Chapter 12
Dhamma Discussions in Hotel Gakkalok, Siem Reap (Part II) Kulvilai: I know from the study of the Dhamma that there are eight types of kusala citta, and that some of them are accompanied by paññá and some unaccompanied by paññá. If we have theoretical understanding of realities but we do not realize their characteristics, can we say that there is paññá?
Sujin: There is paññá but it is very slight. It can be compared to a very small tree that has not grown yet. While one is listening to the Dhamma at this moment, there is kusala of the degree of mental development, bhávaná, but it is not yet of the degree that Satipatthána can arise.
Kulvilai: Kusala of the degree of Dana and of síla do not arise easily in daily life. If we understand the characteristics of realities and develop Satipatthána, we shall be able to develop all kinds of kusala in daily life.
Sujin: All people here are good, they are not bandits, they do not kill, steal or engage in other kinds of bad conduct. But this does not mean that one understands realities. Kusala citta or akusala may arise, but people may not know the characteristics of those realities. When they commit akusala, they may not know that it is akusala, or they may know it, but they still commit it. Even when they know that it is akusala, they do not realize that it is not self. There are several degrees of wholesomeness. In reality not self, but kusala is good, and not self but akusala is evil, and it is paññá that can realize this.
Question: When we still see beings and people, is there akusala citta?
Sujin: When we see that there are beings and people it is because of sañña that remembers. When paramattha Dhammas have fallen away, we remember that what appears is this or that thing or person. When we remember things it is not necessarily akusala. The Buddha remembered and we also remember different things, but the cittas which remember are varied. People who have listened to the Dhamma have understanding stemming from listening, they know that moha, ignorance, is the greatest danger. Whereas those who have not listened to the Dhamma do not have this degree of understanding.
Jaran: Forgiving is a kind of Dana, abhaya Dana. I would like to ask in what way it is kusala.
Sujin: The "a" in abhaya is a negation, meaning: not. Bhaya means trouble, danger or different kinds of harm. Abhaya is freedom from harm or danger. In the case of abhaya Dana, a person wishes that there will not be any kind of harm to someone else. Is it not kusala to abstain from harming someone else through body or speech, or from even harming him in thought? When we forgive, thus when we perform abhaya Dana, there is kusala citta, and when we do not forgive there is still anger.
Kulvilai: The performing of abhaya Dana is actually mettá, we give friendship to someone else, even if he is our enemy.
Question: What kind of citta arises when I wish to have kusala, when I wish to perform kusala?
Sujin: The moment you wish to have kusala is different from the moment you perform kusala. When you wish to have it, there is lobha, and when you perform it there is kusala citta. We should investigate whether there is wishing or whether there is the sincere determination for kusala. You can only know this with regard to yourself. Wishing to perform kusala is something other than the actual performing of kusala. If we can perform a good deed and we perform it immediately, there is kusala citta straightaway. Or it may happen that we wish to perform kusala but we are not able to do this. Someone, for example, may be very wealthy, but he says that he will perform kusala only if he wins a lottery prize. Thus, we should consider whether there is mere wishing for kusala or the determination to perform it. When there is merely wishing for it there is lobha.
Question: What is the difference between people who listen to the Dhamma and have understanding of realities stemming from listening, and those who penetrate the characteristics of realities? Although these people have a different level of understanding, they are the same in as far as they know that realities are not beings or people.
Sujin: There are different levels of paññá, namely, pariyatti, theoretical knowledge, patipatti, practice, and pativedha, realization.
Question: In what way are these levels of paññá different?
Sujin: What appears now?
Answer: Hardness. That is a reality.
Sujin: Why do you say that it is a reality?
Answer: Because I remember that everything is a Dhamma with its own characteristic (sabhåva Dhamma).
Sujin: This is understanding of the level of pariyatti.
Pradip: Paññá of the level of pariyatti is the understanding stemming from listening. When we listen we learn something we had not known before: Dhammas arise and appear through the six doorways of eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body-sense and mind-door. Through the eyes only color is known, through the ears only sound. Realities are not beings, people or self.
Kulvilai: I heard Acharn say that we should pay attention to the kusala of someone else in order to rejoice in it (anumodana), and as regards ourselves, we should look for our akusala in order to eradicate it.
Sujin: Do we look for it or do we see it?
Kulavilai: We should see it.
Sujin: If a saying is true, it must be spoken by the Buddha, no matter which method of explanation is used. One should not be fixed on it to find out in which text of the scriptures these words can be found. If they are true they explain realities.
Nipat: There is the saying of the Buddha that we should not think of the superior and the mean deeds of someone else, but that we should think of the superior and the mean deeds of ourselves.
Sujin: Isn’t that also in agreement with the saying that we should not pay attention to the evils of someone else? We read in the "
Dhammapada " verse 50: [
1]"One should not pry into the faults of others, things left done and undone by others, but one’s own deeds, done and undone."It is certain that the citta will be impure when we see someone else’s evil. We should immediately realize that we forget to consider our own citta at that moment. If we look into the mirror we can see our own citta at that moment and we can find out what kind of citta thinks in that way. Therefore, instead of thinking of someone else’s evil, which conditions the arising of akusala, we should think of his wholesomeness. When we think of someone else’s wholesomeness, without jealousy or contempt, it is excellent. At that moment there is kusala citta.
Nipat: In the Buddha’s time there were not yet books and people could study the teachings by listening, not by means of textbooks. Those who listened could immediately understand what they heard. At the present time it is difficult for us to reach the level of abandoning the clinging to texts.
