QUESTIONS ON TERMINOLOGY

Yogi: Very little is said about faith (saddhā) in the blue book Don’t Look Down on the Defilements, They will Laugh at You. Could you please say something about the meaning and importance of faith?

Sayadaw: Saddhā is faith, confidence, or trust. When we practise meditation, all the spiritual faculties, including faith, should increase. There should be an increase in faith in ourselves, in our ability to do the practice, and in our understanding of the practice. Only if we have trust and confidence in something, can we actually apply ourselves to it. We must recognize the faith we have — however little or much. It is what keeps us on the path.

Those who know how to think correctly, whose wisdom is strong, have strong saddhā. But if there is no wisdom to temper faith, faith can become blind. In order to know whether our saddhā is growing we can examine ourselves. Do we really know and understand the benefits we are getting from the practice? How much faith do we have now and how much faith did we have before we started practising? It is important that we recognize our own saddhā.

Most people have heard about the balancing of the five spiritual faculties and most people spend a lot of time trying to balance viriya and samādhi. Very few people know about or do any balancing of faith and wisdom. Those who are very intellectual and think too much have very little faith. They do too much questioning. But if someone has a lot of faith and does not do any questioning, wisdom becomes weak.

Traditionally, faith is interpreted as confidence or faith in the Triple Gem. But how can someone who has just started practising have faith in the Triple Gem? The confidence, trust, or faith yogis need is faith and understanding in what they are doing. Those who think correctly and who consequently do the right things find that, as a result, their interest and confidence grow automatically.

Yogi: If wisdom and faith are out of balance, if there is too much questioning and too little faith, is that likely to lead to doubt?

Sayadaw: Yes! Definitely! The five spiritual faculties work together. If anyone of them becomes too strong, if it does too much of the work, it sort of blots out the other four. The others cannot be effective anymore; they can no longer do their work properly. If somebody has too much samādhi, paññā is not strong and cannot grow, viriya cannot be strong because of the heavy concentration, and sati is not sharp. But if those three are not working well, then saddhā will suffer; you will start losing confidence in the practice.

If the wisdom faculty is too strong, if there is too much intellect, too much questioning, too much thinking, then there is no samādhi, the mind has no stability. This again leads to the deterioration of the remaining faculties and faith of course suffers again. The five spiritual faculties need to be balanced in order to work effectively.

Yogi: It seems like you are using the word intellect to refer to wisdom and that does not seem like wisdom to me.

Sayadaw: We have talked about the three kinds of wisdom before: sutamayā paññā, cintāmayā paññā, and bhāvanāmayā paññā. I have just been talking about the paññās we can apply, the first two. If you have bhāvanāmayā paññā everything is in balance. You cannot have too much bhāvanāmayā paññā. You cannot ‘input’ or create bhāvanāmayā paññā; you can only ‘tweak’ the faculties. The output depends on our input.

Yogi: OK, I got it; the more bhāvanāmayā paññā, the more faith, but the more faith, not the more bhāvanāmayā paññā.

Yogi: The contemplation of bodily parts and the contemplation of a corpse in decay are well-known kāyānupassanā exercises. Why do you not teach them?

Sayadaw: My teacher taught me a lot about the nature of meditation; he did not teach me these exercises. When you learn about the nature of things (dhammānupassanā), kāyānupassanā is already included. If you do cittānupassanā and dhammānupassanā, kāyānupassanā and vedanānupassanā are already done. My teacher no longer began with samatha before going to vipassanā, he went straight for vipassanā. These kāyānupassanā exercises are in the samatha section of the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta; you only pay attention to concepts.

Yogi: In my experience, the contemplation of bodily parts has been helpful. It gives me useful information to keep at the back of my mind which comes in handy whenever there is lust in the mind. I have stopped doing the exercise now, but I found it very important for my own practice at some stage.

Sayadaw: Sure, it can be helpful and is probably necessary sometimes — that’s why the Buddha taught it.

If we really try to understand the mind, and if there is constant and continuous contemplation of the mind, then, slowly, over time, all of these different aspects of the practice become part of our own experience and understanding. We should not forget that ultimately — whatever we may start practising with — our task is to learn how to deal with the defilements.

Yogi: I heard you mention mindfulness (sati) in connection with wrong view (micchā-diṭṭhi) to a yogi. How do these two come together?

