Is it possible?

pitakele wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 22, 2018 7:06 pm

robertk wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:54 pm

it (abhidhamma) was indeed recited at the first council.

Are there any sources apart from commentaries which state this?

Do you really think ānanda/sāriputta/kassapa/anuruddha/upāli were no brain to ask what they/their students can't understand while they were listening and memorizing sutta from Buddha?

If they were having brain while listening Buddha's sutta, where were their questions and answers? On the other hand, where were their books?

Are their books abhidhamma, parivāra, paṭisambhidhāmagga, ancient atthakathā, right?

Or Buddha's followers can keep/memorize tipitaka through 45 years without any questions/books/comment/aspects? Is it possible?


Can you find the answer? Or you just want to discredit abhidhamma by every way you can without the possible fact?

Commentary wrote Abhidhamma authored by Ven. Sāriputta, after he listened the abhidhamma's summary from the Buddha. Ven. Sāriputta also authored KN. Paṭisambhidāmagga as well.

Commentary wrote 'Only ancient commentary were being at 1st saṅgāyanā'. When Buddhaghosa combined all commentaries, ancient commentary and singhala commentaries, together, he separate them clearly. I still can notice which text is the ancient commentary, and which is not.

More description:

https://unmixedtheravada.blogspot.com/s ... hidhammist

https://unmixedtheravada.blogspot.com/s ... el/History

Unlimited mental mettā has to be mindful to manage verbal/bodily mettā

Mettā is thinking of giving advantages to the others.

There are 3 mettā: bodily, verbal, mental. Only mental mettā which the practitioner can unlimitedly meditate because nobody can talk or do everything with everyone.

The fact is everyone can have only one thinking per time, but there are uncountable living being out there. So even the practitioner can meditates mettā meditation to everyone by mental mettā, but nobody can talk or do follow to everyone's thinking by verbal and bodily mettā.

How to be sotapanna

1. Sakkāyadiṭṭhi-no 62 micchādiṭṭhi [62 misunderstanding of distorted conditions], which appeared in the first sutta of tipitaka (brahmajālasutta).
2. Vicikicchā-no any doubt of right understanding of relative conditions and no any doubt of the noble one and their teaching who understanding that relativity.
3. Sīlabbataparāmāsa - no living follow those 62 micchādiṭṭhi.

Saññā's definition

It is memorizing [sañjānana] to memorize again after [puna sañjānanapaccayanimittakaraṇa].
In path of purification, khandha-niddesa make summary from Sutta. Ma. Mū. Mahāvedallasuttaṃ (MN 43) as:

1. Saññā [perception] has just the characteristic of memorizing[sañjānana] (I changed this word for more easier understanding).
2. Its function is to make a sign as a condition for memorizing again that “this is the same [puna sañjānanapaccayanimittakaraṇa],” as carpenters, etc., do in the case of timber, and so on.
3. It is manifested as the action of interpreting by means of the sign as apprehended, like the blind who “see” an elephant (Ud 68–69).
4. Its proximate cause is an objective field in whatever way that appears, like the perception that arises in fawns that see scarecrows as men.

There are more information in the note book of saṅgaha, too:

4. Saññā - Sam + Ö ñā, to know, (Compare Latin cognoscere, to know.)

The meaning of this term widely varies according to the context. To avoid unnecessary confusion, it is best to understand the specific meaning used in the particular connection as a universal mental state.
The chief characteristic of saññā is the cognition of an object by way of a mark as blue etc. It is saññā that enables one to recognize an object that has once been perceived by the mind through the senses. "Its procedure is likened to the carpenter's recognition of certain kinds of wood by the mark he had made on each; to the treasurer's specifying certain articles of jewelry by the ticket on each; to the wild animal's discernment in the scarecrow of the work of man."
Saññā, therefore, means simple sense perception.
"Perception," according to a modern Dictionary of Philosophy, "is the apprehension of ordinary sense-objects, such as trees, houses, chairs, etc., on the occasion of sensory stimulation."
Perception is not used here in the sense employed by early modern philosophers such as Bacon, Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz.
As one of the five khandhas (Aggregates) saññā is used in the sense of perception.
Could it be that memory is due to this saññā?
Saññā, viññāna and paññā should be differentiated from one another. Saññā is like the mere perception of a rupee coin by a child. By its whiteness, roundness and size it merely recognizes the coin as a rupee, utterly ignorant of its monetary value. A man, for instance, discerns its value and its utility, but is not aware of its chemical composition. Viññāna is comparable to the ordinary man's knowledge of the rupee. Paññā is like the analytical knowledge of a chemist who knows all its chemical properties in every detail.