Question: When Khun Jaran knows hardness, is this of the level of pariyatti, theoretical knowledge, or patipatti, practice?
Jaran: It is the practice; well, I am not sure.
Kimrod: Someone should not use the word practice, if he is not sure about its meaning.
Jaran: Pariyatti is theoretical understanding of realities according to the texts. Acharn asks about my understanding when I study the texts. I do not know whether my understanding at such moments is of the level of pariyatti or patipatti. But I still think that there is a self who is here.
Sujin: Patipatti is different from pariyatti. When there is only pariyatti, theoretical understanding, and not patipatti, one may doubt what level of understanding one has. What appears at this moment?
Jaran: Hardness appears at my hand.
Sujin: Is this pariyatti or patipatti?
Jaran: Pariyatti.
Sujin: If there is patipatti, what is it?
Jaran: When a characteristic of reality appears to sati there is patipatti.
Sujin: That is the difference. We understand the name or the meaning of the word sati. However, when sati arises with Dana or síla, it may not be apparent. At the level of samatha, when the citta is calm, free from akusala, there is sati but it does not appear as non-self. However, when sati of the level of Satipatthána arises, its characteristic appears.
When hardness is experienced through touch, everybody can say that this is hard. When people experience heat, taste something hot or sweet, or when they hear a sound, they know it and they can say what it is. The reason is that citta is the reality which can experience an object through each of the doorways. Seeing-consciousness sees what appears through the eyes and hearing-consciousness hears sound. When odor appears, smelling-consciousness experiences odor. When flavor is experienced, tasting-consciousness experiences flavor. If something is experienced through body-contact, body-consciousness is the reality that experiences hardness naturally, and everybody knows this.
However, when sammå-sati, right mindfulness, arises and is aware, there is understanding based on listening, which realizes that there is no self. It realizes that there are elements or Dhammas, each with their own characteristic, that can appear through the doorways of the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body-sense and the mind-door. The realities that appear through the body-sense are the characteristics of softness, hardness, cold, heat, motion or pressure appearing at this moment. However, when they have appeared, they pass away extremely rapidly. Mind-door process cittas arising afterwards know that there is a table or a chair, but whenever sati arises and is aware, the mind-door process cittas do not know concepts, but they know realities. Understanding, although it is still very slight, can begin to realize that there are Dhammas, each with their own characteristic, and at such moments there is no need to think of them or to speak about them. There can be understanding of the characteristic of hardness that appears at such a moment, it can be realized as a kind of Dhamma that has the characteristic of hardness.
When hardness appears, there are two kinds of realities: hardness and the experience of hardness. The moment of sati and of paññá that gradually begins to understand realities, is very short, because such a moment arises and then falls away extremely rapidly. It is impossible that there is immediately clear understanding of realities. There can gradually be awareness and more understanding of the characteristic which experiences, of the reality which experiences hardness; there will be more understanding of that characteristic as it really is. This is Satipatthána, but not yet of the level of pativedha, the direct realization of the truth. One only begins to develop correct understanding of the characteristics of realities we used to take for people, for beings, for this or that thing. When sati arises and is aware of what appears, one begins to understand that there are only different Dhammas, each with their own characteristic, and that this is reality. When sati arises people will know when they are forgetful of realities and when there is sati. Knowing the difference between the moment of sati and the moment of forgetfulness is the beginning level of its development, and people can only know this themselves. Other people cannot know with regard to someone else what sati is aware of, whether sati arises or not. Each person can only know this for himself.
Soun: In the Tipitaka it has been stated that seeing Dhamma is seeing the conditions for nama Dhammas and rupa Dhammas. If one is aware of rupa Dhamma there must be paññá that is powerful. At such a moment akusala cannot arise, there is only the Dhamma that knows realities as they are. The development of Satipatthána begins with understanding and considering the body, outside as well as inside. Is thinking of conditions the practice, patipatti?
Sujin: Thinking is not practicing. There are three levels of paññá: paññá of the level of knowledge based on listening, suta-mayå-paññá; paññá of the level of investigation, cintå-mayå-paññá; paññá based on mental development, bhåvanå-mayå-paññá. The moment of thinking is not the moment of awareness of the characteristics of realities, you are merely thinking about conditions.
Nina: We should understand akusala, we should not try to eradicate akusala because that is not possible. There are several stages of vipassana ñåùa. The first stage is knowing the difference between the characteristic of nama and the characteristic of rupa, but at that stage one does not realize conditions, that is known later on.
Jaran: When sati is aware of dosa, why is that not the practice?
Sujin: Is there anybody who is angry but does not know what anger is? When dosa arises everybody knows that this is not lobha, not kusala. The characteristic of dosa is coarse, it is harshness. Is there anybody who does not know the characteristic of dosa? But only knowing this is not paññá.
Jaran: When there is the practice, in what way is one aware of the characteristic of dosa?
Sujin: When there is dosa sati can be aware of the characteristic of dosa as only a kind of reality, not our dosa, not self. We can have anger as usual, but when sati arises, the characteristic of anger appears and sati can be aware of it so that it is known as only a kind of reality. Paññá should develop so that we become acquainted with the truth that everything is Dhamma. Everything appearing at this moment is Dhamma, reality; everything that appears through each of the six doorways, through the doorways of the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body-sense and the mind-door is Dhamma. Through the study one knows that everything is Dhamma, but sati has not been aware of all realities. Therefore, through theoretical understanding, understanding of the level of pariyatti, we cannot really understand that everything is Dhamma. Only paññá of the level of patipatti, of the practice, can really understand this.