Sayadaw: The Noble Eightfold Path mentions all these ‘Rights’, Right View, Right Thought, etc., and so by inference there is a ‘wrong’. For Right Awareness (sammā-sati) there needs to be Right View and Right Understanding. Without them it cannot be sammā-sati. If you are just watching something, looking at it, you cannot say that it is sammā-sati. Only when sati has the quality of appamāda, of non-negligence, of not forgetting the right object, or in other words only when sati has some wisdom can it be sammā-sati.

If you tell people who are completely unfamiliar with meditation to watch themselves, how do you think they will go about it? What kind of perspective will they meditate from? MY body, MY mind! That is wrong view, not sammā-sati. This is why it is so essential for people to have the right information before they start their meditation practice. So when I give instructions, I try to point out that what we are observing are just natural phenomena, nature at work. I ask yogis to reflect on questions like: Are you the only person who experiences all these different sensations and mind states? Yogis need to understand for themselves that these are all universal, that they are all part of nature, that they do not belong to any individual.

Yogi: I come from a tradition that places great importance on samādhi, on getting into the jhānas. Could you please explain your understanding of samādhi?

Sayadaw: I am interested in the kind of samādhi which develops because of wisdom. When there is wisdom, when the mind understands things, there is stability of mind and we have what is called sammā-samādhi. Right samādhi brings clarity of awareness and insight. Many yogis think they only have samādhi when they experience a feeling of being in a kind of trance. This kind of samādhi has been built with some tension in the mind. In such a state they cannot learn anything and clarity of awareness cannot improve. The state of mind which we call samādhi is very relaxed, cool, and calm. It is receptive and sensitive to whatever happens and can therefore know a lot more.

Many yogis have wrong ideas about how to build samādhi. They focus; they put in a lot of effort. What develops might be quietness, but it’s heavy; there is no lightness to it. In vipassanā practice all we need is enough stability of mind to remain aware from moment to moment. We need just the stability of mind to know what is happening, that’s all. We don’t need jhānic samādhi; you cannot use absorption concentration for vipassanā. Yogis who develop jhāna before they practise vipassanā need to get out of jhāna first.

Jhāna temporarily controls the defilements; there are no gross defilements in a jhānic state. Jhāna suppresses the five hindrances. But jhāna only suppresses kāmacchanda, sensual desire. It does not suppress other kinds of lobha. Bhava-taṇhā, the desire to become, is very much present in every jhānic state.

Samādhi is only complete when it has all three ingredients: sammā-sati, sammā-vāyāma, and sammā-samādhi. When there is continuous awareness with the right attitude and the right ideas, samādhi develops naturally.

₪₪₪

Yogi: When I first came here I found all the talking and socializing very difficult to accept. I did not believe that you could have any kind of samādhi with that kind of behaviour. It took me quite a while to accept that talking meditation was a valid and important practice. After I had overcome my resistance and started doing it myself, I discovered that there not only was samādhi but that it also felt much more pliable — less brittle. Why is that? What’s happening?

Sayadaw: The samādhi you get from being quiet is a bit tight — or brittle as you put it. It very much relies on one condition and that’s why you can easily lose it when the silence is interrupted. It feels strong but it is actually very fragile.

When you practise to be mindful under more trying circumstances, when you keep practising while talking and socializing, it will be more difficult to develop samādhi. You will only be able to develop this with an open mind and with the right attitude. However, since you need to be more skilful in developing samādhi under these circumstances, it will last longer. This samādhi is also more flexible because it does not depend on fixed conditions. Every time you lose mindfulness, you will calmly reconnect with your practice.

It is impossible to always have mindfulness and samādhi when you practise in daily life; it will be there for a period of time, then you lose yourself in activities, and later you become aware again. As long as you have the right attitude and keep noticing every time you ‘get lost’, you are doing fine. If, however, you have the fixed idea in your mind that you can only develop mindfulness and samādhi under special circumstances, you become inflexible and are somehow stuck in your practice.

Yogi: You don’t mention the term investigation of phenomena (dhamma-vicaya) in the blue book. However, you seem to give an interpretation of it in the chapter BE AWARE INTELLIGENTLY. Is this correct?

Sayadaw: Yes, that’s correct.

Yogi: Could you say more about the meaning and importance of dhamma-vicaya?

