Nina van Gorkom
Tokyo
15 January
1971
Dear Mr. G.,
You asked me questions about mindfulness in daily life. You said that
you can be aware while shaving, but that you are not yet sure about
the experience of different characteristics of nåma (mental phenomena)
and rúpa (physical phenomena). I would like to quote from the Kindred
Sayings (IV, Saîåyatana-vagga, Second Fifty, Chapter IV, § 84,
Transitory). We read that Ånanda asked the Buddha what the world is:
"The world! The world!" is the saying, lord. Pray, how far, lord, does
this saying go?
What is transitory by nature, Ånanda, is called "the world" in the
Ariyan discipline. And what, Ånanda, is transitory by nature? The eye,
Ånanda, is transitory by nature¤objects¤tongue¤mind is transitory by
nature, mind-states, mind-consciousness, mind-contact, whatsoever
pleasant feeling or unpleasant feeling or indifferent feeling arises
owing to mind-contact, that also is transitory by nature. What is thus
transitory, Ånanda, is called "the world" in the Ariyan discipline.
We cannot yet directly experience the impermanence of nåma and rúpa,
but we will know the "world in the sense of the ariyan discipline" if
we develop right understanding of absolute realities, paramattha
dhammas, by being mindful of their characteristics as they appear one
at a time through the six doorways.
We are used to thinking that there are the world of our work, of our
home, of meditation, so many kinds of worlds. Actually we should
consider what the realities are which can be directly experienced.
These are the nåma and rúpa which appear through the six doors. There
is seeing-consciousness, which experiences visible object through the
eye-door. There is hearing-consciousness which experiences sound
through the ear-door. There is smelling-consciousness which
experiences odour through the nose. There is tasting-consciousness
which experiences flavour through the tongue. There is
body-consciousness which experiences tangible object through the
body-door. There is mind-consciousness which experiences mind-objects
through the mind-door. Thus, there are actually six worlds appearing
through the six doors. It will take a long time to develop a clearer
understanding of the six worlds. Thinking about them is not enough. In
being mindful of different characteristics we will come to understand
"the world in the sense of the ariyan discipline" through our own
experience.
Coming back to your example of shaving, you notice different moments.
Can you notice that there are different realities with different
characteristics? When you look into the mirror, touch the razor, when
you are thinking , could you simply, without any need to "detect" nåma
and rúpa, just realize that these different moments are different
experiences which have different characteristics ? We should know that
there are different realities. When you are looking into the mirror is
there no seeing? It experiences just what appears through the
eyesense, visible object. When you close your eyes the reality which
appeared when you were looking does not appear anymore. Considering
this is the first step to know what realities are. Later on one will
learn more through direct experience.
You write that you experience "touching the razor". Which realities
appear? Cold, motion or hardness? These are physical phenomena which
can be experienced through touch. Or does a nåma appear which
experiences one of these rúpas? Can you realize that they have
different characteristics? This will help you to know the world in the
ariyan sense.
When you eat breakfast you touch the fork. We call it "fork", but what
can you directly experience through the bodysense? The rúpas which are
cold, hardness or motion? You can learn that, no matter whether we
touch a razor or a fork, rúpas such as cold, hardness or motion can be
experienced through the bodysense. It is not you who experiences them,
but only a type of nåma which experiences them. Through the eyesense
the rúpa which is visible object or colour can be experienced. The
world of tangible object is different from the world appearing through
the eyesense.
You might say, "But I experience the razor and the fork. I know when I
touch the razor and when I touch the fork." How do you know what is a
razor and what is a fork? Because of remembrance or perception, saññå,
a mental factor, cetasika, which arises with every moment of
consciousness, citta. There isn't any experience which is not
accompanied by saññå. Because of saññå we remember things, we remember
what different things are used for. We remember, "when we do this, it
has that effect". Saññå is another reality, it is a kind of nåma, not
self.
In the "absolute sense", or, in the "ariyan discipline", there is no
fork, no razor, no mirror; these are only ideas we can think of, but
they are not realities. When there is seeing, it is visible object
which is experienced; when there is touching, it is hardness, coldness
or another rúpa presenting itself through the bodysense , which is
experienced. When we remember that we call a particular thing a "fork"
or a "razor", or when we remember how to use them, the reality
presenting itself at that moment is a kind of nåma. Realities are
experienced through the six doorways, presenting themselves one at a
time. They are not a person, not a thing which can stay, they are nåma
and rúpa which arise and then fall away immediately. This is the truth
which can be directly experienced, this is the "world" in the ariyan
discipline.