One will really understand that everything is Dhamma when sati is aware of the characteristics of realities as they appear one at a time, so that paññá can develop and realities appear as just Dhammas, not self. Paññá should be developed continuously so that it is understood that everything is Dhamma and there is no doubt about the characteristics of nama and rupa, no matter through which doorway realities appear, through the -sense-doors or through the mind-door. When we are seeing and Satipatthána does not arise, there is no way of knowing that seeing is an element or reality that experiences something; this characteristic is real, and it does not have shape or form. We should consider the reality that is the element which experiences something: there is no rupa that is blended or mixed with it. Then it will be clear that the characteristic of the element that experiences is penetrated through the mind-door. Such a moment is different from the moments that everything seems to appear together, such as visible object that seems to appear together with seeing [
2]. Paññá of the level of Satipatthána that investigates the characteristics of realities should develop to the degree of pativedha, the realization of the truth, when realities appear as they are through the mind-door. If paññá has not been developed to that degree it is impossible to penetrate the characteristics of realities.
Jaran: Can paññá of the level of pariyatti be a condition for having less anger?
Sujin: Sometimes, and this depends on the level of correct understanding. In reality, anger that arises falls away, there is no anger that does not fall away.
Soun: Just a moment ago we spoke about thinking, which is of the level of pariyatti. Would you please explain the difference between patipatti and pativedha?
Sujin: I just explained about dosa that everyone knows, but people think that it is self who is angry. However, when sati arises the characteristic of dosa appears and they will begin to gradually understand that that characteristic is just a reality, a Dhamma. We should consider whether the idea of self who is angry is different from knowing that it is just a reality with that characteristic. We believe that it is self who is angry, but we should know that it is a reality with its own characteristic. We should thoroughly know everything that appears now, be it color, sound or thinking. Satipatthána should be aware of all realities so that it can be understood that everything is truly Dhamma. The study of the Dhamma should be in conformity with the paññá that is to be developed stage by stage. The first stage is knowing that everything is Dhamma, and this is the stage of pariyatti. The stage of patipatti, practice, is Satipatthána which knows the true characteristics of the realities that are appearing and which begins to realize that they are just Dhammas. There is a considerable difference between the idea of self who is angry and the understanding that that characteristic is only a kind of Dhamma. Everything that appears through the -sense-doors and the mind-door are different kinds of Dhamma. When sati arises, it is known through which doorway the reality sati is aware of appears.
If sati is aware when one is angry, but it is not aware of other Dhammas, such as what appears through the eyes, one will not know that these are also Dhammas, each with their own characteristic. Moreover, we should begin to understand also the characteristic of paññá. We should know that paññá cetasika is a reality that correctly understands the characteristic of what appears. There are many degrees of paññá. Paññá based on listening to the Dhamma is still very weak, it knows the meaning and the names of the different notions, thus, only concepts. However, when someone has listened and understood a great deal, it can be the condition for understanding the characteristic of sammå-sati which is aware of a reality that has arisen and appears. Sati can be aware , and we should not think it too difficult or impossible. People may doubt whether they can be aware in this life, but that is just thinking. When there are conditions for the arising of sati it can arise. One may think that sati may only arise after ten years or in the next life, but thinking in that way is useless. Sati is dependent on conditions, just like hearing and other realities: when there are conditions for hearing, it must arise; and when there are conditions for seeing it must arise. Even so, when there are conditions for the arising of sammå-sati, it arises. Therefore, we should correctly understand that sati can arise naturally.
Each Dhamma arises naturally. It is not natural if someone because of his ignorance wishes for the arising again of sati. We should not forget that paññá is developed with the aim to become detached. Sati arises and then falls away, this is normal. Why does one wish for its arising again? Whenever there are conditions sati will arise. We should clearly understand that all realities appearing at this moment do so because there are conditions for their arising. If someone really understands this, he will not worry. Lobha will arise because there are conditions for its arising. Dosa will arise because there are conditions for its arising. Whatever reality arises must fall away again, and we cannot do anything else but study with sati sampajaññå, clear comprehension, the realities that arise and fall away. We know the truth, we know that whatever appears is just Dhamma and this is in conformity with what we learnt by listening. In this way paññá is developed in combination with the study of realities. People should not merely study and then wait for the arising of Satipatthána or wish for its arising. Right understanding is the condition for sati to arise and to be aware naturally. Everything that concerns the development of paññá should be natural. When sati has fallen away, it has fallen away, and when it arises, it arises. In this way one will know the difference between the moment when sati arises and the moment when there is forgetfulness.
Footnotes 1. I inserted the text of the "Dhammapada".
2. When there is seeing there is also that which is seen, visible object, but sati can be aware of only one reality at a time. Seeing is nama and it can only be experienced through the mind-door. Visible object is rupa and it can be experienced through the eye-door and through the mind-door. When insight-knowledge arises, nama and rupa are realized one at a time through the mind-door.
Chapter 13
Dhamma Discussion in Hotel Gakkalok, Siem Reap (Part III) Soun: When sati arises, is that full comprehension of the known, ñåta pariññå?
Sujin: No, it is not. Full comprehension of the known begins at the first stage of vipassana ñåùa, insight knowledge, which is knowing the difference between nama and rupa, nama-rupa-pariccheda ñåùa.
Soun: When Satipatthána arises, one is aware of nama Dhamma and rupa Dhamma.