Sayadaw: Vipassanā meditation is a work of intelligence. That’s why dhamma-vicaya is very important. The goal of vipassanā is wisdom. If you want to gain wisdom, you have to start with wisdom; you have to invest wisdom to gain more wisdom. That’s why I often ask yogis this question: “We are all puthujjanas (worldlings) and the definition of puthujjana is ‘one who is full of defilements’ — so how can you follow my instructions to meditate without the defilements?”

Since we are full of defilements we are unable to meditate without them, so where do we start? A puthujjana has to start meditating with information on amoha, on wisdom. Although all puthujjanas are full of defilements, they have some wisdom too. Buddhism distinguishes between three kinds of wisdom: sutamayā paññā, cintāmayā paññā, and bhāvanāmayā paññā. The first is information, general knowledge, the second is using your own intelligence, rational mind, logic and reasoning, and the third is insight. Dhamma-vicaya falls under cintāmayā paññā.

Where does the ability to use dhamma-vicaya come from? From information, we must have a lot of right information. Once we have this kind of basic or general knowledge, we know how to think. I myself had a very good teacher who gave me a lot of information and advice which I could apply in my meditation practice. I am very grateful to the kind of ‘space’ my teacher gave me to learn for myself. Whenever I discovered something new in my meditation and then went to tell Sayadawgyi all about it, he would often just ask me: “Why?” I usually did not know the answer and he would never give it to me immediately. Since I desperately wanted to know, I would invest all my energies into trying to find the answer. For this kind of investigation it is not sufficient to just be aware. I really had to use my brain. This is intelligent investigation, dhamma-vicaya. I wanted to know and for me this was always a very constructive challenge — more like a game — and so I tried all sorts of ways to find answers. I usually found an answer but not always the right one. When my teacher saw that I could not get it, he would explain things to me.

Three of the bojjhaṅgas, of the seven factors of enlightenment, are causes and four are effects. The causes are: sati, dhamma-vicaya, and viriya. You can ‘input’ these factors, you can actively do these. The effects are: pīti, passaddhi, samādhi, and upekkhā. We cannot create them, we cannot make them happen. When talking about the three kinds of wisdom, I said that dhamma-vicaya falls under cintāmayā paññā. The upekkhā of the seven bojjhaṅgas comes under bhāvanāmayā paññā; this is equanimity that arises because of true understanding.

Intelligence or wisdom is essential for vipassanā. Dhamma-vicaya is a kind of wisdom and is therefore very important. For those who are intelligent and know how to think for themselves, vipassanā works. It is easy for them to understand; bhāvanāmayā paññā comes very easily to those who have strong innate wisdom, strong cintāmayā paññā. For those whose cintāmayā paññā, their ability to reason, to see logic and so on is weak, it takes a long time. Those who are weak in cintāmayā paññā need to rely a lot on sutamayā paññā. They need to gather a lot of information and they need to listen to advice from others. They need others to tell them what to do since they are unable to figure out answers for themselves.

According to the scriptures, there are seven conditions for dhamma-vicaya to arise:

Repeatedly asking Dhamma questions, talking about topics related to Dhamma nature, investigating them, thinking about them.

Cleaning our possessions, both external and internal. This brings clarity of mind. Clarity of mind is a condition for wisdom to arise. (Cleaning outside means cleaning our bodies and our environment — to whatever extent that is possible — but what is more important is cleaning the inside which means cleaning the mind of defilements.)

Learning to balance the five spiritual faculties. (There is a lot of work that needs to be done here. You need to become able to recognize these faculties, and you need to find out what is too much and what is too little so that you can balance them well.)

Avoiding the company of people who do not have wisdom.

Associating with people who have wisdom.

Contemplating deep wisdom, contemplating or reflecting on deeper things.

Having the desire to grow in wisdom.

₪₪₪

Yogi: What is the difference between dhamma-vicaya and clear knowledge (sampajañña)? Could you please elaborate on the four sampajaññas?

Sayadaw: Both are wisdoms. In the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta it is mentioned that there must be sati plus sampajañña, clear comprehension, that they must both be present. All four sampajaññas are concerned with wisdom. Very simply put, the first one is understanding of what is suitable (sātthaka-sampajañña) and the second is understanding of what is beneficial (sappāya-sampajañña). These two come under sutamayā paññā and cintāmayā paññā . They are concerned with our actual practice. But when the practice gains momentum and understanding is increasing, we experience the third kind of sampajañña, gocara-sampajañña, which is understanding that there are just mental and physical processes, that there is nobody there. The last one is asammoha-sampajañña, which means understanding anicca, dukkha, and anatta. The last two come under bhāvanāmayā paññā.