Is this not more simple than you would have thought at first? There is
thinking when you are shaving. Is that not different from seeing ,
from touching? Attachment or aversion may arise on account of what is
experienced. Are these not realities different from seeing, from
visible object, from the experience of tangible object or from the
rúpas which are experienced through the bodysense? It would be helpful
to realize that all these realities which appear are different, that
they have different characteristics. They are nåma and rúpa which
arise because of conditions, not self. We cling so much to concepts
and ideas which we convey to others by means of conventional terms in
language. We cling to saññå, we are infatuated with all the ideas and
stories we remember, such as razor, fork, person. This blinds us to
the world in the ariyan sense. It prevents us from understanding nåma
and rúpa as they present themselves through the six doors, one at a
time.
You wrote that you often wake up with mindfulness. I often wake up
with attachment, lobha, or aversion, dosa. For example, I think, "What
difficult thing do I have to do today?" Sometimes I have to hear
unpleasant words from other people, and then I feel unhappy. Why?
Because at those moments I do not see the world in the ariyan sense.
When we hear unpleasant words, the hearing is only vipåka (citta which
is result of kamma), it is nåma which arises just for a moment and
then falls away immediately. When I have aversion, there is akusala
citta (unwholesome consciousness), which is another kind of nåma. In
the ariyan sense there is no "I"who experiences, there is no
experiencer. There is not this or that person who says unpleasant
words to me. There are only nåma and rúpa. There is seeing, hearing,
thinking and other phenomena which appear for a moment and are then
gone. There are different feelings arising because of different
conditions. The teachings are very helpful for the understanding of
our life. When we listen to the sutta texts we can be reminded to be
aware of realities.
You find that there is more awareness when you do things which do not
require so much attention, things which are done automatically, like
shaving. You wrote "Shaving is there. It presents itself as if done by
someone else."
"Shaving is there", these are words you use to describe a whole
situation you can think of, but which are the realities you can
directly experience? There is the world in the ariyan sense: different
phenomena presenting themselves through the six doors. Seeing,
touching or thinking are realities, but shaving is not a reality.
"Shaving presents itself as if done by someone else". What is this? It
is a thought, that is all. We should not cling to special sensations,
they are only nåmas which do not stay. Thinking is only one kind of
reality which appears, and then there are other realities.
Is it true that there is more awareness when we do things which do not
require much attention? At the Japanese school I have to be attentive
to the teacher who asks me questions in Japanese which I have to
answer, applying the grammar I learnt. We should not exclude
beforehand the arising of awareness in such situations. If there can
be awareness sometimes of different realities one can begin to develop
understanding of them. Mindfulness arises when there are conditions
for its arising and we cannot say beforehand, "In such circumstances
it will arise, in such circumstances it will not arise". Awareness is
anattå, not self. We may think that it cannot arise in particular
circumstances, but this is only our thinking. We should realize such a
moment of thinking as only a kind of nåma which arises because of
conditions.
Sati, mindfulness, of the Eightfold Path will not arise often when it
has not been accumulated enough yet. We may take for mindfulness what
is actually only a sensation of quietness and "some notion of what is
going on", as you write. But this is not knowing a characteristic of a
reality which appears through one of the six doors, it is merely
pondering at leisure.
When hardness is experienced through touch we may take for sati what
is actually attachment. Do we wish to have many moments of sati? Then
we are clinging and right understanding cannot develop. Our aim should
be to learn more about the realities which appear one at a time. We
cling to visible object, sound and all the other sense objects. We may
not notice it that we cling to them, but is it not true that we are
usually absorbed by these objects and think about them for a long
time? We think that we see people and different things, but we can
learn that what appears through eyes is only visible object. We think
that we hear the voice of someone, but what appears through the ears
is only sound, there is no person in the sound. We can learn to
consider the phenomena of our daily life as only different realities
which appear one at a time.
There can be "study" of visible object, sound, hearing and other
realities when they appear one at a time. The word "study" is
appropriate, because it is a learning process. It is not theoretical
study but study of nåma and rúpa in daily life. We should not have
expectations about the arising of clear, direct understanding of nåma
and rúpa. When there are expectations there is attachment to an idea
of self who is successful, whereas mindfulness and right understanding
should lead to detachment from the idea of self. We should remember
that mindfulness of nåma and rúpa accompanies kusala citta and that
kusala citta does not arise as often as akusala citta. There are
countless more moments of akusala citta than kusala citta. If we
remember this we will be less inclined to false expectations. When we
have understood that there should be study of the characteristics of
nåma and rúpa in order to have more understanding of them, we will
stop wondering what mindfulness is or doubting about it.