Sujin: Satipatthána is developed little by little, very gradually, until there is clear understanding. From the very beginning sati needs to be aware again and again, very often, so that vipassana ñåùa can be reached. "Full comprehension of the known" is the paññá that penetrates the true nature of the characteristics of nama and rupa that appear, but this is not the beginning stage of Satipatthána. Satipatthána arises when one develops understanding.
Soun: This is true, in the "Visuddhimagga" (Ch XX, 4) it is explained that "full understanding of the known" begins at the stage of insight knowledge that is knowing the difference between nama and rupa.
Nina: When you, Khun Soun, are angry or unhappy, do you like it?
Soun: I dislike it but I do not know the reality at that moment as it is.
Nina: I think that nobody wants to have anger, but we forget to be aware of the characteristic of anger. This is most important: everything that appears should be understood.
Sujin: We should know that everything that is real at this moment is Dhamma. The word "Dhamma" means element, dhåtu. Is it easy or difficult to know that there are different elements? It is surely difficult to know nama dhåtu. If we take something for self, we do not realize it as an element. Whereas, if we do not cling to the idea of self, we know that what appears is Dhamma, that there are different kinds of elements.
Jaran: What is the difference between the moment one sees anger with the wrong view of self and the moment without the wrong view of self, when sati is aware of the characteristic of the citta which is harsh?
Sujin: What do you mean by seeing anger? If the characteristic of anger arises and you know that this is anger, it is just normal.
Jaran: You explained that the person who has not studied the Dhamma erroneously believes that there is self but that he can also see his anger.
Sujin: That is correct. Everybody knows anger. When anger arises everybody knows that this is anger. Isn’t that correct?
Jaran: I still do not know what the difference is between the moment that sati is aware of the characteristic of anger as non-self and the moment of knowing anger with the wrong view of self.
Sujin: We should know the difference between the characteristic of sati and forgetfulness. When sati arises the characteristic of sati appears. Then we can know that sati is aware of the reality of anger at that moment. When sati arises, the characteristic of sati appears as a reality that is aware of the object at that moment. Whenever sati arises we should know that it is not self. It is not necessary to be in a room where one sits quietly so that sati can arise. It can arise naturally at this moment. Dosa arises and it has a characteristic, sati arises and it has another characteristic. When sati arises it can be aware of the characteristic of the reality appearing at that moment. Paññá which accompanies sati when one just begins to develop Satipatthána is still very weak, it is merely paññá of a beginning stage.
However, If people do not have correct understanding of the right Path, cetanå, volition or intention, is of the wrong Path, micchå-magga. When one has listened to the Dhamma, sañña, remembrance, becomes steadfast and remembers that there is Dhamma, reality, at this moment. That is a condition for sammå-sati, right mindfulness, to arise and to be aware of a Dhamma that appears. Then there is paññá of the right Path. When one studies and gradually has more understanding of the characteristics of realities, this is not merely the level of theoretical understanding, of thinking about concepts of realities. When characteristics of Dhammas really appear to sati, one begins to have correct understanding of the reality that appears. At this moment a Dhamma appears but when there is ignorance there cannot be right understanding of the characteristic of that Dhamma, because ignorance is not Satipatthána. When Satipatthána arises there is awareness of the characteristic of the reality that is naturally appearing, and in this way paññá gradually begins to understand that reality. When Satipatthána arises, there is training in higher síla (adhi-síla-sikkhå), in higher citta or concentration (adhi-citta-sikkhå), and higher paññá (adhi-paññá-sikkhå)[
1].
Pramesavan: There can only be patipatti, practice, when there is first pariyatti, theoretical understanding which is correct. Is that right?
Sujin: We have to understand first what pariyatti is, the study and the correct understanding of the characteristics of realities so that they are known as Dhammas, not self. From birth to death Dhammas arise and fall away but we take them all for self. When we study the theory, we begin to understand that what we take for self are citta, cetasika and rupa. However, we should have a deeper understanding, we should realize them as Dhamma. We learn that the rebirth-consciousness, the patisandhi-citta, the first citta of a new life, is an element that experiences, nama dhatu, different from rupa arising at the same time. Nobody knows the moment of his rebirth-consciousness, but after that characteristics of rupa Dhammas and nama Dhammas appear. If someone does not study, there is no awareness of them, but if one studies and understands nama and rupa, there can be conditions for the arising of sati, depending on the degree of understanding. Sati does not arise when one clings to the view of a self who wants to have sati. When someone really understands that there are only Dhammas, it is a condition for Satipatthána to be aware of the characteristic that is Dhamma.
Pramesavan: Thus, we should begin with the study of the Dhamma, no matter whether this is done by reading, listening or Dhamma discussions. We must consider correctly the teachings in conformity with what the Buddha taught, namely, that realities are not a being or person, that they are only elements. We have to develop this understanding all the time.
Sujin: We should also understand that Dhammas are not theory, that they are not merely contained in the texts. We have to know that at each moment now everything is Dhamma. Studying Dhamma is studying what is appearing at this very moment. We should never forget this.
Pramesavan: Study should be based on something, because we cannot know the truth just by ourselves. Study must be based on listening, reading and considering what we read and heard.