The relation of lokuttara/lokiya/citta/viññāna/mano/paññā which sariputta used as a base of abhidhamma-literature.

If consciousness is a Reification, how does a Buddha attain the Truth?
'Reification' is making something real, bringing something into being or making something concrete.
The Pali suttas say about the relationship between consciousness and wisdom/enlightenment:

Discernment (wisdom; panna) & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It's not possible, having separated them one from the other, to delineate the difference between them. For what one discerns, that one cognizes. What one cognizes, that one discerns. MN 43

Is the Enlightenment or Wisdom of a Buddha a Reification?

---

The question make a wrong comparison. It's a totally different story.
From question's quote, ven. Sāriputta in Ma. Mū. Mahāvedallasuttaṃ (MN 43) is talking about minds&wisdoms, which are clinging-aggregates of run-of-the-mill person before enlightenment; But from question's asking, enlightened minds&wisdoms of Buddha are minds&wisdoms after enlightenment, so Buddha's enlightenment-wisdoms are declung-aggregates of the noble one.

1. Question's quote is declung-aggregates:

Declung-aggregates in Sutta. Saṃ. Sa. issatthasuttaṃ:

The entire spectrum of an adept’s ethic-aggregate, immersion-aggregate, wisdom-aggregate, freedom-aggregate, and knowledge&vision-aggregate of freedom.
Asekkhena sīlakkhandhena samannāgato hoti, asekkhena samādhikkhandhena samannāgato hoti, asekkhena paññākkhandhena samannāgato hoti, asekkhena vimuttikkhandhena samannāgato hoti, asekkhena vimuttiñāṇadassanakkhandhena samannāgato hoti.

Declung-mind-aggregates in the end of Sutta. Saṃ. Kha. Anattalakkhaṇasutta:

And while this exposition was being given, the cittas of the group of five bhikkhus, by not clinging, were liberated from the āsavas.
Imasmiñ·ca pana veyyākaraṇasmiṃ bhaññamāne pañca·vaggiyānaṃ bhikkhūnaṃ anupādāya āsavehi cittāni vimucciṃsūti.

Declung-wisdom-aggregates and declung-mind-aggregates in Sutta. Ma. U. Mahācattārīsakasuttaṃ:

“And what, bhikkhus, is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path? The wisdom(paññā), the faculty of wisdom, the power of wisdom, the investigation-of-states enlightenment factor, the path factor of right view in one whose mind(citta) is noble, whose mind(citta) is taintless, who possesses the noble path and is developing the noble path: this is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path.

2. But question asking about clinging-aggregates:

Clinging-wisdom-aggregates in Sutta. Ma. U. Mahācattārīsakasuttaṃ:
“And what, bhikkhus, is right view that is affected by the taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the acquisitions? ‘There is what is given and what is offered and what is sacrificed; there is fruit and result of good and bad actions; there is this world and the other world; there is mother and father; there are beings who are reborn spontaneously; there are in the world good and virtuous recluses and brahmins who have realised for themselves by direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world.’ This is right view affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the acquisitions.
Clinging-mind-aggregates in Sutta. Tī. Ma. Mahāsatipaṭṭhānasuttaṃ Cittānupassanāpabba:

Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu understands citta with rāga as "citta with rāga", or he understands citta without rāga as "citta without rāga", or he understands citta with dosa as "citta with dosa", or he understands citta without dosa as "citta without dosa", or he understands citta with moha as "citta with moha", or he understands citta without moha as "citta without moha", ...