There is usually forgetfulness of nåma and rúpa, but sometimes there
can be kusala citta accompanied by mindfulness of the reality which
appears at the present moment, a nåma or a rúpa. We cannot do anything
special to cause the arising of sati because sati is anattå. It arises
because of its appropriate conditions. The right conditions for sati
are: listening to the Dhamma, theoretical understanding of nåma and
rúpa and deeply considering the Dhamma in our life. One may be
discouraged about it that, although one has listened for many years,
there is hardly any awareness in daily life. When one merely listens
but does not deeply consider what one heard and does not test the
meaning of it, there are no conditions for awareness. Through
considering the Dhamma one builds up one's own understanding, one is
not dependent on other people. Everybody should consider nåma and rúpa
in his own situation.
You asked in your letter what the difference is between sati and
thinking. There can be thinking with kusala citta and with akusala
citta. Most of the time there is thinking with clinging or with
aversion. When there is thinking in the right way about nåma and rúpa
it can condition right awareness later on, but we do not know when.
When we think about sati we will not know its characteristic, but when
right mindfulness of nåma and rúpa arises we will know what sati is.
We can notice that there are countless moments of thinking in a day,
and when there is thinking it is time to study the characteristic of
thinking. Then we can come to know it as a nåma which arises because
of its own conditions, not self. It is the thinking which thinks.
"Sometimes sati seems to be contemporaneous with its object, sometimes
later", you write. We should be careful and not mistake thinking for
sati. When there is study with awareness of one reality at a time, the
reality which appears, one does not think about sati as being
contemporaneous with its object or not. There is at that moment only
the characteristic of the nåma or rúpa which appears.
You want to know when in the process of cittas sati arises. Sati has
to accompany kusala citta, but it can be mindful also of akusala
citta. When for example aversion, dosa, arises, it can be object of
mindfulness. Cittas succeed one another very rapidly and after the
dosa has fallen away there can be in another process kusala cittas
with sati. Sati can then be mindful of the dosa which has fallen away.
If there is unpleasant feeling now can there not be study of its
characteristic, in order to know it as not self, not my unpleasant
feeling? We are inclined to take feeling for self, but when we
understand that feelings arise because of conditions we will be less
inclined to take them for mine or self. Sometimes I take things to
heart and I have unpleasant feeling, sometimes not. This is because of
different conditions. We should learn that there is no self who can
control feelings. We do not have to think of processes when there is
the study of different characteristics. All that matters is to know
the world in the ariyan sense. This world is a new world to us since
we used to know only the world of conventional truth, the world of
self, people and possessions.
When there is no development of understanding of nåma and rúpa,
akusala cittas will arise very often: we are infatuated with the
objects we experience, we have aversion towards them or there is
ignorance about realities. When we, for example, see a teapot, we may
be ignorant of the six worlds in the ariyan sense. When we are
confused as to the different doorways, we think that what presents
itself through the eye-door is a teapot and we take it for something
which stays. However, through the eye-door it is only visible object
that presents itself, just for a moment. When we touch the teapot, the
rúpas which are hardness, softness, heat or cold may present
themselves. In order to know realities as they are we should be aware
of them as they present themselves through the different doorways, one
at a time. Like and dislike are again different phenomena and we
should not confuse them with seeing or visible object. Thinking of the
concept "teapot" is again another reality, a type of nåma.
Whatever nåma or rúpa appears can be object of mindfulness and thus
right understanding can develop. If there is preference for particular
types of nåma or rúpa which seem to be so clear, there is clinging. We
should learn different characteristics of nåma and rúpa as we go along
in daily life; when walking, standing, getting up, taking a bath,
eating, listening or talking. Only thus will there be the
disintegration of the "self ". We will know the world in the ariyan
sense. We read in the Kindred Sayings (IV, Saîåyatana-vagga, Kindred
Sayings on Sense, Third Fifty, Chapter IV, § 136) that the Buddha said
to the monks:
Devas and mankind, monks, delight in objects, they are excited by
objects. It is owing to the instability, the coming to an end, the
ceasing of objects, monks, that devas and mankind live woefully. They
delight in sounds, scents, savours, in touch, they delight in
mind-states, and are excited by them. It is owing to the instability,
the coming to an end, the ceasing of mind-states, monks, that devas
and mankind live woefully.
But the Tathågata, monks, who is arahat, a Fully-enlightened One,
seeing, as they really are, both the arising and the destruction, the
satisfaction, the misery and the way of escape from objects,-he
delights not in objects, takes not pleasure in them, is not excited by
them. It is owing to the instability, the coming to an end, the
ceasing of objects that the Tathågata dwells at ease.