Sujin: When we truly consider the Dhamma while we are listening, we can understand that the Dhamma we studied is here at this very moment. If we understand this, it is a condition for sati to arise and to be aware, because Dhamma, reality, appears each moment; it appears at this very moment. Some people separate pariyatti from patipatti which they see as something that is not part of their normal daily life, as something particular they have to be engaged in. They forget that when they study the theory, pariyatti, they should study with the aim to understand the reality that appears at this moment. One should study in order to understand that any reality of this moment is Dhamma, be it seeing or hearing, but one never knew before that it was Dhamma. Thus, people should study with the aim to correctly understand that nama Dhamma at this moment is the reality that experiences, the element that experiences. Nama Dhamma is not theory, but there is nama Dhamma while we are seeing now. One may have heard and understood that seeing at this moment is nama Dhamma, because it is a reality that experiences something, but the expression " the reality that experiences" is most difficult to understand and to penetrate. When one sees, there is something that is appearing through the eyes, but the reality of nama that sees does not appear. Only when its characteristic appears, it can be known as an element or a kind of Dhamma that is real.
When people have understood this, they know that what is appearing through the eyes at this moment could not appear if there would not be nama Dhamma that has arisen and sees that object. One can gradually understand that seeing at this moment is Dhamma. Therefore, when one studies the Dhamma one studies with the purpose to have right understanding of the characteristics of realities that are the truth of each moment in daily life. This can be a condition for sati to arise and to be aware and in this way one will gradually understand that when one sees at this moment, it is a reality, an element that experiences, or when one hears, that it is an element experiencing sound.
People who listened at the time when the Sammåsambuddha had not yet finally passed away, could understand immediately the characteristics of nama and rupa. The reason was that they had developed understanding, that they had listened and considered what they had learnt to a great extent. When we read the life stories of those people we see that, before they could realize the four noble truths at the moment of enlightenment, they had to study and listen a great deal during many lives, so that they could become "bahussuta". A person who is bahussuta (bahu is much, and suta is heard) is someone who has listened and studied a great deal in order to understand realities. As Khun Nipat has said, at that time there were no books. Therefore, people listened with understanding and they did not think of textbooks or different subjects written down in books. They heard about realities that were appearing, they could investigate and understand them immediately. Their study was based on listening and considering, they knew that what they heard concerned the reality appearing at that very moment. When the Buddha asked whether seeing was permanent or impermanent, they answered, "impermanent". They did not memorize this from a textbook, but seeing was performing the function of seeing, and the paññá they had developed was the condition for understanding the truth of the reality at that moment.
Is seeing at this very moment permanent or impermanent? People at the Buddha’s time could answer that it was impermanent. It depends on the level of paññá how someone can answer this question. People who had developed paññá that could penetrate the truth could give the right answer. Just a moment ago I asked Khun Jaran whether he knew hardness on the level of the theory, pariyatti, or on the level of patipatti, the practice. One should be sincere, truthful, when one considers this. When it is still pariyatti, one takes hardness for the hardness of a table or a chair. When a person has studied the Dhamma he knows that it is a kind of element that can be experienced through the body-sense, a reality that is hardness. People at the Buddha’s time who answered the Buddha’s question about realities being permanent or impermanent could, when his discourse was finished, become a sotápanna or even an arahat. We may give the same answer as those people but has paññá reached the same level as their paññá? It depends on conditions what level paññá has reached. When Satipatthána arises one can begin to understand the difference between sati of the level of Dana or síla and of the level of Satipatthána. Sati of Satipatthána has a characteristic that arises and appears. Not a self, but sati is aware of the characteristics of realities. It is aware of the realities that naturally appear in daily life. Paññá that arises and is conditioned by Satipatthána is the reality that clearly understands those realities as they are. Paññá is different from sati.
Sati is the reality that is aware, it is not paññá. Sati has the function of awareness from the beginning on, all the time. Whereas paññá has the function of understanding the characteristics of realities while it is gradually developed stage by stage. It depends on the degree paññá to what extent the realities that appear are clearly understood. At this moment everybody experiences hardness and knows that Satipatthána is aware of hardness. However, the moment of understanding the characteristic of hardness is extremely short; other realities appear and then there is forgetfulness again. Thus, it will take a long time before there is firm understanding of the characteristic of the reality appearing right now, and before such understanding conditions the different stages of insight knowledge, and even the stages of enlightenment of the sotápanna and eventually of Arahatship. However, not only the reality of hardness should be known, also the characteristics of other realities that appear should be thoroughly known and understood. The level of theoretical understanding stemming from listening is not sufficient, but sati should be aware over and over again. We say that everything is Dhamma, but if there has never been awareness of what appears through the eyes at this moment, realities cannot appear as just Dhamma. We should begin to be aware of realities so that it will become evident that everything is Dhamma. Understanding can gradually grow, and everybody will know for himself to what extent it has been developed. We should be very sincere with regard to what we understand or not yet understand. This is the true benefit of studying the Dhamma. People who study but who have no awareness at all during their whole life are like the ladle who serves the curry but does not know the taste. The next life they have to listen again, they have to memorize what they heard, but if they thoroughly study the realities that appear they will begin to understand their characteristics. This is the true benefit of the study, namely the study of the level of pariyatti and of the level of patipatti, and this will lead to the level of pativedha, the direct realization of the truth.
Pramesavan: You stress studying for the right purpose, namely, right understanding of realities as they are at this very moment. It is very beneficial to read your book "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas" as an introduction to the study. I understand that the study of the Dhammas really has to be developed for a long time, it is cira kåla bhávaná. We do not expect to cause the arising of Satipatthána at a particular time or even in this life.
Sujin: The study of the characteristics of realities has to be developed for a long time. People should study so that they have first theoretical understanding of realities and this will lead to direct understanding of the characteristics of realities.