---

Note: Citta (mind), mano (intellect), and viññāna (experience/consciousness) are same, according to Sutta. Saṃ. Ni. assutavasutta:

"But as for what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness,' the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is unable to grow disenchanted with it, unable to grow dispassionate toward it, unable to gain release from it...

Paṭiccasamuppāda & Saṃyojana

How are the 10 fetters being destroyed?

To breaking the circuit of 10 fetters, the practitioner has to destroy by the continuous understanding the circuit, paṭiccasamuppāda, of 10 fetters as they are.
In breaking of circuit, paṭiloma-paṭiccasamuppāda, Buddha taught to destroy the last fetter, avijjā and taṇhā&upādāna, to break the whole circuit. But most some people can not immediately destroy avijjā and taṇhā&upādāna.
So, in 10 fetters, Buddha describe more explanation of those avijjā and taṇhā&upādāna as 10 fetters, 10 saṃyojana. And Buddha arranged that 10 fetters from the easiest-to-destroy to the hardest-to-destroy. So, someone, who can not destroy avijjā and taṇhā&upādāna at only one time, will try to destroy the easier-to-destroy fetters (such as uddhambhāgiya-saṃyojana) instead, step by step.
By this way, people can more easily destroy avijjā and taṇhā&upādāna, by beginning at destroying 3 orambhāgiya-fetters, which are diṭṭhi-upādāna/sīpabata-upādāna/attvāda-upādāna-paṭiccasamuppāda, =iterations of bhava&vibhava-taṇhā-paṭiccasamuppāda, and ignoring [avijjā] of causes&effects in paṭiccasamuppāda. After they destroyed these 3 fetters, the 7 left fetters will certainly destroy in the future, not over more than 7 rebirth according to Sutta. Aṅ. (3): chakkanipātā, Paṭhama-abhabbaṭṭhānasuttaṃ and the suttas around it.

Can the chain of fetters be seen during vipassana meditation?

Yes, according to Sutta. Saṃ. Ma. Dhammacakkappavattanasutta, the practitioner have to clearly understand the 4 noble truths, which included 10 fetters in the 2nd noble truth, already.

buddha may teach the same topic by the difference words for one from the northern and another one from the southern

The answer of this question

According to your quote, khayāya and nirodha mean same. It is synonym of each other for that context.

There are two suttas, one about destruction of craving and other about the cessation of craving.

Why buddha teach those both sutta by those difference words in the same meaning?

Because some word is understandable just for some listener. Similitude, if you say "give me barbie" in the Australian's restaurant, it may means "give me barbecue", not barbie doll, because "barbie" is a slang of barbecue in Australia. Also, buddha may teach the same paṭiccasamuppāda by the difference words for one from the northern and another one from the southern, because of their lingo.

Then how to know they are the same?

1. Your quote suttas come together, the first is full, but the next is brief. That means the 1st saṅgāyana-members decided to brief the next sutta because of the previous sutta.
2. The other sutta, which describing paṭiccasamuppāda as alike as your quoted sutta, use these 2 words as each other synonym, such as in Sutta. Saṃ. Ni. parivīmaṃsanasutta:

ayaṃ vuccati bhikkhave bhikkhu sabbaso sammā dukkhak-khay-āya paṭipanno jarāmaraṇa-nirodh-āya.
This is called a mendicant who is practicing (paṭipanno) for(āya) the complete ending (khaya) of suffering (dukkha), for(āya) the cessation(nirodh) of old age and death (jarāmaraṇa).
[jarāmaraṇa=dukkha follow to SN Dhammacakkappavattanasutta and SN Paṭiccasamuppādavibhaṅgasutta]

There are another example of the same case in Vinaya. Mahāvi (1) Paṭhamapārājikakaṇḍaṃ as well

The side answer in this question

It is very easy to take two piece of jigsaw, then say "whole of jigsaw-pieces in this box is not united, because these 2 pieces can not connect together". And people who addicts drama-movie often love&like to act like this.
But it is uncountable hard to relate and connect a thousand pieces of jigsaw together by the right way. It is harder when that jigsaw has changed the box more than 2,600 times through 2,600 years.
However, if one in 2,600 years later can done that jigsaw to be unity. It's means the fist box owners already marks the numbers at each piece of jigsaw very clearly, and they also wrote the manual "how to connect the jigsaw together", then sent it from the previous generation the the next generation for 2,600 years.