Is this real life or not? When we do not see things as they are we are
enslaved. How did the Buddha become free? By fully knowing realities,
by knowing their characteristics as they appear through the six doors.
With mettå
Nina van Gorkom
Tokyo
15 February
1971 Dear Mr. G.,
First I will quote your question about personality-belief: "I wish you
could tell me more about personality-belief, sakkåya-diììhi. Is
sakkåya-diììhi wrong view? But, if I have wrong view, it is only a
kind of nåma, to be recognized as such."
Sakkåya is a name for the five khandhas which are objects of clinging.
Sakkåya-diììhi¤¤ is wrong view about the five khandhas. We have
accumulated wrong view about them during many lives. There is wrong
view about the khandhas when we really believe that they are permanent
and self.
All conditioned realities in ourselves and around ourselves can be
classified as five khandhas and these are the following:
rúpa-kkhandha ¤ physical phenomena
vedanå-kkhandha ¤ feelings
saññå-kkhandha ¤ remembrance
saòkhåra-kkhandha ¤ cetasikas (mental factors)
except feeling and saññå
viññåùa-kkhandha ¤ all cittas
This classification may seem rather theoretical, but it is a
classification of realities which arise now. There are the five
khandhas now while you are seeing. There is the eyesense which is
rúpa-kkhandha, there is visible object which is also rúpa-kkhandha,
there is seeing which is viññåùa-kkhandha. Seeing is accompanied by
feeling, vedanå-kkhandha, by remembrance, saññå-kkhandha, and by other
cetasikas which are saòkhåra-kkhandha. The khandhas arise and fall
away, they do not stay and none of the khandhas is self. Do you have
an idea of a self who is seeing? It is only viññåùa-kkhandha which
arises for an extremely short moment, performs the function of seeing
and then falls away. Seeing arises because of its own conditions.
Eyesense and visible object are conditions for seeing. Without these
conditions you could not see. Can you create your own eye-sense? It
arises because of its appropriate conditions. Seeing, eyesense and
visible object do not belong to you. Do you think that you see people?
It is only visible object, rúpa-kkhandha, which is seen just for a
moment and then falls away.
When we have listened to the Dhamma we understand in theory that there
is no self, no being, but our understanding is still weak. We do not
directly experience the truth of realities as they appear one at a
time. We cling to the khandhas and have an idea that they can last. Do
we have a notion of a "whole" of mind and body, of "my personality"?
What we take for a whole of mind and body are only five khandhas which
arise and fall away. We also cling to rúpas outside ourselves and
consider them as things which last. Don't we cling to our possessions,
to our house and all the things in it? We may be stingy, we may not be
inclined to give things away. We should remember that what we take for
our possessions are only rúpa-kkhandha which arises and falls away.
There is not necessarily wrong view every time we cling to the
khandhas. We may just be attached to our body without there being
wrong view about it. We can cling to the khandhas with conceit. When
we have conceit and compare our body or our mental qualities with
those of someone else there cannot be wrong view at the same time.
Conceit and wrong view cannot arise together. We learn from the
Abhidhamma that there are eight different types of lobha-múla-cittas,
cittas which are rooted in attachment, of which four are accompanied
by wrong view, diììhi, and four unaccompanied by wrong view. When one
has studied the Dhamma and acquired intellectual understanding about
the nature of not self of realities it does not mean that one has
realized the truth of not self. We have accumulated so much ignorance
about realities and the latent tendency of wrong view has not been
eradicated. Only the sotåpanna who has developed understanding to the
degree that enlightenment could be realized has eradicated the latent
tendency to wrong view. Paññå, right understanding, must be developed
in order to realize nåma and rúpa as impermanent and not self.
You wrote to me that when you have wrong view it can be recognized as
such. It is not easy to know exactly when there is clinging with wrong
view and when without wrong view. Only when paññå is keener it can
know the different characteristics of realities more clearly.
We are so used to thinking that we see people, houses and trees. Do we
really study with awareness seeing which appears now or visible object
which appears now? Do we study again and again the realities which
appear one at a time? Only in that way can we find out that no person
can appear through the eyes but only visible object, that which is
visible. We prefer to think about people and things, we prefer to live
in the world of our thoughts instead of studying realities such as
seeing or visible object. We have accumulated the tendency to be
absorbed in our thoughts about people and things, and thus it is
natural that we are inclined to thinking about those things which are
not real, which are only concepts or ideas. It is not self who thinks,
but a type of nåma which arises because of its own conditions. We
should not try to push away our thinking but we can begin to notice
the difference between the moments we are absorbed in our thoughts and
the moments of being aware of one reality at a time, such as visible
object or seeing. In this way we can learn the difference between
concepts or ideas and realities. Only when we know the difference we
can gradually learn how to study realities with awareness and in this
way there can be more understanding of them.