Pramesavan: Some people say that one should not study at all, that one should only investigate realities.
Sujin: This is not right. We do not have paññá to the same extent as the Sammåsambuddha who realized the truth through his enlightenment all by himself, without having heard the Dhamma from someone else in his last life. He considered and was aware of the characteristics of realities and in the last watch of the night he attained enlightenment and thereby became the Sammåsambuddha.
Footnote 1. At the moment of mindfulness of nama and rupa, there is training in higher síla, the six doors are guarded, there is no transgression. There is training in higher citta or concentration, because concentration, samádhi cetasika, performs the function of one-pointed ness on the nama or rupa that appears. There is training in higher paññá that realizes nama and rupa as they are and that can eventually eradicate defilements when enlightenment is attained. At the moment of Satipatthána one does not take síla, samádhi or paññá for self.
Chapter 14Dhamma Discussion in Hotel Gaggalok, Siem Reap (Part IV) Pramesavan: Is it necessary to read your book "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas" entirely?
Sujin: No matter what we read, the aim should be the understanding of realities. We may have read a great deal, the Tipitaka and the Commentaries, but we should take part of Dhamma discussions and it should be emphasized from now on that Dhamma, reality, appears at this very moment. We heard about realities while we listened to the Dhamma, but they are appearing now. Someone can test his understanding of all that he has learnt, by finding out whether he can really understand the characteristics of realities that are appearing now, or not yet. Generally there are two ways of study: by way of repeating and memorizing and by way of testing or verifying. As to the way of repeating or memorizing, we should forego that method. Some people believe that they should repeat for themselves what they learnt, but this leads only to remembering what was learnt, not to understanding it. Memorizing the subjects one learnt takes a long time, and moreover, when someone does not understand what he learnt he is bound to forget it, and thus it is not useful.
At this moment realities are appearing. What do we learn? We learn to understand the Dhammas that are real at this moment, and we should not forget that this is our goal. Some people learn the Dhamma by repetition and memorizing, and then they check their knowledge. Others memorize what they learnt but do not check their knowledge. Others again do not repeat, memorize or check their knowledge, they just study but do not consider the goal of their study. The goal is the understanding of the truth of the realities that are appearing. If someone understands the goal, he will not study what is beyond his ability to understand. Our understanding is not of the degree of the understanding of the Sammåsambuddha. The Buddha taught in his great wisdom the three parts of the Tipitaka in all details during forty-five years. All people read the same scriptures, but why do they practice in different ways? Their practice shows whether they understand the goal of their study or not. It shows whether they comprehend the way to reach this goal, the real understanding of realities, or not. When we study different subjects of the Tipitaka, of the Vinaya, the Book of Discipline, the Suttanta or the Abhidhamma, we should know for ourselves to what degree we can understand what we have read. Can we understand only a little or is our understanding the same as the paññá of the Sammåsambuddha? Do we study in order to acquire theoretical knowledge, or do we see that the understanding we gain from the study will help us to clearly know realities as they are? For example, we may understand the object-condition, årammaùa-paccaya which is one condition among the conditions for realities. Anything that citta cognizes is the object of citta, it conditions the citta by being its object. An object is what citta is cognizing or experiencing, and this pertains to this very moment now. The object is an important condition for citta, citta cannot do without it. If there is no object that can be known by citta, citta cannot arise. If sound does not impinge on the ear-sense, hearing cannot arise. Thus, the object, that which citta cognizes, is a condition for the arising of citta by being its object. Citta is the element, the reality that experiences, and there must be an object that can be known so that citta can arise at that moment. A simile can help us to understand this better. Just as a disabled person has no strength to stand up by himself but needs something he can hold on to and by which he can pull himself up so that his body can stand erect, evens is the object the condition for the arising of citta. It is helpful to understand this condition, and when people gradually study the other conditions with right understanding it will help them to understand the realities at this moment. In this way there are conditions for sammå-sati to arise and to be aware of their characteristics. However, if a person just memorizes what he reads in the texts but he is not able to understand the characteristics of the realities that are appearing, his study is not useful.
Pramesavan: When we study, the goal is not memorizing, is that right?
Sujin: Khun Jack will remember that last time we were in America I said to him that he began to be interested in understanding Satipatthána, because there was the foundation of understanding that could condition the arising of Satipatthána. The Buddha generally taught Satipatthána when the listeners had already sufficient understanding of the Dhamma. People who have understanding of the Dhamma should continue developing Satipatthána, that is, awareness of the characteristics of realities. This is actually the development of paññá with the aim of penetrating the truth of the realities that are the noble Truths. If people only speak all the time about the concepts of Dhammas without any understanding of Satipatthána, Satipatthána cannot arise.
Pramesavan: Our group of people in America who are studying the Dhamma have no teacher. We help each other to read your book "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas" as a foundation, but we do not read the Tipitaka and the Commentaries. Is this all right?
Sujin: But that is studying concepts of Dhammas. Khun Anop thinks that both the recordings of discussions and this book are helpful.
Anop: I believe that someone should listen and consider the Dhamma so that he will understand it. Reading helps one’s understanding in certain aspects, but I believe that listening to the recordings is most important.
Sujin: The book "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas" is a collection of some parts of Dhamma lectures and it deals with only a very small part of the Dhamma. There are also the Vinaya, Book of Discipline, and the Suttanta, but some people do not read these. I think that it is not sufficient just to study my book, because
in my lectures I explain only a very small part of the Dhamma. I want everybody to come into contact with the original Tipitaka, and to study it completely. I introduced in my book only those parts that people would be able to gradually understand. When they have understood those they can read the scriptures by themselves and in that way their understanding will become more thorough. They should not neglect reading by themselves.
