If any Burmese speaker is reading this, could you please help me?
I am translating Ledi Sayādaw’s Ānāpānadīpanī from Burmese into Italian with the help of machine translation tools. I have a problem with the following passage (from chapter 19, a note on the mind element):
My difficulty is the simile နေခြည်မျှင် တံလျှပ်မျှင်တို့ကဲ့သို့.
နေခြည်မျှင် seems to be “sunbeams” (thin rays of sunlight).
တံလျှပ် seems to means “mirage”. Judson’s dictionary and a Burmese speaker confirm this point.
Can someone help me understand what is the intended image? What does the combination of sunbeams and mirage convey?
U Sein Nyo Tun’s translation runs as follows:
In the case of the mind element, there are occasions of mind arising in dependence on particular objects of thought (such as out-breath and in-breath), each particular thought being connected with and dependent on each particular out-breath and in-breath as the case may be, like the connection
and dependency of shadows and reflection on sunlight.
I can’t understand it. Maybe it is not quite accurate.
the sunbeam, or rays arising from mirage simile, as I understand them, is uninterruptedness in the awareness.
We have seen from time to time sunrays shining down from the sky all the way to the earth in good weather. Burmese often say the straight, constant, interrupted rays from sky to earth. That’s what is most likely meant here.
This is from my friend Thuyein, he has the book and will have a closer look at it so with more context he might update the translation
a heavy sentence. the mind must/should (Burmese do not have equivalent English modal verbs) be aware of the incoming breath, outgoing breath, or the dependent object (vague. could be sensations on the nostril or some other object outside) constantly to the extent that the incoming, outgoing breaths are coming in, going out like rays of sunlight or rays arising from mirage (probably reference to nimitta/symbols/). it’s not a very clear instruction to me. I suppose not a very clear instruction to ordinary chaps like us.
Thank you to you and your friend Thuyein. Let’s wait for an update of the translation. In the meantime, I have received confirmation that the second term refers to mirage, not lightning. Also, your reference to nimitta opens up a line of understanding that I had not yet considered.
After a long analysis of this passage, and after some discussion with people here and elsewhere – thanks also to DeepSeek and Dharmamitra – I have come to the following conclusion for the translation of the text.
Text
[Regarding the mental function (cittadhātu), one should understand that one’s own mind (cittaṃ), together with out-breath and in-breath, arises without interruption – based both on the sensory object, namely out-breath and in-breath, and on the physical basis (vatthu), i.e., the supporting matter (rūpaṃ) – as a continuous stream of sunbeams or of a mirage.]
Note 1: The possessive adjective သူ့, meaning “his/her/its own”, does not here indicate a permanent self that owns the mind and the breath. Rather, it expresses an impersonal correlation whereby each single act of breath is inseparably matched with its own mental moment.
Note 2: The Burmese term မျှင် literally means a long, thin strip or filament. It is used to describe extended, continuous phenomena such as cirrus clouds in the sky (တိမျှင်), blood capillaries (သွေးကြောမျှင်), textile fibres (ချည်မျှင်), or a spider’s web (ပင့်ကူမျှင်). The common feature is the idea of something thin, linear, and unbroken. In this passage, the compounds နေခြည်မျှင် (lit. ‘filament of a sunbeam’) and တံလျှပ်မျှင် (lit. ‘filament of a mirage’) do not describe static entities but continuous flows: the sunbeam in its straight, constant extension from sky to earth, and the mirage in its incessant shimmering on the horizon. The simile thus expresses the nature of the mind as it arises together with the breath: a continuous, unbroken stream – straight and luminous like sunbeams, and at the same time insubstantial like the apparent water of a mirage.
Gautama sometimes made reference to “the four arisings of mindfulness”–at least in some translations, he did!
Maybe the passage should read:
In the case of the mind element, there are occasions of mindfulness of mind arising in dependence on particular objects of thought (such as out-breath and in-breath), each particular thought being connected with and dependent on each particular out-breath and in-breath as the case may be, like the connection
and dependency of shadows and reflection on sunlight.
which I have rendered “one’s own mind (cittaṃ), together with out-breath and in-breath”.