The first two, understanding what is suitable and what is beneficial, are the causes and the last two are the results, the insights that arise.

The first sampajañña, sātthaka-sampajañña, is concerned with suitability. What would be the most suitable thing to do right now? The second is concerned with what is beneficial. What would be most beneficial to apply right now? What is likely to work best? All this is dhamma-vicaya. You see the mind at work in the present moment and you see the whole picture; the field of awareness, how the mind is putting in energy, how it relates to the objects etc. Then the mind asks itself: “What shall I do right now?” Just staring at things quietly is not enough. This is why I have begun to question the term ‘bare attention’. What do we mean by that?

The first two sampajaññas are really common sense wisdom. It is wisdom that is at work when you are meditating, it is wisdom that tells you how to do something. Is this a suitable way to do something? Is it beneficial if it is done this way? It is, for example, understanding how using more energy affects your meditation. In daily life too, this common sense wisdom is at work, helping you to make a wise decision on whatever activity you intend to do, to see clearly whether it is suitable and beneficial or not.

Yogi: I am still not clear about the difference between sampajañña and dhamma-vicaya.

Sayadaw: They overlap, but only the first two sampajaññas are dhamma-vicaya. This is how I understand it.

There is something I want to add to my explanation of gocara-sampajañña. Putting it another way one could say that gocara-sampajañña comes into play when the mind pays more and more attention to the Dhamma nature of things rather than to concepts. This happens when there is momentum in the practice. It becomes almost natural to the mind to look at the reality of the situation rather than the concepts. The Dhamma nature has become the grazing field (literal translation of gocara) of wisdom. If this kind of awareness can be kept up over a long period of time, the nature of dukkha, anicca, and anatta will no longer be misunderstood.

Instead of truly understanding dukkha, anicca, and anatta people spend too much time contemplating it, thinking about it in their practice without having any real, experiential, intuitive understanding. This is why I don’t even like using those terms when I talk about Dhamma. I prefer it when people talk about their actual experience, about what they have been watching or experiencing, rather than telling me that they saw anicca or anatta — which does not make any sense.

₪₪₪

Sayadaw: It is not enough to just be calm, and make an effort to remain aware, you should check whether all the five spiritual faculties (indriyas) are present. You can ask yourself the questions: “Do I have confidence in what I am doing? Do I really know what I am doing?” With experience you will be able to always see whether the five indriyas are at work or not, and whether they are balanced or not.

Yogi: How about the seven factors of enlightenment, the bojjhaṅgas, do we also need to check them?

Sayadaw: Yes. The seven bojjhaṅgas are divided into cause and effect. You only need to check the causes: sati (awareness), viriya (effort), and dhamma-vicaya or paññā. You have to pay special attention to effort; that is the difficult one among these three. There is no problem with awareness and wisdom, they are always wholesome (i.e. there are no defilements), but effort is very problematic. Effort that comes with a defilement is wrong effort. Most yogis make an effort with some kind of desire, so they use effort together with a defilement. There are two kinds of desire: lobha which is unwholesome desire, and chanda which is wholesome desire. You need to be very clear whether you are making an effort with lobha or chanda.

When you make an effort with lobha, you will become tense and you will suffer. When you are successful, you will feel very happy, when not, you will become upset, maybe even depressed. But if you make an effort with chanda (which is wise desire, desire for spiritual growth) you will not suffer and the mind will become powerful. When you succeed, you will not feel elated and when you don’t succeed, you will not feel upset. This is the result of right effort. With right effort, you never give up but you try again and again. So it is very important to keep checking your mind to see whether you have the right motivation.

Asking and exploring questions is conducive to dhamma-vicaya. According to the commentaries to the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta there are four questions to each of the bojjhaṅgas that a yogi should look into. For example: a yogi must know when sati-sambojjhaṅga is present, when it is not present, why it is present and, lastly, why it is developing. Each of these questions reflects a different level of understanding; it is not so difficult to recognize whether or not something is present, but the last two questions could yield a large variety of possible answers. Any understanding on these levels can be difficult. Asking yourself such questions, trying to figure things out for yourself and discussing them with others, will all help wisdom to grow. This kind of exploration is considered as one of the causes for dhamma-vicaya.

