In the context of liberating wisdom, the Buddha frequently employs a term called “yathabhuta” when
describing the practice of insight meditation.
Usually this term is translated as “as it really is”. So, a passage like this:
Sāvatthinidānaṃ. ”Rūpaṃ, bhikkhave, anattā. Yadanattā taṃ ‘netaṃ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṃ yathābhūtaṃ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ. Vedanā anattā… saññā anattā… saṅkhārā anattā… viññāṇaṃ anattā. Yadanattā taṃ ‘netaṃ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṃ yathābhūtaṃ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ. Evaṃ passaṃ…pe… nāparaṃ itthattāyāti pajānātī”ti. Chaṭṭhaṃ.
…is usually translated as:
I heard thus. At one time the Blessed One was living in the monastery offered by Anathapindika in Jeta’s grove in Savatthi. From there the Blessed One addressed
the monks: Monks, matter [sic] lacks self; that which lacks self is not mine, it is not I or my self. This should be seen as it really is, with right wisdom. – Feelings – perceptions – Intentions – Consciousness is not self. – Monks, the noble disciple seeing it thus turns from matter, turns from feelings, turns from perceptions, turns from intentions, and turns from consciousness. Turning, [he] is calmed and released. Knowledge arises: I am released; birth is destroyed, the holy life is lived to the end, and I know there is nothing more to wish.’ SN 21. 1. 2. 6.
The above paragraph, of which the Khandha and Salayatana chapters of the SN are filled with (in various variations, interspersed by similes and explanations), are vipassana meditation instructions. But, do we realize that when reading English (or other translations) of those passages? Can you discover a clear meditation instruction in the English paragraph above?
The paragraph starts out with an instruction (see the sentence in italics above) and continues to apply the same kind of instruction to either of the 5 groups of grasping or, in the case of the Salayatana chapter of the Samyutta Nikaya, to the six sense impressions. In both instances the description makes it clear that whatever experience arises to the meditator, it has to be dealt with in the way the instruction outlines.
Finally, in the last part of the above paragraph, the result is mentioned. It is a short form of the elaborate 16 stages of insight knowledge culminating in the realization of nibbana.
Let us have a closer look at this instruction part and —at the same time— give an alternative (more literal) translation:
Yadanattā taṃ ‘netaṃ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṃ yathābhūtaṃ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ
Whatever is void of self, of that (think): “This is not mine. This am I not. This is not my self.” So is this as soon as it/as far as it has become (come into existence) (yathābhūtaṃ) to be seen (daṭṭhabbaṃ) with right/correct wisdom.
A couple of observations. daṭṭhabbaṃ or ‘to be seen’ does literally mean what it says: looking. There is only one way to see these things, and that is in a meditative session/environment. The verb does not say “think” or “conceptualize” or “reflect” or “analyze” and you will attain to Nibbana. No, it clearly says that you have to see these phenomena in a certain fashion, with right wisdom.
Now, even “right wisdom” would be an empty phrase if we do not know how we should see them in our meditation. Well, we don’t have to look far; everything is right in front of us, explained in this little paragraph. However, and that is the special point of this posting, the simple non-literal translation of “yathabhuta” with “as it really is” does not help in the context of meditation. It is not completely wrong either, but if we go word for word and consider some other facts, the meaning behind yathabhuta is even more powerful. The problem here is that the listener at Buddha’s time was very well aware of the literal meaning of those terms. He was able to grasp from this and the context the “instruction” part. He may have even applied the instruction at the same time of hearing the discourse spoken. No wonder then that many suttas tell us about attainments of Nibbana while listening to such words. But, back to our text:
Literally then, yathā means:
Yathā (adv.) [fr. ya˚; Vedic yathā; cp. kathā, tathā] as, like, in relation to, after (the manner of).
More important though, take a look at other examples where the word is used:
- yathā kāmam (as far as his liking goes) according to his liking
- yathā kālam (as far as the time) in time, timely
- yath’ āgato tathā — gato as he came, thus he went
Bhūtaṃ is simply the past perfect of being, meaning “become”. Have a look at the PED’s definition:
Bhūta [pp. of bhavati, Vedic etc. bhūta] grown, become; born, produced; nature as the result of becoming.