The text has the Burmese adaption of the word cittaṃ here, ie. စိတ် (cit) which should mean “mind” or even “state of mind” but, I don’t see the word for mindfulness here.
I’m sure you’re right. I have no experience with translation.
I was simply trying to make sense of what U Sein Nyo Tun’s translation was saying. It makes no sense to me that “there are occasions of mind arising in dependence on particular objects of thought”, as there is no thought without mind, but it does make sense that there are “occasions of mindfulness of mind arising in dependence on particular objects of thought”. Sort of!
Your translation leaves me confused:
[Regarding the mental function (cittadhātu ), one should understand that one’s own mind (cittaṃ ), together with out-breath and in-breath, arises without interruption – based both on the sensory object, namely out-breath and in-breath, and on the physical basis (vatthu ), i.e., the supporting matter (rūpaṃ ) – as a continuous stream of sunbeams or of a mirage.]
Gautama’s teachings are nothing if not practical, even if we can’t see the practice behind them initially. My opinion, I realize.
The mind that arises in connection with inbreathing and the mind that arises in connection with outbreathing is the one-pointed mind, the mind that is synonymous with concentration:
And what… is the (noble) right concentration with the causal associations, with the accompaniments? It is right view, right purpose, right speech, right action, right mode of livelihood, right endeavor, right mindfulness. Whatever one-pointedness of mind is accompanied by these seven components , this… is called the (noble) right concentration with the causal associations and the accompaniments.
|(MN 117, tr. Pali Text Society vol III p 114; “noble” substituted for Ariyan)
This, exactly:
Note 1: The possessive adjective သူ့ , meaning “his/her/its own”, does not here indicate a permanent self that owns the mind and the breath. Rather, it expresses an impersonal correlation whereby each single act of breath is inseparably matched with its own mental moment.
Can you say what the larger context of the passage is?
While I was writing the following, I read your last comment, so I will first deal with your previous comment and at the end with your last comment.
First, on general things.
As far as I know, with regard to “Gautama’s teachings” we are dealing with many traditional corpora, let’s say Pāḷi texts, early Tibetan translations, early Chinese translations and so on. What actually constitutes “Gautama’s teachings” is something we can only assume with a pinch of salt. Anyway, without forgetting context, which is always a very important thing, we are here not dealing with early texts, but rather with an exegetical work from the early 20th century. It is not a direct “Gautama’s teaching”; it may be a reworking of it. Many centuries have passed between the time the Teacher taught and Leḍi Sayāḍo.
Anyway, as far as we can see from the discourses (suttāni), “Gautama’s teachings” can differ somewhat in form according to the natural disposition of the interlocutor. At times, a teaching which could sound difficult for person A could resonate well for person B, or vice versa. Some are more prone to “philosophical understanding”, others to “practical things”. No one is better than the other, in my opinion; it is just a difference in disposition.
Having said that (sorry for the long introduction), I realize that Leḍi Sayāḍo’s text is not so easy, even assuming my translation is faithful. One important point to understand is: what is cittaṃ? It is not a banal thing. Should we intend cittaṃ as cittasaṅkhāro, i.e. vedanā and saññā (MN 44, Cūḷavedallasuttaṃ)? I am not sure. If so, cittaṃ in our passage could be a kind of mental activity, not only occasional thought, but also intention, evaluation, recognition, and so on. So, all this mental activity that we have would arise based on the fact that we have a body (it could be the vatthu in Leḍi’s text) which is a manifestation of matter (rūpaṃ). Obviously the body comes in conjunction with assāsapassāsā (respiration), so that our mind (and mental activity) is inseparable from the body and respiration, and is based on that. And it is a continuous process like the sunbeams. The reference to mirage, provided that my translation and interpretation of it are correct, should point to anattā.