According to Dhammadhatu's answer:

I was once taught the Pali word "atthaṅgama" refers to a temporary cessation where as "nirodha" refers to a permanent cessation.

Atthaṅgamo can refer to a permanent cessation, too. Such as in DN Nidāna. Dukkasuttaṃ:

10. “Monks, what is the fading (Atthaṅgamo) of unpleasantness?
11. “Monks, on account of eye and forms arises eye-consciousness. The coincidental arising of the three is contact. On account of a contact are feelings. On account of feelings is craving. With the cessation of that craving without a remainder holding ceases. With the cessation of holding being ceases. With the cessation of being birth ceases. With the cessation of birth, decay, death, grief, lament, unpleasantness displeasure and distress cease. Thus ceases the complete mass of unpleasantness.

According to Dhammadhatu's answer:

Therefore, I think the suttas should be researched to affirm or refute this idea that "nirodha" refers to a permanent cessation.

Sāriputta already done it, but the anti-abhidhammist often ignore it. So, according to Ven. Payutto and Sāriputta-mahāsāvaka, there are 5 type of cessations using in tipitaka that appears in various difference words:

[224] Nirodha 5 = extinction; cessation of defilements.

1. Vikkhambhana-nirodha — extinction by suppression.
2. Tadaṅga-nirodha — extinction by substitution of opposites.
3. Samuccheda-nirodha — extinction by cutting off or destruction.
4. Paṭipassaddhi-nirodha — extinction by tranquillization.
5. Nissarana-nirodha — extinction by escape; extinction by getting freed.

These example words have the same meaning as well: Pahāna 5 (abandonment 5), Vimutti 5 (deliverance 5), Viveka 5 (seclusion 5), Virāga 5 (detachment; dispassionateness), Vossagga 5 (relinquishing), etc.

Actually, atthakathā already researched and often specified one of these 5 meaning for each nirodha-word found in each sutta. But the anti-abhidhammist ignore them, never try to study abhidhamma and atthakathā as they are and by the ancient study system. So although the research already done, they still never know the existence of that research.

According to Dhammadhatu's answer:

The word "kkhayo" ("destruction") definitely refers to a permanent cessation or "uprooting". When the Buddha 1st uttered his awakening, he referred to the destruction of craving

1. There is no kkhaya-word in pāli. Pāli has only khaya. But -k- of taṇha*-k-khaya (taṇha+khaya) is a word merging as alike as -t- of get-t-*ing (get+ing).
2. Khaya not used only as a permanent cessation, there are many khaya used as temporary cessation, such as in Sutta. Saṃ. Kha. Ānandasutta:

4. “Ānanda, matter is impermanent, compounded and arise dependently and it is of the normal of withering(khaya), fading (vaya), loosing interest (virāga) and ceasing (nirodha[temporary]). The cessation(nirodha[permanent]) of that is cessation.

According to Dhammadhatu's answer:

Another contra argument against synonymity is it is impossible for "kkhayo" ("destruction") to be used in Paticcasamuppada because "nirodha" in Paticcasamuppada refers to the extinguishing of ignorance that taints consciousness, mind-body, sense bases and contact rather than the destruction of consciousness, mind-body, sense bases and contact.

Kaya-word was not directly used in Paṭiccasamuppādavibhaṅgasutta. But Kaya-word was used instead of cease-word, (nirodha-paṭiccasamuppāda) directly in various suttas and in many relation with paṭiccasamuppāda, such as:

“Sir, a mendicant who is perfected—with defilements ended, who has completed the spiritual journey, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, achieved their own goal, utterly ended the fetters of rebirth, and is rightly freed through enlightenment—is dedicated to six things. They are dedicated to renunciation, seclusion, kindness, the ending of craving, the ending of grasping, and mental clarity (no-ignorant).
“Yo so, bhante, bhikkhu arahaṃ khīṇāsavo vusitavā katakaraṇīyo ohitabhāro anuppattasadattho parikkhīṇabhavasaṃyojano sammadaññāvimutto, so cha ṭhānāni adhimutto hoti— nekkhammādhimutto hoti, pavivekādhimutto hoti, abyāpajjādhimutto hoti, taṇhāk-khayā-dhimutto hoti, upādāna-kkhayā-dhimutto hoti, asammohādhimutto hoti.