So, what does this term stand for? “as born”, “as far as become”?! He should see things as far as they were born? “What the heck does that mean?” – We can almost hear that question raised by the translators of Pali texts…How can you see something as born?
Well, it took quite some time and effort to dig out the ancient meditation techniques of Theravada, and it just happened recently, some 50 years ago, and it is mainly the Burmese Sangha who deserves our compliments for this re-establishment of vipassana practice in Theravada.
Of course, in the course of vipassana, to see phenomena like feeling, form, perception, mental preparations and consciousness as “This is not mine” [tag it!] AS (SOON/FAR) as they arise or as soon as they are born makes complete and utter sense. We are reminded of the Bahiya sutta, where the Buddha says, “by the seen, just the seen”, or this (and many other similar) beautiful verse:
Uddhaṃ, tiriyaṃ apācinaṃ,
yāvatā jagato gati
samavekkhitā va dhammānaṃ
khandhānaṃ udayabbayaṃ.
Audio: http://pariyatti.com/downloads/dwob/itivuttaka_4_111.mp3Above, across or back again,
wherever the wakeful went
let him carefully observe
the rise and fall of compounded things.Itivuttaka 4.111
http://tipitaka.org/romn/cscd/s0504m.mul3.xml#para111
But such an observation and thus translation and choice of words is hard for someone who has never experienced a vipassana meditation or similar instruction. So now, we live with Western translations and go for vipassana retreats and some ask: “Why did not the Buddha give this kind of instruction in the Suttas?”
The right answer is: Well, he did! In fact, overwhelmingly many texts talk in this direct way, but it might need another generation of Pali translators to uncover them. We find many instances with variations of this basic technique of using labels to stop short the mind at bare awareness and thus by slowing the movie allowing a very deep look into the mind.
In fact, we might even learn more and derive more details for current vipassana meditation instructions if we take a look at the Pali texts from this very literal and meditation-related point of view.
khandy
Excellent post!
I wish to comment to this phrase at the end, though: “… this basic technique of using labels to stop short the mind at bare awareness…”
In my experience, the technique of using labels is to stop the self-centric tendency to proliferate, to complicate, using concepts and stories: “my leg hurts,” “i see a beautiful woman,” “he is verbally abusing me,” etc. When sati (in saṅkhāra) is not yet well-established, saññā is ready to add pollutions to the knowing of viññāṇa. We therefore restrain saññā within the confines of objective labels only: “pain,” “raising,” “falling,” “seeing,” “hearing,” etc.
On the notion of bare awareness as you put it, i feel that Vipassanā practice develops much more than this. The Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta specifies 3 factors: ātāpī, sati, sampajañña. Certain teachers take pain to always mention sati-sampajañña as a pair. If sati implies “noting,” sampajañña implies “understanding.” Vipassanā would be incomplete without this factor of understanding.
Finally, you are right on: suttas are meditation manuals, not texts for academic studies. In this light, i come across wonderful instructions that are repeated over and over in the Nikāya.
khandy
Oh, one more thing…
Elsewhere, you mentioned that the meaning of sati includes “memory.” This is true, when one considers the mental labels with which the Vipassanā practitioner trains saññā. Sati also means remembering the practice instructions — by extension, this implies memorizing the suttas. Saññā encompasses memory and capacities based on memory: recognition, perception, recall, reasoning…
Cheers!
theravadin
Very good. Yes, you are absolutely right. i was actually thinking whether to include that into my post, but i guess it wont be the last one. Sati being memory we find passages where the Buddha uses it in a broader sense to include the memory of the teachings.
With regard to the labels however, there is one tricky issue which i think would ask for another post: The “dry vipassana” school, where most people take on vipassana without any prior samatha training make people use a vast amount of very superficial labels at first…like “hurting”, “moving” etc etc.
Of course, these concepts will help the mind to slow down the proliferation a bit, but they are very blunt and will have to be reduced/refined when concentration and insight pick up speed.
For anyone interested i highly highly recommend Ven. Nyananandas article “Seeing-Through”:
http://nibbanam.com/nibbana_guide_en.htm (you need to read the whole article though)
which is based on the meditation training he provides in Sri Lanka. You will see in that article how the noting labels “concepts” can be refined in accordance with the progress and i will definitely do another post on the various labels the suttas provide us with.