Yogi: Can there be kilesas plus wisdom of knowing that kilesas are present and relaxation in the midst of that knowing?

Sayadaw: Yes, it is possible; when the defilements are clearly known as objects, when there is this clear understanding. That’s why I keep telling yogis to be more concerned with how they are watching. If they are watching in the right way, if there is no defilement in the watching, they can watch defilements in an unbiased way. Many yogis have reported this ability, of being in this space where the watching is different, separate from the defilements and they can also clearly express the feeling that there is no defilement in the watching.

Yogi: So the feeling is one of ease and freedom even though there are defilements?

Sayadaw: Yes, they can see clearly that those defilements have nothing to do with ‘me’. An understanding of anatta is present.

Yogi: Does the defilement that is being watched in this way continue to be a defilement?

Sayadaw: There are two different perspectives of wisdom that might be working. There can be the wisdom which frees the watching mind from identifying with the defilement, so that there can be freedom in the watching. But the defilement does not go away by just looking at it. Only if the understanding is about the defilement itself, if you fully understand that defilement, will it go away.

₪₪₪

Yogi: Can you say something about the three levels of kilesa?

Sayadaw: When you are not aware of any defilements in the mind, when they only exist as potentials, they are called latent (anusaya). At this level, the kilesas are hidden and it is impossible to become aware of them. We can only observe defilements when they arise in the mind — that’s the second level — and when they express themselves in words or deeds — that’s the third level. In Pāli the kilesas of the second level are called pariyuṭṭhāna, the ones of the third vītikkama.

Yogi: So the kilesas of the first level are invisible, they are just waiting to get you?

Sayadaw: Yes, they just exist as potentials and they will only arise when there are the conditions necessary for them to arise. As soon as they arise they are called pariyuṭṭhāna. Only insights on the level of enlightenment can eradicate the kilesas on the anusaya level.

Yogi: You do not seem to encourage the practice of mettā-bhāvanā. Do you consider it unsuitable for practitioners of insight meditation?

Sayadaw: It is not that I think it is unsuitable. It can be useful sometimes. My teacher told me to do mettā-bhāvanā at some stage in my practice. It really depends on the person. There are many beginning exercises for meditation. The Buddha taught some people mettā-bhāvanā as a meditation to start with, but he also taught other beginners satipaṭṭhāna.

When you practise satipaṭṭhāna, you practise with the idea of not trying to create anything. You don’t try to create your experience, you take your experience as it is and try to learn something from it. But then what does mettā-bhāvanā do? It tries to create a feeling of mettā. You might be angry with someone but you are trying to feel mettā towards this person.

For some people, to practise mettā-bhāvanā when they are angry can create an internal conflict. For them it does not work. What is real is the anger, and trying to intellectually suppress it won’t help. I tried to send mettā to people I was angry with. But now my wisdom just cannot accept it. My wisdom tells me: “Be real! Watch the anger! Understand the anger!” It feels like the mind is trying to lie to itself. I have done quite a lot of mettā-bhāvanā in the past, even practised all night long and got into absorption, into really blissed-out states for a whole day, but it did not make me a less angry person. The moment I stopped practising I was full of anger again.

After I had been practising satipaṭṭhāna at home for many years, continuously watching all mental activities, I started having periods during which there was really no more dosa in the mind. Then it was easy to send mettā to anyone — no problem. My teacher would sit until his mind was really peaceful and only then send mettā. Because then it was real mettā. Only if you have money in your pocket, can you give some away...

When there is no dosa in the mind and you come across an equal person, it will feel mettā. When it is faced with someone who is in difficulties, it will feel karuṇā, when meeting someone who is doing well, it will feel muditā, and when confronted with a situation in which nothing can be done, it will feel upekkhā. But when there is only a little bit of dosa, none of this is possible. When the mind is clear and when there is no dosa, other contemplations become easy too. If you see a picture of the Buddha, you will start having feelings of reverence towards the Buddha because your mind is in a good state. You are naturally and spontaneously doing Buddhānussati.

There are three ways of seeing the Buddha: 1. with our eyes; 2. by imagining him in our minds (i.e. by visualization); and 3. by understanding the Buddha with our wisdom. That’s why the Buddha said: “Those who see the Dhamma see me.” Many people who lived with the Buddha didn’t really see him. He even had to send a disciple away who did not practise but just wanted to look at him.