I think that Leḍī Sayāḍo’s remark holds true on every occasion, whether the mind is “concentrated” or not. In other words, the mind arising in connection with out-breathing and in-breathing can be a one-pointed mind but also a distracted mind; the phenomenon of interconnection will still be there even though the mind is vikkhittaṃ (distracted).
For reading about the larger context, you can refer to the whole Leḍi Sayāḍo book, which is available on many websites, e.g. here: https://buddho.org/anapana-dipani-manual-of-meditation-on-breathing/. Please, look for the word “shadows” in order to go directly to the point of the book under discussion. You can see there the larger context.
Anyway, be aware that the word “shadows” could be the fruit of a wrong translation. It seems that the corresponding Burmese word should mean “mirage”. Beware also that many available translations of Leḍī Sayāḍo in English sound quite odd to me. I think they should be carefully revised in bulk.
May I first thank you for your long and extremely cogent reply.
What I get, for shooting from the hip–reading the lecture (I’m guessing it started out as a lecture) from the link you provided, I don’t believe he was talking about mindfulness of mind, or one-pointedness, in the material you were concerned with.
I did know that he lived in the twentieth century, thanks.
Some things jump out at me in the lecture.
First, he’s explaining the application of Anapanasati, MN 118. He says this about the fourth element of the practice:
In the fourth stage, when the perception of every breath in its entirety has been mastered, the coarse and rough breaths must be calmed down and allayed by degrees, making them more and more gentle and subtle, until the stage is reached when it seems that the out-breaths and in-breaths have entirely disappeared.
In the case of concentrating on breathing, the breathing gradually becomes regular, long and pleasant. It’s very likeable. Due to the lack of energy use, the breathing naturally becomes shorter and subtler, until it stops. If one doesn’t worry about that, it’s possible to stay with that subtle sensation of no breathing.
Some of the above can be connected to the Suttas: the attention to breathing and the no breathing: “For one engaged in the fourth jhana, in-and-out breathing has ceased.” (Rahogata Sutta, SN36.11)(p 29)
What ceases in the jhanas is action by choice:
It is intention that I call deeds. For after making a choice one acts by way of body, speech, and mind.
(AN 6.63, tr. Bhikkyu Sujato; Pali Text Society [PTS] vol III p 294)
And what are choices? There are three kinds of choices. Choices by way of body, speech, and mind. These are called choices.
(SN 12.2, tr. Bhikkyu Sujato)
The Pali Text Society translated the above passage with “activities” in place of “choices”:
And what are the activities? These are the three activities:–those of deed, speech and mind. These are activities.
(SN 12.2; tr. PTS F. L. Woodward, Vol II p 4)
The “activities” of the Pali Text Society’s translation are the intentional actions of body, speech, and mind, the actions that follow from choice.
Gautama declared that the “activities” become still, or “cease”, in particular states of concentration:
…I have seen that the ceasing of the activities is gradual. When one has attained the first trance, speech has ceased. When one has attained the second trance, thought initial and sustained has ceased. When one has attained the third trance, zest has ceased. When one has attained the fourth trance, inbreathing and outbreathing have ceased… Both perception and feeling have ceased when one has attained the cessation of perception and feeling.
(SN 36.11, tr. PTS vol IV p 146)
In my estimation, a moment-to-moment conscious experience of “reflex movement” in inhalation and exhalation is “the cessation of inbreathing and outbreathing”.
The “point of touch” in Sayadaw’s lecture seems like a description of “one-pointedness”, but the things he said that go along with it are strange to me:
When attention becomes fixed on the out and in-breath (i.e. when a certain degree of concentration is achieved), manifestations appear, such as masses of fluffy wool, or gusts of wind, or clusters of stars, or gems or pearls, or strings of pearls, etc., in various shapes, groups, and colours. These are the counterpart signs.
The connection method must be maintained until such time as the counterpart signs appear clearly whenever effort is made.
He spoke of vipassana, and said:
When can one proceed to Vipassanā?