Thanks khandy for your comments.
khandy
I suppose we are on the same page.
My observation “when sati is not yet well-established…” suggests that the non-subjective labels tend to be used during the initial phase. And, yes, these may become too mechanical to enable further progress.
Looking forward to reading more of your posts!
theravadin
A great (thorough) compilation of passages related to yathabhuta can be found in “Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, W.G. Weeraratne (ed.), Sri Lanka: Department of Buddhist Affairs” by Ven. Bhikkhu Analayo:
http://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/fileadmin/pdf/analayo/Yathabhuta.pdf
To his credit he emphasizes the meaning “as it has come to be” for “yathabhuta” as essential for understanding how knowledge “of what is or is not” was perceived to be of utmost importance in the early Buddhist Sangha. Thanks, Bhante!
BT Tay
Yes but the literal analysis here(in this wesite) is nice . This is just my opinion , though .
In the phrase : Yadanattā taṃ ‘netaṃ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṃ yathābhūtaṃ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ
there is very deep / profound stuff which is usually neglected . Please look at Ani Sutta(Drum Peg) for example.
Perhaps yathābhūtaṃ here may also mean as far as this view / realization is born / produced (the Yadanattā taṃ ‘netaṃ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti) .
Anatta is a realization that needs to become born / produced .
And all that is to be seen ((daṭṭhabbaṃ) with sammapannaya .
taṃ may serve as a sort of emphasis .
Anatta is not the usual kind of stuff and one really needs the prerequisite panna and this is lokuttara panna.
Sabbe dhamma anatta .
“Anatta Lip service” is easy but that is not sammappaññāya.
Please correct / refute me if I am wrong .
BT Tay
09:01:38 6-1-2016
Pingback: Seeing Things as the Way They Are |
Sublime
Apologies for lack of diacritics in what follows.
Yathabhuta = according to fact, from:
Bhuta = ‘has become’, ‘has come into being’ is very frequently used to mean ‘fact’, a thing that has come into being; see for instance beautiful Right Speech summary towards the end of MN 58; What one knows to be not true (taccha), not fact (bhuta), one does not say.
Yatha = ya + atham ‘that this’ or ‘which this’, the ‘ya’ normally refers to an earlier ‘ta’, in compounds usually ‘according to’
dhattabam = gerund of dassati (to see): ‘seeing’. PTS has ‘to be regarded as’ (to be seen as)
So:
Whatever is not self, [of] that think “this is not mine, I am not this, this is not myself” thus seeing according to fact right wisdom.
‘thus according to fact seeing right wisdom’ at the end is equally supported I think; sammapannaya is indeclinable so I don’t think there’s a way to distinguish the two.
Definitely agree seeing this as quickly as possible is a great meditation practice though!
I love love love how Pali can convey so many beneficial but subtly different meanings in English with the exact same words; it always makes me wonder to what extent the meanings were distinguished thousands of years ago.
Just my tuppenceworth; always when translating from Pali something is lost and something is added. Thank you for this excellent page!
Sublime
…technically as dhattabam is a gerund there probably ought to be an ‘is’ in there in English, so
‘thus seeing according to fact IS right wisdom’,
or
‘seeing thus according to fact IS right wisdom’
or possibly even
‘thus seeing right wisdom IS according to fact’.
The word order in Pali is
‘[thus] [according to fact] [right wisdom] [is seeing]’, so perhaps
‘thus according to fact right wisdom is seen’
is the most direct English translation.
I have seen in Pali grammar manuals that word order seldom conveys meaning though.
Sublime
I spent several hours researching this so I hope what follows is right:
Yadanattā taṃ ‘netaṃ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṃ yathābhūtaṃ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ
Simple Pali sentences typically take the form [SUBJECT] [OBJECT] [PREDICATE/VERB], which words qualifying each part preceding that part (see Charles Duroiselle’s Practical Grammar of the Pali Language)..
The verb at the end is ‘daṭṭhabbaṃ’, the gerundive (= Future Passive Participle) of ‘to see’, meaning ‘to be seen as’, ‘to be regarded as’ (see https://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Textual-Studies/Grammar/Guide-to-Pali-Grammar.htm). This declines as an adjective and is in the nominative case, referring to the subject of the sentence.