The mettā I would like you to have is real mettā, not the kind you try to create for yourself or towards someone else. If there is no dosa, then mettā, karuṇā, muditā, and upekkhā all become possible, and you can radiate as much mettā as you like. mettā grows out of adosa (non-aversion) and it is therefore more important to acknowledge, observe, and understand dosa than to practise mettā. I emphasize this point of first dealing with the dosa because it is real.

Yogi: I sometimes work with mettā when I am suffering; I realize that I do not feel any mettā for another person and therefore I cultivate mettā for myself so that the mind can become more wholesome.

Sayadaw: Yes, that’s the right way to do it. You should start with yourself because only when you are happy yourself can you send mettā to other people. I always tell yogis who want to practise mettā to be aware of themselves while they are doing it. When you are observing yourself while sending mettā, you are doing satipaṭṭhāna. Watch your mind at work sending mettā; check whether you really feel mettā. Then you will also notice if you are angry and that it is really difficult to send any mettā when you are angry.

Yogi: If right attitude is present, is true mettā then automatically possible?

Sayadaw: Yes it is, whenever there is wisdom — right attitude is wisdom. That is why I always emphasize the importance of wisdom; if wisdom is present, then everything else becomes possible. I am trying to go to the most important thing first; I am not going to start from the bottom. In the progression sīla – samādhi – paññā, sīla is basic, samādhi is higher, and paññā is highest. Try just maintaining your sīla and not have any samādhi—you cannot maintain your sīla. But when you have samādhi, sīla is easy to maintain, and when you have wisdom, both samādhi and sīla will automatically be present.

There are two kinds of sīla. At first we try to practise; we restrain ourselves from doing unwholesome deeds. The second kind of sīla arises because the mind understands something, and this means that there is no restraint necessary because there is no more or little desire. Both lobha and dosa have been weakened, and it is called sīla of the cetasikas, ‘mental-contents’ sīla. When true wisdom arises, i.e. when someone experiences enlightenment, sīla becomes immediately pure and the Noble Eightfold Path is understood.

During the Buddha’s time quite a few people had a very well developed wisdom faculty. Because their wisdom was so strong, it often only took a few words from the Buddha for them to get enlightened.

I am stressing the importance of wisdom more and more in my teaching. I myself have tried all kinds of methods. I tried hard to maintain my sīla and to develop samādhi but it did not really change me. Only when my mind began to understand things, when wisdom grew, I became a better person. Of course this growth in wisdom helped me to maintain better and better sīla. One of the practices I did as a layman was keeping eight precepts, not the ones you keep here on retreat, but the usual five precepts plus an extension of the speech precepts, i.e. I tried not only not to lie, but also undertook to abstain from harsh speech, from slander or backbiting (i.e. divisive speech), and from idle talk. I soon found out that I needed a lot of mindfulness, a lot of self-awareness to keep all these speech precepts and that is when my practice really started zooming. The starting point here again was wisdom. There was the wisdom, the understanding that this way of practising would be helpful. When there is wisdom, everything will turn out right. I really want everyone to grow their wisdom, precisely because I know what a big difference it makes.

I don’t really want to talk about mettā, but if you know how to look, you can see mettā. Without real patience, which is akin to mettā, it would not be possible for me to devote all this time to teaching. But I cannot give mettā to every individual, it’s more universal, I feel for you, all of you.

Yogi: There are four pāramīs which I don’t quite understand: adhiṭṭhāna (resolve), nekkhamma (renunciation), sīla (morality), and sacca (truthfulness). Could you please tell me how you understand these?

Sayadaw: Adhiṭṭhāna is a process of strengthening resolve of the mind. It is usually applied in order to reinforce or strengthen some quality that is already present. This can be done by doing something repeatedly and also by pushing the borders of the mind a little bit at a time in order to strengthen the mind. I have done a lot of adhiṭṭhāna. In my experience, making strong resolves never really works except when the motivation is wisdom. If you just bash about with resolve it is never very steady, but if you have been practising steadily, wisdom can take all the strength from that practice and use it effectively. When wisdom is there, resolve is present too.

Yogi: So the strengthening of the mind happens by challenging it?

Sayadaw: No, challenging means wanting to go beyond your limits. The strengthening happens by reinforcing what is already there.