In the Ānāpānassati Sutta and the Commentary, the order of practice is to undertake the work of the fourth tetrad only after the attainment of the four jhānas. If one can adhere strictly to this order it is ideal. However, if one finds oneself unable to follow this order of practice one may proceed to insight from the third jhāna. It is permissible to proceed to insight also from the second jhāna, or from the first jhāna, or from access concentration before jhāna is attained, or from the connection stage, or even from the counting stage after the wandering tendencies of the mind have been overcome.
“… the order of practice is to undertake the work of the fourth tetrad only after the attainment of the four jhānas”–I haven’t found anything to that effect in the first four Nikayas. This I have found:
Whatever… is material shape, past, future or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, mean or excellent, or whatever is far or near, (a person), thinking of all this material shape as ‘This is not mine, this am I not, this is not my self’, sees it thus as it really is by means of perfect wisdom. Whatever is feeling… perception… the habitual tendencies… whatever is consciousness, past, future, or present… (that person), thinking of all this consciousness as ‘This is not mine, this am I not, this is not my self’, sees it thus as it really is by means of perfect wisdom. (For one) knowing thus, seeing thus, there are no latent conceits that “I am the doer, mine is the doer” in regard to this consciousness-informed body.
(MN 109; tr. PTS vol III p 68; reprint 1977, ISBN 0 7100 8748 9)
“No latent conceits that ‘I am the doer, mine is the doer’ in regard to this consciousness-informed body” is the result of moment-to-moment conscious experience of “reflex movement” in inhalation and exhalation, activity in the body that takes place without choice or intention. The quote seems to indicate that reflection on the five aggregates precedes that experience, and facilitates it.
Thank you again for your thoughtful reply. Even while acknowledging that your reflections may not directly help with my translation, these discussions often open up useful perspectives.
Now, to your points.
1. On “reflex movement”
This is the part I find most difficult to understand.
“In my estimation, a moment-to-moment conscious experience of ‘reflex movement’ in inhalation and exhalation is ‘the cessation of inbreathing and outbreathing’.”
I have thought about this for some time, but I am not certain what you mean by “reflex movement” here. Would you be willing to rephrase or elaborate? What kind of movement are you referring to, and in what sense is it “reflex”? Your reference to MN 109 (“No latent conceits that ‘I am the doer, mine is the doer’…”) suggests that you are pointing to a mode of experience where the sense of agency drops away. Is that correct?
2. On the “counterpart signs” (masses of fluffy wool, gusts of wind, etc.)
You mentioned that these manifestations sound strange to you. I think it is worth noting that this list likely comes from the Visuddhimaggo (or the commentarial tradition more broadly). Leḍī Sayāḍo is probably quoting or summarising that tradition here, not inventing these images. I cannot be certain without checking the source, so take this as a suggestion rather than as established fact.
3. On the order of practice: “only after the attainment of the four jhānas”
I think Leḍī Sayāḍo’s statement here is partly rhetorical. He first states the ideal order, ie. starting by the fourt jhānaṃ, but then immediately adds that one may proceed to vipassanā from the other jhānāni too, or even from any stage of concentration/stillness of the mind after the wandering tendencies of the mind have been overcome. So the “only after” is not a rigid rule – it seems to a pedagogical device. He presents the full ideal path first, then allows for many other entry points.
4. On the three saṅkhārā and gradual cessation
You cited SN 36.11 and mentioned the three saṅkhārā. The same list appears in MN 44 as well. Regarding the gradual cessation of saṅkhārā, MN 43 might also be worth checking – I recall that it speaks on this topic.
On translations of saṅkhārā as “activities” or “choices”: both have their strengths and weaknesses. As always, translations should be taken cum grano salis. I generally prefer to refer to the Pāḷi itself. That said, I acknowledge that translations can still help understanding, provided one remembers their limitations and does not grasp to them.