The subject of the sentence is at the beginning and is the only noun in the nominitive case, Yadanattā, anattā being a feminine noun in ā (PTS atta).
There are two adverbs (adverbial compunds Avyayiibhaava), yathābhūtaṃ and sammappaññāya which are indeclinable. See http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/ele_pali.pdf.
The object of the sentence is in the accusative case, taṃ ‘netaṃ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṃ.
The taṃ is part of a ya..ta construction (see PTS) referring back to the Yadanattā. The quoted section is ‘this is not mine, I am not this, this is not myself’. The evametaṃ is ‘just so’ or ‘thus’.
Translating the whole lot apart from the yathābhūtaṃ gives:
What is not self is to be seen yathābhūtaṃ-ly right-wisely as ‘this is not mine, I am ot this, this is not myself’ just so
or
What is not self is to be seen yathābhūtaṃ-ly right-wisely thus: ‘this is not mine, I am not this, this is not myself’
On to yathābhūtaṃ.
yathā is an indeclinable adverb, meaning as, like, in relation to, after (the manner of), and particularly ‘according to’ when used in compounds (PTS and others).
bhūta is the past participle of ‘to become’, so literally ‘became’, ‘has become’. It has at least 10 different meanings according to the PTS Dictionary:
1) animate nature as principle or the five khandas
2) ghosts
3) inanimate nature as principle or the four elements
4) all that exists, existence
5) predicative use (unlikely here)
6) all beings, the animal kingdom
7) the vegetable kingdom
8) beings
9) natural, true, genuine
10) what has happened, what has become
It is also used beautifully in MN58 to mean ‘fact’ (What one knows to be not true, not fact one does not say etc.).
PTS also has for the specific compound yathābhūtaṃ: in reality, in truth, really, definitely, absolutely; as ought to be, truthfully, in its real essence
So there are literally THOUSANDS of possible English translations of this phrase when one takes all the possible permutations of ‘yathā’ and ‘bhūta’ into account.
If one’s sticking with the usual ‘according to’ construction for yathā, then ‘according to fact’ or ‘factually’ or ‘truthfully’ or ‘as a matter of fact’ makes sense as an adverb, giving something like:
What is not self is to be seen factually right-wisely thus: ‘this is not mine, I am not this, this is not myself’
but we could also have
What is not self definitely ought to be seen right-wisely thus: ‘this is not mine, I am not this, this is not myself’
The ‘as [soon as] it has become’ construction suggested by this blog also seems fine to me, and could be a useful meditation instruction as suggested. ‘According to its becoming’ also seems fine to me. ‘As it has become’ is pleasingly literal.
There are at least a further two hidden meanings supported, though whether or not they were intended I think now there is no way to know for sure:
What is not self is to be seen right-wisely according to all beings thus: ‘this is not mine, I am not this, this is not myself’
What is not self is to be seen right-wisely according to existence thus: ‘this is not mine, I am not this, this is not myself’
alongside many many more. I can’t make sense of ‘according to ghosts’ though – but perhaps that’s just me!
I love love love how Pali can convey so many beneficial meanings with the same words. It always makes me wonder to what extent these subtly distinct meanings in English were distinct in the minds of those who lived thousands of years ago; I guess there’s no way to know that now.
I often find that when one focuses in on a single specific English meaning, one misses the beauty and wisdom inherent in the original Pali for this reason. Always when translating something is lost and something is added.
Many thanks for this excellent page that provided me with several hours of most diverting research in creating this reply. If I have mistranslated in any way please do say, for Buddha said:
The wise man who protects the truth does not say this only is the truth, all else is false.
MODERATOR: Please delete my earlier posts; I had not completed the full analysis and had misread ‘grd’ in PTS as gerund rather than gerundive regarding the verb, hence much confusion on my part. Thank you!
Sublime
…given that this phrase is repeated regarding each of the five Khandhas in turn, each of which is the ‘what is not self’ at the start of the phrase, perhaps as a result of this context we should prefer the first meaning of bhūta = ‘animate nature as principle or the five khandas.’
The whole lot then becomes instruction on the method of seeing that there is no self to be found in any of the five Khandas, which represent all of being/reality, and therefore seeing/directly knowing the status of anattā as one of the Three Characteristics that apply to all things. That way liberation lies, or so I’m told.