Phemsombat: I listen many times to your recordings from beginning to end. If I only read your book but I do not listen to the recordings, my understanding will not be as good. It is best to do both.
Fongchan: If someone listens to recordings and reads, but does not consider the realities that are appearing, it will not help much.
Pramesavan: It is not possible to consider realities without having studied the Dhamma.
Amara: Everybody should begin at the foundation, namely, knowing what Satipatthána is. When someone has understood this he can develop paññá, but it depends on his accumulations to what extent he can develop it. When someone has right understanding and he develops paññá, he can attain enlightenment. If he studies a great deal but does not consider and is not aware of the characteristics of realities, he will not understand realities as they are.
Pramesavan: The many explanations I receive from reading and from listening to the Dhamma are not the same as the explanations from Acharn Sujin personally.
Sujin: People may not understand what reading implies. I have read the Tipitaka. But I leave out those parts which I believe to be beyond my awareness and understanding. If they are beyond my understanding I am not interested in them. Only those parts are beneficial that help me to understand the realities that are appearing. I am interested to study and consider realities so that right understanding can become clearer. We are inclined to overlook the realities of our daily life and then they are not of any benefit to us. Events of daily life can remind us of realities, they can condition sati that sees the benefit of detachment. We can see the great compassion of the Buddha who did not avoid uttering short, uncomplicated statements that are not difficult to understand but that deal with daily life, in order to remind people of the truth. He spoke in that way because he knew that people’s accumulated inclinations are very different. As to my own study, I read the subjects that I can understand. If people only memorize or just read texts, they receive no benefit from them. However, if there is a subject of Dhamma that is useful, even if it is a very short text, I will study and consider that subject until I clearly understand it. This is of a far greater benefit.
I intend to read all of the Suttanta, the Vinaya and the Abhidhamma and also the Commentaries, but I have not finished them. The Tipitaka is most difficult. I have given many lectures about the "Expositor", the Commentary to the Dhammasaùgani (Buddhist Psychological Ethics), the first Book of the Abhidhamma. I have given lectures about the twenty-four conditions contained in the Pathhåna, the "Conditional Relations", that is the last Book of the Abhidhamma, so that other people could have understanding of them. When we study the realities of citta, cetasika and rupa, we should also understand their conditional relations. Several monks have said that they believe that they in this life will never understand the subject of conditions. They read the scriptures including also the teaching on conditions, but they need explanations so that they can grasp the meaning of paccaya, condition, and can gradually understand this subject from the beginning. For example, citta and cetasika must arise together, they are both nama Dhammas that are closely joined and cannot do without each other. However, they are not the same paramattha Dhamma, ultimate reality. Citta and cetasika that are conascent, condition one another by way of sampayutta-paccaya, association-condition, because they are both nama Dhammas. Even though nama Dhamma and rupa Dhamma arise and fall away together, their characteristics are different from each other, they cannot be as closely joined as nama with another nama. Therefore, nama and rupa cannot condition each other by way of association-condition. Nama and rupa are completely different realities, each with their own characteristic. Even though they can arise at the same time, and are thus related by way of conascent-condition, sahajåta-paccaya, they condition each other by dissociation-condition, vippayutta-paccaya. Nama-Dhamma is a condition for rupa-Dhamma and rupa-Dhamma is a condition for nama-Dhamma by way of dissociation-condition, vippayutta paccaya. Thus, they cannot condition each other by being closely joined together, such as nama that is a condition for another nama, they cannot condition each other by way of association-condition. In this way we can gradually begin to understand conditions. When there is a foundation knowledge for people who have studied paramattha Dhammas they can have understanding of them. It is the same in the case of my book "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas". If someone reads from the beginning about citta, but he has no foundation knowledge of paramattha Dhamma, if he does not know what paramattha Dhamma is and how many of them there are, he will not be able to thoroughly understand them. The correct understanding of realities from the beginning is a most important foundation for the development of paññá.
As for myself, I study only in order to have more understanding, and I study also in so far as I can understand what I study. If a part of the teachings is beyond my ability of understanding I am not interested in the study. I do not need to speak about terms, to arrange subjects in the right order or to write essays for others. I only want other people to have real understanding of Dhammas. I know that if I arrange a lay-out of the subjects of the Dhamma, it is too easy for people; they will just read and they may not ponder over those subjects at all. People may just look at it and believe that they themselves have understood it. When we study the Dhamma with the aim of really understanding it, we do not have to separate the different chapters, and study them in the right order. When someone really understands a particular subject of the Dhamma, he can understand other subjects as well. He can, for example, understand the rebirth-consciousness; he can understand of what jåti (class or nature) it is, what object it experiences, and by what factor it is conditioned. It is conditioned by kamma-condition, because it is vipåkacitta, citta that is result. Thus, we should consider and understand the words we have heard, we should not just follow the text without any understanding. Then there can be the foundation knowledge for understanding the realities that are appearing, and this understanding is most beneficial, it is the purpose of our study. Therefore I like to suggest people to read the Tipitaka and Commentaries in addition to listening to lectures and Dhamma discussions. However, everyone should know for himself whether he is able to really understand particular subjects of Dhamma or not, and he should know to what extent he can understand them. He should not merely understand the letter of the Dhamma, or know the amounts of the different classifications of Dhammas.