According to Dhammadhatu's answer:

Also, the term "tanhanirodha" appears to be not found in any other sutta, apart from in suttas about dependent origination.
This gives rise to two different conclusions:

1. SN 46.27 is a fake sutta. Generally, when "permanent nirodha" is referred to, the term "asesa" ("remainderless") is also included. Since SN 46.27 does not include the term "asesa", it could be a fake sutta.

The fact is: only in the cessation noble truth that taṇhā-nirodha come with "asesa" as "yo tassaāyeva taṇhāya asesavirāganirodho" . even in Paṭiccasamuppādavibhaṅgasutta "asesa" come with only avijjā as "avijjāya tveva asesavirāganirodhā". But taṅhā come with nirodha without "asesa".

When craving ceases, grasping ceases.
taṇhānirodhā upādānanirodho; (no "asesa")

Actually, we all know that the meaning of "asesa" also included by the context relation. But, it was fail, if someone said 'when "permanent nirodha" is referred to, the term "asesa" ("remainderless") is also included'.
So, this fail can not prove "it could be a fake sutta."

According to Dhammadhatu's answer:

2. SN 46.27 explains how to achieve the "cessation" mentioned in SN 46.26; upon which the factors of enlightenment depend on. In other words, the "destruction" in SN 46.26 is about final Nibbana where as the "cessation" in SN 46.26, which the factors of enligthenment are dependent upon, is the non-final cessation from starting the Path.

The fact is: If one think 'SN 46.27 has to have "asesa" to be "final Nibbana"'. According to that idea, SN 46.26 can not be "final Nibbana" as well, because AN 46.26 also doesn't have "asesa" as well.
So, this fail can not prove "it could be a fake sutta.", because the logic are fail at both.

According to Dhammadhatu's answer:

Therefore, the respective terms "kkhayo" and "nirodha", as used in SN 46.26 and SN 46.27, may not be synonymous.

Therefore, those all reasons can not prove '"kkhayo" and "nirodha", as used in SN 46.26 and SN 46.27'.

So, what happen in SN 46.26 and SN 46.27?

The possible case is "some of the listening-bhikkhu came form the other state, they didn't understand and did confuse of "khaya" in SN 46.26, while Buddha had be teaching. Because of that confusing, they couldn't memorize that sutta. Then they ask the buddha for repeat again "Please, repeat again, because I confuse of 'khaya'-word in 'taṇhakkhayā kammakkhayo kammakkhayā dukkhakkhayoti', so I can't memorize this sutta". Then the buddha know and repeat as SN 46.27.

The explanation of whole kakacūpamasutta

After Buddha blamed Moliyaphagguna in Sutta. Ma. Mū. kakacūpamasuttaṃ, he rejected the monk hood to be a lay in Sutta. Saṃ. Ni. kaḷārakhattiyasuttaṃ. In that, kaḷārakhattiyasuttaṃ, Kaḷārakhattiya bhikkhu talked with Ven.Sāriputta "the mendicant Moḷiyaphagguna has rejected the training and returned to a lesser life." So, Buddha began the second part of kakacūpamasuttaṃ to explain & to teach the left bhikkhu by Moliyaphagguna-rejection case.

Moliyaphagguna can not patient to co-temple bhikkhus' and Buddha's blame, because he was unruly, unteachable by his annoy--dosa. He annoyed after he was blamed, so then he rejected the monk hood. Therefore Kaḷārakhattiya bhikkhu talked with Ven.Sāriputta "the mendicant Moḷiyaphagguna has rejected the training and returned to a lesser life."

Buddha began the second part of kakacūpamasuttaṃ to explain & to teach the left bhikkhu that whoever can pause annoy--dosa-mind, by mettā-meditation, they can patient to listen and to train follow Buddha's teaching such as "only 1 period meal vinaya-rule". Then they will "come to growth and development in this dispensation of the Teaching" like buddha said in kakacūpamasuttaṃ.