5. On saññāvedayitanirodho (cessation of perception and feeling)
You quoted the phrase “cessation of perception and feeling” from SN 36.11. This has recently made me think: referring to saññāvedayita (perception and feeling) might be a case of taking the part for the whole (pars pro toto). Does the cessation of saññāvedayita imply the cessation of all mental activity? I am not certain – I pose this as a genuine question.
From my own writing–I am using Woodward’s “zest and ease”, as they are feelings I can relate to, unlike “rapture and bliss” or similar:
Gautama described the “first trance” as having feelings of zest and ease, and he prescribed the extension of those feelings:
… (a person) steeps, drenches, fills, and suffuses this body with zest and ease, born of solitude, so that there is not one particle of the body that is not pervaded by this lone-born zest and ease.
(AN 5.28, tr. PTS vol. III pp 18-19, parentheticals paraphrase original)
Words like “steeps” and “drenches” convey that the weight of the body accompanies the feelings of zest and ease.
The weight of the body sensed at a particular point in the body can shift the body’s center of gravity, and a shift in the body’s center of gravity can result in what Moshe Feldenkrais termed “reflex movement”. Feldenkrais described how “reflex movement” can be engaged in standing up from a chair:
…When the center of gravity has really moved forward over the feet a reflex movement will originate in the old nervous system and straighten the legs; this automatic movement will not be felt as an effort at all.
(“Awareness Through Movement”, Moshe Feldenkrais, p 78)
“Drenching” the body “so that there is not one particle of the body that is not pervaded” with zest and ease allows the weight of the body to effect “reflex movement” in the activity of the body, wherever “one-pointedness” takes place.
In falling asleep, the mind can sometimes react to hypnagogic sleep paralysis with an attempt to reassert control over the muscles of the body, causing a “hypnic jerk”. The extension of a weighted zest and ease can pre-empt the tendency to reassert voluntary control in the induction of concentration, and make possible a conscious experience of “reflex movement” in inhalation and exhalation.
Yes, I’m beginning to understand that some of these interpretations belong to the Visuddhimaggo or to Theravadin tradition. Such strange images.
“A pedgogical device”, sounds right.
Gautama did say:
Concentration… practise (sp-EN) concentration. (One) who is concentrated… knows a thing as it really is.
And what does (one) know as it really is? The arising of body and the passing away thereof; the arising of feeling and the passing away thereof; the arising of perception and the passing away thereof; the arising of activities and the passing away thereof; the arising of consciousness and the passing away thereof.
(SN 22.5, tr. PTS vol III p 15; parentheticals paraphrase original)
From a piece I’m writing now:
The Pali word for the fourth aggregate, “saṅkhāra”, has been rendered as “choices” (Bhikkyu Sujato, 2018), and as “mental factors” (Woodward, 1930). Additional translations of the word include “the activities” (Woodward, 1925), “the habitual tendencies” (I. B. Horner, 1957), and “volitional formations” (Bhikkyu Bodhi, 2012).
The Pali Text Society’s Pali-English dictionary describes “saṅkhāra” as “one of the most difficult terms in Buddhist metaphysics”.
Woodward’s translation of AN 6.63:
…I say that determinate thought is action. When one determines, one acts by deed, word, or thought.
Bhikkyu Sujato’s translation:
It is intention that I call deeds. For after making a choice one acts by way of body, speech, and mind.
Woodward again:
And what… is the ceasing of action? That ceasing of action by body, speech, and mind, by which one contacts freedom,–that is called ‘the ceasing of action’.
(SN 35.146, tr. Pali Text Society vol IV p 85.)
The ceasing of the activities in the concentrations appears to have been the ceasing of that activity which occurs through “determinate thought”, by “choice” or “intention”.
No, the cessation of feeling and perceiving does not mean the cessation of all mental activity. MN 121 has this line (Bhikkyu Sujato’s translation):
There is only this that is not emptiness, namely that related to the six sense fields dependent on this body and conditioned by life.’
The mind being one of the six sense fields, a contact of mind must remain. The cessation of feeling and perceiving is the cessation of feeling and perceiving by choice, by intention. Even if we say that thought is something that is “perceived”, that perception is not by choice in the signless concentration, and contact with thought would appear to still occur.