Yogi: How do I reinforce what is already there?

Sayadaw: You have to become clear about what you are capable of, and then do that again and again. I’ll give you a very basic example: If you want to become able to practise all night, you don’t go and try to do it straightaway. You start by resolving the first night to stay up as long as you can and then the following nights you try to repeat that, i.e. you stay up until the same time again. If you can keep this up for two weeks or so, then you can try pushing the mind to practise one more hour. Then you wait and see whether you can keep that up for a week or two before you again try to push further.

Yogi: Thank you, that’s clear. I think you once said that renunciation was about non-greed, is that right?

Sayadaw: Yes, learning to watch all the defilements every time they come up is renunciation — you are making an effort not to indulge in them.

Your third question was about sīla. Sīla is about restraint and responsibility; the more wisdom there is, the more complete sīla becomes.

Yogi: Yes, I understand that. But I am still not clear about the meaning of sīla, does morality mean keeping the eight precepts?

Sayadaw: No, it is understanding what should be done and what should not be done. It is both doing what you should do and not doing what you should not do.

Yogi: OK, my last question is about sacca, truthfulness.

Sayadaw: Sacca basically means truth but it has different meanings. In this context it is about speech, it means not breaking a promise, i.e. once you have promised to give or do something you do not break that promise. But I do not know that much about the technical meanings of sacca. In Burma we have a colloquial way of using sacca. People strongly believe in the power of truth, even when used in a negative way. For example, someone has lied and then uses this as a truth by saying: “It is true that I just lied to my mother, may the power of this truth help my aunty to recover from her illness.” Apparently this really works, but it has less power than when used with a positive truth.

Yogi: A teacher from the Chinese Chan tradition talks about relaxing into nature, into one’s true nature. What is your understanding of seeing self nature, of seeing into self nature?

Sayadaw: The way I understand it is that we have made something that actually is nature into a self. If we understand that we are making nature into a self, that we are creating a concept, then what you said would make sense and also that if we understand nature, we understand ‘ourselves’. That’s how one could express it in words. Sometimes I ask a yogi: “Who are you?” “What are you?”

I don’t see a self, the word self is just a designation that people use. But you cannot communicate without using it. The Buddha said that there is no atta, but he also said “Rely on yourself”. When we are talking about relying on ourselves, we mean relying on the good qualities like awareness, concentration, wisdom, etc.

Yogi: My sense is that the expression ‘self nature’ is pointing to relaxing into the Unconditioned and having that attitude in practice.

Sayadaw: But if it is Unconditioned you do not need to relax! If it is the Unconditioned the mind is already free, there is no need to relax anymore. Only as long as there is an ‘I’ to relax, is there still a need to relax.

Yogi: You often encourage yogis to remind themselves that what they are experiencing is just ‘nature’. Why do you want us to look at our experiences in terms of ‘these are all just natural phenomena’ rather than in terms of ‘non-self’?

Sayadaw: The term non-self or anatta is usually misunderstood. People tend to think of it in terms of an absence of self and this ‘non-self’ becomes a concept. In reality there simply is no self and there has never been one! It is therefore better to think of experiences in terms of ‘these are just natural phenomena’. These phenomena arise because of causes and conditions. Looking at things in this light is right view, and by observing how certain causes and conditions lead to a particular result, we can understand that there are just these causes and conditions, that there is no ‘I’ involved. Understanding conditionality is understanding anatta.

Yogi: You were talking about dukkha the other day, saying that it is everything which is difficult to get rid of. Do you mean getting rid of once and for all or just temporarily?

Sayadaw: Whatever is difficult to get rid of is dukkha — whether just temporarily or once and for all.

Which is harder to get rid of, dosa or lobha?

Yogi: I’d say they are neck to neck.

Sayadaw: Lobha is more difficult, more subtle — and moha is hardest. The point I was making the other day was that we should better not use the word suffering when we talk about dukkha. Most yogis don’t understand the truth of dukkha but they understand suffering. Usually the only kind of suffering they understand is ‘feeling’ suffering (dukkha vedanā) and this interpretation of suffering will lead to aversion. Understanding dukkha is very different.

Many yogis have been told that because things are impermanent they are suffering. They also know that arising and passing away is a sign of impermanence. Because they are eager for progress, they also tend to try to see arising and passing away. When they do this, they will of course remember all the information they were given, and they will interpret whatever they see coming and going as suffering. Because they see this as a sign of progress, their minds will then start to lean towards suffering and they become fearful. Fear is passive dosa. Sometimes yogis become so frightened that they break down and cry.

