wetlet-Masoyein U Teiktha TRANSLATED
|