Thought “directed and sustained” ceases in the second concentration. The reasoning that I’m applying above would say that thought still occurs in all the concentrations, and that would also seem to be contrary to Theravadin tradition.
Lets ask student of Ledi Sayadaw who Ledi Sayadaw encouraged to teach the meditation…
Saya Thet on anapana…
“As concentration gets more mature, these pearls shine like electric lights, coming in and going out. When going out, they get outside of the nostril together with the out-breath. When entering, they go as far as the navel. With that light, the content of the abdomen can be seen. When these signs are on, yogi may be aware of the signs only, with no awareness on the nostril. When the signs disappear, the mind returns to the tip of the nose.”
[…]
“The in-breath and out-breath may sometimes seem like vapors, white and smoke-like, sometimes like wafts of cotton wool at the nostril piling up waft upon waft Sometimes white vapors appear together with sparkling golden or silvery particles, often like fireworks.”
[…]
“stronger and firmer, the nimitta sphere shines with cool, clear light brighter than the moon or the sun.”
It might be relevant. To quote your quote…
textile fibres
a spider’s web
The common feature is the idea of something thin, linear, and unbroken.
A second source for the above is first hand to in english from a student of his Marie Byles of Sydney in the book “Journey Into Burmese Silence” See page 223 for same territory - https://host.pariyatti.org/treasures/Journey_Into_Burmese_Silence.pdf If you view appendix of that book you will set another account of the same instructions that simularly mentions the above. Marie Byles is cool - she is responsible for Bouddhi national park in Sydney and was first woman solicitor in NSW.
Saya Thet …
“vitakka is a property of the mind that collects itself and other factors of consciousness to receive signals from the sense object. Vicāra is a property of the mind and its factors of consciousness that identify and determine the nature of the sense object received by virtue of vitakka” also can see confirmation ekagatta is without awareness of other things / senses. :folded_hands
Amazing how you guys can get into so much detail I really admire it because I don’t have the ability or patience to study, the breath does stop when practicing Anapana sometimes for over a minute sometimes, with no tension in the body or mind there is just awareness of sensation moving where the attention was on the touch of the breath, and when sleeping there is full awareness of the touch of the breath which turns around as soon as there is movement in a direction going in and going out
Hi Pretty sure Marie Byles was a student of Sayagyi U Ba Khin first he was extremely strict and only accepted certain students so she went to another of Saya thetagyis students in Mandalay,
In the Pali suttas, the Buddha is normally addressed by the Sangha as “Reverend” “Blessed One” or “Lord” and in the Chinese agamas it’s “World Honored One”.
Usually “Gotama" or "Master Gotama” is used by Brahmins or those who are not followers of the Buddha, sometimes in disrespect.
If you are interested in U Ba Khin (student of Saya Thet who student from Ledi Sayadaw ) now here is him talking to student Jocelyn in English about that same territory mentioned (https://youtu.be/2PYEKIpP4p8?si=L7txl9JrGoAhh8qA) - normally I wouldn’t speak except I saw invokation of AI and all kinds of ideas here (e.g. about vitakka and vichara - some which just directly answered in those) so I felt compelled to perhaps at least provide evidence or reason to maybe not speculate that direction and find or ask question of qualified person (that’s not me!) and so there i linked to resources that mention that territory (from pariyatti.org, archive.org and youtube) with metta
Thanks, if you look in the comments of this video somebody asked Thuyein where did he get the video from? And you will see it says somebody from Australia and that somebody is me ha ha. I’m glad you found this video if you go to his channel there’s quite a number of talks by Sayagyi U Ba Khin that have been translated. Make sure you click on the subtitles or you can read the transcript. Thuyein is now working on some Webu Sayadaw discourses. The most important thing that these teachers are talking is a way to Nibanna which is starting with Samma Samadhi which enables you to practice Vipassana at a very deep level
