Realization Comes from Right Attention (With an Open Mind)

Realization Comes from Right Attention (Talk 2, Burma)

Diṭṭhi is the main enemy (the defiled mind). If one cannot abandon wrong view, one cannot abandon craving, greed, and lust.

(This explains why humans are becoming increasingly greedy: material progress has brought many problems and much suffering.)

The cause of no progress in Dhamma practice is improper attention. Another important factor is neglecting the practice for various reasons. Only with right attention can one put effort into the practice and walk on the right path.

(Many people fall into superstition and rely on outside powers, even doubting the law of kamma. (This can be seen even among some Chinese Buddhists.)

For monks who are studying, recollection of death may cause them to lose interest in mere study.

[This is a good sign: whether monk or layperson, one is then inclined toward practice rather than merely increasing defilements.

In the past, a novice listening to the Devadūta Sutta (Divine Messengers Sutta, MN 130, Majjhima Nikāya) developed a strong sense of urgency (saṁvega) and became fearful. He requested permission from his teacher to practise first, and only after attaining the first stage of realization did he continue his studies.]

With improper attention to the nature of non-self (anattā), a yogi may relax effort and become indulgent, falling into a view of coarse materialism—believing that nothing exists beyond indulgence. In reality, anattā refers to the phenomena of cause and effect.

Renunciation (nekkhamma-pāramī) is the effort to make greed, anger, and delusion diminish. It is also included within other perfections. For example, practising dāna must be directed toward Nibbāna, where lobha, dosa, and moha are extinguished. Giving in this way produces the proper result because it is free from defilements. It must be accompanied by the noble aspiration for Nibbāna alone.

One important point in vipassanā is that without noting and with only observing, one cannot attain the level of samādhi that is able to discern anicca. It is acceptable to observe after samādhi has been well developed (for example, in U Ba Khin’s system); in that case, there is no need to note. However, there are different views. Without samādhi, saying that there is no need to note is wrong.

Knowing the arising of dhammas is done through noting. Noting develops samādhi. I am concerned that if one follows the wrong approach, when insight into anicca becomes sharp, quick, and mature, one may no longer be able to note it. When relying only on observing, the process may become slower and weaker, and one then needs to return to noting. Because of the method, things can go wrong; I myself have experienced this before.

If one relies on observing with samatha samādhi, samādhi may gradually weaken, and insight into anicca may also weaken. This is one reason why forest monks who rely heavily on jhānas and contemplations sometimes experience a decline in samādhi and need to re-establish it again (this is also seen in U Ba Khin’s system).

Here, the Mahāsi system is effective because it is based on vipassanā samādhi. After samādhi has been attained—by whichever method—if one continues noting in the Mahāsi way, samādhi will not fall down.

Mental noting without observing is also not correct. At times, when it is possible to note, one must note; when it is not possible, one should simply observe. If one understands what has happened to the khandhas, that becomes knowledge. Therefore, one should note and observe only what is known; in this way, knowledge develops more quickly.

Noting prevents the mind from running away by regulating samādhi. In some situations, one cannot note, so one has to observe instead (for example, when talking with others).

Why is it necessary to note objects? It is to remain with the present moment and to know the changing nature of the present moment. For this reason, we have to note. During the noting process, yogis discern anicca. At first, yogis only know the arising of phenomena and cannot immediately discern anicca. Later, when samādhi becomes strong, the discerning of anicca follows.

One should not compare oneself with Mogok Sayadawgyi, because he possessed very sharp knowledge. According to sutta, it was mentioned to discern anicca, its disenchantment and its cessation. (Mogok Sayadaw also taught in the same way but did not mention about mental noting. Here, Sayadaw U Jhaneyya emphasized the importance of noting before the discernment of anicca.)

Note: There are monks who interpret Mogok Sayadaw’s way of practice differently, including teachers from the Mogok tradition. Many talks by Mogok Sayadaw never described the practice in detail from beginning to end. From his close disciples—whether monks, laymen, or women—there are also no references to their practices, in brief or in detail, except for U Kyaw Thein, who spoke about his practice under the Sayadaw’s guidance only in gist, as recorded in the short biography of Sayadawgyi. This was a great loss for Buddhists.

From the study of his Dhamma talks and his two biographies (i.e., by U Kyaw Thein and Sayadaw U Gosita), as well as from my own understanding, I hold a different view. In fact, U Kyaw Thein is the best candidate to write a complete biography and account of Sayadawgyi’s teaching.

From my contemplation, Sayadawgyi was not a sukkha-vipassanā yogi, but rather a samatha-vipassanā yogi. There is evidence of this in some of his talks and biographies. Sayadaw possessed the skill of mind-reading and could predict certain future matters. In his daily activities, he did many things without using clocks, yet always knew the exact time.

Near his final passing away, Sayadaw was receiving unseen or divine beings four times, namely on the 11th, 14th, 15th, and 16th of October 1962. On the 17th, he passed away and entered eternal peace. To communicate with divine beings, jhānic power is required (please read Ajahn Mun’s biography by Ajahn Maha Bua at forestdhamma.org/books/).

If one truly discerns anicca, one may later encounter rapture, happiness, tranquillity, light, and so on (i.e., the ten insight corruptions). With continued noting, arising and vanishing occur instantaneously. When knowledge becomes sharper, one may no longer see the arising and perceive only the vanishing.

For example, when noting rising and falling (i.e., the breath passing through the abdomen), one may not see the beginning of the rising but only the end of the falling. During noting, the yogi has to note the prominent object. He has to give preference to noting the internal process of the khandha when there are (as example), bodily pain, and external sound arising. He has to neglect the sound.

After the pain has disappeared and there is no prominent internal object, note the external one. If mental sign objects arise, note them as well. If they do not disappear, do not pay attention to them; instead, contemplate an internal object, such as in- and out-breaths, or touching and knowing (i.e., sitting).

If one becomes interested in them (i.e., external signs), they do not vanish. Worse than external objects are one’s own imaginations.

---

• Content of With an Open Mind-- Dhamma Talks by Sayadaw Jhaneyya
• Content of Publications of Bhikkhu Uttamo

---

• MP3 and Youtube

---

According to the translator—Bhikkhu Uttamo's words, this is strictly for free distribution only, as a gift of Dhamma—Dhamma Dāna. You may re-format, reprint, translate, and redistribute this work in any medium.