There’s no easy way to convey that directly in the translation of the phrase itself, though; the best I can manage is:
Form, monks, is not-self, to be seen according to its nature right-wisely thus: ‘this is not mine, I am not this, this is not myself’ (and so on with the rest of the other khandhas).
or perhaps more succinctly:
Form, monks, is not-self, accordingly to be seen right-wisely thus: ‘this is not mine, I am not this, this is not myself’ (and so on with the rest of the other khandhas).
As a meditative practice (and indeed in daily life) immediately noting/thinking or better yet actually seeing ‘this is not mine, I am not this, this is not myself’ regarding whatever happens to present itself does indeed train the mind towards this realisation, and this could well also be what is meant here; certainly I find making the effort to remember to see this on a regular basis helps me maintain uppekkha, equanimity, as I go about my day.
progressivefan1
…the liberating knowledge is found in anattalakkhana sutta – release from “i me and mine” – all objects
/ sankharas have three characteristics – anicca, anatta and dukkha…this is yathabhuta – seeing things
as they are …ownerless…
BT Tay
11 Aug 2022 10:54:48 UTC
Some sanskrit dictionary gives :
Yathābhūtam (यथाभूतम्).—ind. according to what has taken place, according to truth, truly, exactly.
Yathābhūtam (यथाभूतम्):—[=yathā-bhūtam] [from yathā > ya-tama] ind. in accordance with fact, acc° to what has happened, acc° to the truth .
Personally therefore for myself the “yathā-bhūtaṃ” in the Anattalakkhana Sutta should include all the meanings , not just ” as it has occurred”, because this particular ” as it has occurred ” involves “anatta” which led to Arahantship of the 5 bhikkhus ( tena kho pana samayena cha loke arahanto honti , which is in the Vinaya Mahavagga version but absent from the Samyutta Nikaya version of the Anattalakkhana Sutta).”Anatta” is a unique realization-vision of reality exactly as it truly and really is .It is in accordance with the facts as it has occurred in the Sutta itself – how Anatta was introduced and taught to the 5 bhikkhus as per the Anattalakkhana Sutta .
BT Tay
11 Aug 2022 11:10:03 UTC
BT Tay
11 Aug 2022 11:27:31 UTC
Response to : Pingback: Seeing Things as the Way They Are
If I were to say this to a Buddhist meditator – this statement will have different meanings according to the meditators background .
yathā-bhūtaṃ the Anattalakkhana Sutta context – deals with anatta and the place and context that the term yathā-bhūtaṃ occurs has special significance .
I am now more inclined towards the meaning : according to reality-truth as it really is .
BT Tay
11 Aug 2022 11:38:07 UTC
BT Tay
11 Aug 2022 12:13:09 UTC
Rhys Davids Pali -English Dictionary has :
yathābhūta(ŋ) in reality, in truth, really, definitely, absolutely; as ought to be,
truthfully, in its real essence.
But in your article above you have used yathā and bhūta from PED but did not also quote yathābhūta(ŋ) from the PED ?
yathā-bhūtaṃ in the PED and Sanskrit Dictionaries seem to agree very well .
BT Tay
11 Aug 2022 12:19:49 UTC
allister
I get the idea that yathabhutam is a form of acceptance practice…if you read the four noble truths it explains that 2 forms of desire were to be overcome – wanting things to be different is what suffering is..Upekkha or equanimity is the state of acceptance or realization of yjatha bhuta – accepting things as they are…
BT Tay
6 April 2025 09:08:14 UTC
The fact that “sammappaññāya” occurs in :
Yadanattā taṃ ‘netaṃ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṃ yathābhūtaṃ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ , and in the Anattalakkhana Sutta ( Vinaya Mahavagga 1.6.38 – 1.6.47 ) ( SN 22.59 lacks Vinaya Mahavagga 1.6.47 At that time, there were 6 arhats in the world ) .
seems to unequivocally highlight and emphasize “wisdom as per the anatta profile” .
So for myself – you can jhana and samadhi all you want but if “wisdom as per the anatta profile ” is lacking , deficient or even flawed – you cannot see and experience anatta properly . You can “sati ” all you want – yet miss the deep anatta !
Tip tip hooray for anatta “sammappaññāya” !
BT Tay
6 April 2025 09:10:48 UTC