But the training is not too easy like that, some time there are hidden enemies such as hidden annoy, etc. So, Buddha said "Like a Sal grove near a village or hamlet would have an undergrowth of weeds" and put the Vedehikā example in in kakacūpamasuttaṃ to let bhikkhu more careful about the hidden annoy before they will be blamed by the others.

Then Buddha taught "others speaking would speak in this fivefold way" and many similitudes to bhikkhu, because Buddha let them prepare themselves before the annoy will arise at listening blame. By this teaching, bhikkhu will have enough mettā to patient for the blame listening, then they can practice follow to the blame "to come to growth and development in this dispensation of the Teaching".

Why does the Buddha's harsh speech, in the Pali Canon, is not harsh speech?

Harsh speech follow to Collins dictionary:

Harsh actions or speech are unkind and show no understanding or sympathy.

Wrong speech follow to Sutta. Ma. Mū. Verañjakasuttaṃ:

Would talk roughly, saying insolent words that are sharp and cursing. Words bordering on anger and not conductive to concentration. Would say frivolous, untimely, untruthful words, not in keeping with the Teaching and the discipline.

But the buddha's words is more flexible, beniefical, in Sutta. Ma. Ma. Abhayarājakumārasuttaṃ:

1 In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial (or: not connected with the goal), unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
2 In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
3 In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.
4 In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
5 In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
6 In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, and endearing & agreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings."

So, when buddha blame Sāgata-bhikkhu in VN Surāpāna-sikkhāpada (and the other bhikkhus in many Vinaya rules [sikkhāpada]), it is not harsh speech, because after that, he became an arahanta.
However, in Devadatta case, nobody could change his vindictiveness, so buddha made devadatta as a cause of statute making instead in Vinaya. Mahāvi (1) Saṅghādisesa Dasamasaṅghādisesaṃ. Also, buddha try to keep Devadatta's students instead of him in Vinaya. Culla (2) Saṅghabhedakkhandhakaṃ, so buddha helped Devadatta by helping his students:

the venerable Sāriputta spoke thus to the Lord: “Devadatta, Lord, having split the Order, is setting out for Gayā Head with as many as five hundred monks.”
“Can there not be for you, Sāriputta and Moggallāna, compassion for these newly ordained monks? Go you along, Sāriputta and Moggallāna, before these monks fall into trouble and distress.”

How do I practice ' see things as they are'?

You know black hole because you fluently understand the knowledge of the relation of physical&chemical properties about black hole. It doesn't mean you have seen black hole.
"Seeing things as they are" is the same. You know their paṭiccasamuppāda (causes) in every time before you know them (effects) directly.
You think some one mad because of their properties, so you never think the dead body is mad. The same way, the practitioner think clinging-aggregates are "impermanent, suffering, anattā" because they aggregates depending on clinging-paṭiccasamuppāda. So, without paṭiccasamuppāda 12, the practitioner can not see impermanent-characteristic, suffering-characteristic, anattā-characteristic" of "impermanent-aggregates, suffering-aggregates, anattā-aggregates".
This is the reason why the practitioner can meditate sammasana-ñāṇa(realizing everything have 3 characteristics) after paccayapariggahañāṇa (realizing paṭiccasamuppāda/paṭṭhāna).
So, to practice "Seeing things as they are", you have to practice to see everything in paṭiccasamuppāda style. But before that step, you have to make sure that you having good enough adhi-sīla & adhi-samādhi (sīlavisuddhi&cittavisuddhi).
See, KN Paṭisambhidāmagga Dhammaṭṭhitiñāṇaniddesa & Visuddhimagga Paccayapariggahañāṇaniddesa. Both path of them describing yathābhūtañāṇa, directly:

25. The knowledge that has been established by the overcoming of doubt about the three periods of time by discerning the conditions (paccayapariggaha[ñāṇa]) of mentality-materiality according to the various methods should be understood as “purification by overcoming doubt (kaṅkhāvitaraṇavisuddhi).” Other terms for it are “knowledge of the relations of states (dhammaṭṭhiti)” and “correct knowledge (yathābhūtañāṇa)” and “right vision (sammādassana).”
26. For this is said: “Understanding of discernment of conditions thus, ‘Ignorance is a condition, formations are conditionally arisen, and both these states are conditionally arisen,’ is knowledge of the causal relationship of states” (Paþis I 50). And:

...
“When he brings to mind as impermanent, he correctly knows and sees the sign. Hence ‘right seeing’ is said. Thus, by inference from that, all formations are clearly seen as impermanent. Herein doubt is abandoned. When he brings to mind as painful, he correctly knows and sees occurrence. Hence ... When he brings to mind as not-self, he correctly knows and sees the sign and occurrence. Hence ‘right seeing’ is said. Thus, by inference from that, all states are clearly seen as not-self. Herein doubt is abandoned.

Another, I also describe yathābhūta in this answer: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/26699/10100 

What’s the difference between yathābhūta and yathābhūtaṃ?

Yathābhūta is not correct in pali-sentence. We have to put the declension-mark at the end of yathābhūta, such as yathābhūtaṃ, before put it in the sentence.

Yathābhūta is adjective/adverb which is not complete, not ready to use, because the properties of word (vibhatti;case-endings;declension): preposition(sambandha), amount(vacana), and gender(liṅga), etc., must put at the end of every words, except ready-made-noun (nipāta), some standalone-prefix (upasagga-nipāta; I'm not sure for linguistic name), and compound-word (samāsa). So, it can not come alone, and you can not found only yathābhūta alone in pāli. It should to be yathābhūtaṃ (si-vibhatti), yathābhūtañāṇadassanaṃ (Deleted vibhatti because of compound-word; Vibhatti still be, but it disappear by pali-processing), yathābhūtena (nā-vibhatti), etc.

See: http://www.buddha-vacana.org/toolbox/noundec.html

For the explanation of the term "yathābhūta":

Yathā ... tathā = How it is ... as it is.

Bhūta = arising/becomming = upatti-bhava-paṭiccasamuppāda = upatti-becoming = jāti(rebirth) + jarā&maraṇa (old-age&death). bhū-root[as arise-term]+ta-suffix[as verb].

Arising of what? Arising of 5 aggregates in paṭiccasamuppāda-cycle. So:

1. in Sutta. Saṃ. Saḷa. Dukkhadhammasutta, buddha use yathābhūta as arising and vanishing of 5 aggregates;
2. In Sutta. Saṃ. Ni. Dukkhasutta, buddha describe arising and vanishing of 5 aggregates as paṭiccasamuppāda;
3. In Khandhapabba of Sutta. Ma. Mū. Mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta, buddha describe arising and vanishing of 5 aggregates as udayabbaya-ñāṇa-niddeso;
4. Also, in Khandhapabba, buddha describe vipassanā in arising and vanishing of 5 aggregates as "samudayavayadhammānupassī vā" which commentary refer that dhamma-term as Dukkhadhammasutta;
5. So, in Sutta. Khu. Paṭisambhidāmaggo udayabbayānupassanāñāṇa-niddesa & the path of purification maggāmaggañāṇadassanavisuddhiniddesa udayabbayañāṇakathā, Master Sāriputta and Master Buddhaghosa describe udayabbaya as paṭiccasamuppāda as well.

So, yathābhūta-ñāṇa is understanding of arising of 5 aggregates in paṭiccasamuppāda-cycle.

Another, I also describe yathābhūta in this answer: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/26702/10100

Buddha have to cut the big sutta in DN/MN for the students who not smart enough to enlighten/understand/memorize at once. So, you can notice my reference are from DN&MN&SN&KN, and actually AN as well.

Pāli has a very strong structure. This is the reason why we can understand tipitaka's content by just fluent reciting&memorizing. But because of the complicate detail of Dhamma, so when we translate tipitaka to the other languages, such as english or especilly thai, we will lose many important words' properties. Then we can not understand/analysis/find the fact from some translation.

"Svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo-the best dhamma was taught by buddha." is not just the psalms, but it is the fact by the linguistics and the truth.