The meaning of the word dukkha is much wider and deeper than just the experience of physical or mental suffering. Any kind of suffering, from the most obvious manifestations of pain or grief to the most subtle notions of discontent, uncertainty, unsatisfactoriness, unreliability, unpredictability, ambiguity, insecurity etc. all just refer to the grossest level of dukkha. According to Buddhist tradition, this level is called dukkha-dukkha. The pain of birth, getting sick, ageing and death as well as any emotional sorrow like anger, fear, despair, disappointment, anxiety, getting separated from loved ones, having to be with unpleasant people, not getting what we want or getting what we don’t want — all this is traditionally listed under the first level of dukkha.

The next level is called vipariṇāma-dukkha. This is more subtle, more difficult to see. Any kind of sensual pleasure or mental rapture, in fact any kind of happiness whatsoever — however subtle and long-lasting — will sooner or later end. Doing something over and over again or trying to achieve something also belongs to this category of dukkha. You might be experiencing a lot of samādhi, pīti, and passaddhi every time you meditate but this too won’t last. Experiencing such states is also dukkha. Most people find it very difficult to understand that all happiness is dukkha.

The third and last level of dukkha is called saṅkhāra-dukkha, also referred to as existential dukkha. Nāma-rūpa is dukkha; the sheer fact that we exist is dukkha.

It is really important to understand the difference between experiencing dukkha and understanding it. Physical or mental suffering – however gross or subtle – automatically comes with some form of aversion; dukkha vedanā or domanassa always arise together with dosa. All such experiences will lead to unwholesome states of mind and therefore to more suffering.

Understanding dukkha does not mean mental suffering. Understanding dukkha is very different; it is a wholesome quality of mind, a liberating and life transforming experience. Every little understanding of dukkha enables the mind to let go and therefore to experience more freedom. Understanding dukkha will lead to more wholesome states of mind; it will make the mind stronger.

In order to be able to understand dukkha we not only need to have this right information but we also need right thinking. The Buddha said that the one thing that keeps us trapped in this endless cycle of existence is not seeing and not understanding dukkha. If we don’t understand dukkha, we will keep hoping for better times and we will keep getting disappointed. Most people waste a lot of time trying to fight dukkha, trying to manipulate their world. This resistance to dukkha is not only exhausting but it also creates even more dukkha. Right thinking is accepting and acknowledging dukkha. Seeing and accepting dukkha means seeing and accepting how things are, and such a state of mind will free up a lot of energy which we can use to practise.

When we become more and more skilled at recognizing dukkha we will also more often see whenever we ‘create’ new dukkha. My teacher used to say that only when we understand the dukkha in becoming (jāti-dukkha), will the mind really strive towards Nibbāna. Everything that comes into existence is dukkha — and its passing away is dukkha too. It is because we don’t understand jāti-dukkha that we want to get something or to get rid of something. A mind that understands dukkha will neither want happiness nor will it resist anything it is experiencing; it will be completely at peace with whatever is happening.

All beings experience dukkha but only those who recognize dukkha can work towards freeing themselves from it. Clearly recognizing and accepting dukkha will lead to inner freedom. The Buddha said that those who see dukkha also see the end of dukkha. Only if dukkha is really understood, will striving for Nibbāna be seen as the only worthwhile thing to do.

Yogi: You rarely use the word insight. You always talk about wisdom. So I am not sure whether you are using a different model than the one I am used to or whether you just use different terminology. I have been taught that when you apply mindfulness it creates samādhi, that samādhi then leads to insight, which leads to wisdom. Do you agree with this model or do you have a different understanding?

Sayadaw: I use the same model. What we watch are mental and physical processes. Over time, with practice, our understanding of these processes changes. Whether we call it understanding, insight, or wisdom does not really matter; these are just different words pointing to the same thing.

There is a growth in the level of understanding. For example, awareness can see that something is a thought. When the level of awareness grows, wisdom understands that ‘this is the mind’. When the understanding that ‘this is just the mind’ is firmly established, wisdom will start to see that ‘this is just happening’.

It is important to remember that any kind of insight or understanding can only arise when there is no moha, lobha, and dosa in the observing mind.