I myself study in order to understand what I read thoroughly, profoundly and in all details. I do not disregard or neglect to consider the things I read, such as bhavanga-citta. When there is bhavanga-citta, life-continuum, realities do not appear, but why is it that, after the bhavanga-citta has fallen away, realities do appear, is that not amazing? In this respect we should understand the term åyatana (-sense-field or sphere of contact), we should understand where the åyatanas are. When are there åyatanas [
1] ? If we do not know this we are only learning terms. We should understand that at the moments when there are no cittas arising in processes (víthicittas), there is no appearance of an object. Every citta, no matter what kind, must know an object, but some kinds of cittas can know an object without being dependent on one of the six doorways [
2]. In this way we can understand the difference between the moment of víthi-citta and the moment of bhavanga-citta.
When we study and understand realities in this way, we shall see that the realities are appearing just in conformity with what we studied. Each saying in the Suttanta, even if it is short, is actually AbhiDhamma. The Suttanta and the AbhiDhamma are in conformity with each other. When we read a Sutta we should also correctly understand its essence, namely, the reality that is referred to. The "Discourse on the Analysis of the Elements" Middle Length Sayings III, no. 140), for example, deals with the elements in increasingly more details and one should understand these elements before one can grasp their conditionality.
We read in this Sutta [
3] that the Buddha spoke to the potter Pukkusåti about the six elements, six fields of (-sense-)impingement, eighteen mental ranges, four resolves:
Monks, when it is said: "This man has six elements," in reference to what is it said? To the element of extension (Earth or solidity), the liquid element (Water), the element of radiation (Heat), of motion (Wind), of space, of consciousness. Monk, when it is said, "This man has six elements", it is said in reference to this.
Monk, when it is said, "This man has six fields of (-sense)-impingement", in reference to what is this said? To the field of visual impingement, of auditory... olfactory...gustatory...tactile...mental impingement...
Monk, when it is said, "This man has eighteen mental ranges," in reference to what is it said? Having seen visual object with the eye... cognized a mental state with the mind, one ranges over the mental state that gives rise to joy...to sorrow...to equanimity. Thus there are six ranges for joy, six for sorrow, six for equanimity...
Monk, when it is said, "This man has four resolves," in reference to what is it said? To the resolve for wisdom, the resolve for truth, the resolve for relinquishment, the resolve for calm...
We then read that the Buddha explained about the elements in detail. We read about the monk who develops the stages of jhana, but sees that these are "constructed", conditioned phenomena. He sees their disadvantage, grasps after nothing in the world and attains nibbána. We read that the monk is endowed with the highest resolve for wisdom, the highest resolve for truth, the highest resolve for relinquishment, the highest resolve for calm. All his defilements are eradicated at his attainment of Arahatship.
Each person should study only in as far as he is able to understand what he studies. A person with a great deal of paññá who is able to study the Dhamma in all details and who can truly understand what he has learnt, who can understand it profoundly, clearly and correctly, should study the Dhamma evermore in detail. If someone merely memorizes what he learns, it is not beneficial. Different people have different accumulations.
Nipat: We should not forget that we are only beginning to study. People who really study are the enlightened ones who are "learners" (sekha puggala), who are classified as seven, beginning with the person who has attained the Path-consciousness of the "Streamwinner", the sotápanna, up to the Path-consciousness of the arahatta. The person who has attained the fruition-consciousness, phala-citta, of the arahat is a non-learner, asekha. Therefore, we should not be downhearted about our study, because we only just begin to study. However, we should be firmly convinced of the truth that there are realities appearing through six doors, the doors of the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body and the mind-door.
Sujin: Our study will be beneficial if it can be combined with the understanding of the level of patipatti, of the practice. The study is not merely knowing what is in the texts, but it is really the true investigation and consideration of realities. In this way someone who studies can develop the paññá that knows the characteristics of realities which are appearing. Some people who came to study in Khun Jack’s group in the U.S.A. said that they listened to the discussion on Dhamma but did not understand it, but that they found listening without understanding better than not listening at all. However, if someone listens without understanding he accumulates more ignorance, and is this in conformity with the goal of the study? How could it be beneficial to accumulate ever more ignorance. We should try to understand what we study so that there can be more understanding. We should understand what we hear by carefully considering it, and in that way we accumulate understanding.
Someone thought that remembrance, sañña, was rupa, he did not know that it was nama. This is an example which demonstrates that if someone does not understand the basic notions, he should go back to the beginning, he should begin again with the study. People can understand the Dhamma more profoundly if they develop Satipatthána, because then they will begin to understand realities as they are. They will not understand realities if they just listen to the Dhamma. I said this to Khun Jack so that he would be interested at the understanding of Satipatthána. He has already sufficiently studied Dhamma on the theoretical level, and now he should combine the study of the theory with the development of Satipatthána.
Amara: When a reality appears we can verify our understanding of what we studied, no matter what kind of subject of the Dhamma we are studying.
Footnotes 1. The åyatanas are the twelve bases on which the cittas arising in processes depend. They are the five -sense-doors and the mind-door, the five -sense objects and the mental object.
2. The cittas arising in processes experience objects through the six doorways. The bhavanga-citta does not experience an object impinging on one of the six doorways, it experiences the same object as the rebirth-consciousness, and this is the object experienced shortly before dying in the preceding life. The object of the bhavanga-citta does not appear.
3. I have added the text of the Sutta and, in the following paragraph, some explanations of the Sutta.