You have asked me what it means to take something for "self", for
"attå ".
Attå or self implies something which stays. Where is the self, does it
have a characteristic which can be directly experienced? Is the body
the self? The body consists of rúpas which arise and then fall away
immediately. Is feeling self? Feelings change all the time, they can
be happy, unhappy or indifferent. Is thinking self? Thinking changes
all the time, thus, how could you identify yourself with thinking?
When we learn to be aware of the phenomena which appear through the
six doors we will lose interest in things which cannot be directly
experienced but which are only objects of speculation.
Even though we may not expressively think, "It is I" , we are likely
to be confused about realities. So long as right understanding has not
been developed we join different realities together into a "mass", a
"whole". For example, we do not distinguish the characteristic of
sound from the characteristic of hearing, and thus our knowledge of
them is still vague. We do not distinguish hearing from thinking about
what we heard, or from like and dislike. When understanding has not
been developed yet we are also confused as to the different doorways
through which objects are experienced. For example, hearing
experiences sound through the ear-door and thinking about what was
heard experiences its object through the mind-door.
You asked me what the difference is between seeing a rose and seeing
its colour.
There is seeing time and again but there is no right understanding of
it. We do not realize the characteristics of phenomena as they appear
one at a time through the different doorways. The nåma which sees only
experiences visible object or colour through the eye-door. When we
recognize an object such as a rose there is not seeing. The object is
not colour but a concept or idea we form up by thinking. The thinking
of the concept "rose" is conditioned by seeing but seeing and thinking
arise at different moments. There is the experience of colour and
there is thinking of the concept rose, and then colour impinges again
on the eye-door and there is seeing again. How fast cittas change, how
fast objects change! In which world do we mostly live? Do we know the
six worlds appearing through the six doors or do we live only in the
world of conventional truth? Is it wisdom to know only one world?
Should we not know the worlds appearing through the six doors by being
aware of different characteristics? In that way the self can gradually
be broken up into elements until there is nothing left of it.
We will keep on clinging to the "whole" of the five khandhas, to body
and mental phenomena so long as we have not realized that they are
only elements which do not stay. We read in the Kindred Sayings (III,
Khandhå-vagga, Kindred Sayings on Elements, Middle Fifty, Chapter 5, §
102, Impermanence) that the Buddha said to the monks at Såvatthí:
The perceiving of impermanence, monks, if practised and enlarged,
wears out all sensual lust, all lust of rebirth, all ignorance, it
wears out, tears out all conceit of "I am".
Just as, monks, in the autumn season a ploughman with a great
ploughshare, cuts through the spreading roots as he ploughs; even so,
monks, the perceiving of impermanence, if practised and enlarged,
wears out all sensual lust, wears out all lust for body, all lust for
rebirth, wears out all ignorance, wears out, tears out all conceit of
"I am".
The Buddha uses several similes in order to explain that the
perception of impermanence wears out all clinging, ignorance and
conceit. Further on we read:
Just as, monks, in the autumn season, when the sky is opened up and
cleared of clouds, the sun, leaping up into the firmament, drives away
all darkness from the heavens, and shines and burns and flashes forth;
even so, monks, the perceiving of impermanence, if practised and
enlarged, wears out all sensual lust, wears out all lust for body, all
desire for rebirth, all ignorance, wears out, tears out all conceit of
"I am".
And in what way, monks, does it so wear them out?
It is by seeing: "Such is body; such is the arising of body; such is
the ceasing of body. Such is feeling, remembrance, the activities
(saòkhåra-kkhandha), such is consciousness, its arising and its
ceasing."
Even thus practised and enlarged, monks, does the perceiving of
impermanence wear out all sensual lust, all lust for body, all desire
for rebirth, all ignorance, wears out, tears out all conceit of "I am".
When one begins to develop right understanding of nåma and rúpa there
cannot yet be the direct realization of their arising and falling
away. First their different characteristics have to be clearly known,
nåma has to be known as nåma, different from rúpa, and rúpa has to be
known as rúpa, different from nåma. Understanding develops stage by
stage and it is at a later stage that the arising and falling away of
the reality which appears can be directly known. However, even the
sotåpanna who has realized nåma and rúpa as they are, as not self, has
not eradicated all clinging and ignorance. Only the arahat has
eradicated all kinds of clinging, all ignorance and conceit. When we
read this sutta we can be reminded to begin to study with awareness
the nåma and rúpa which appear now. Since it is a long way to realize
their impermanence we should not delay the development of
understanding of them.
You were wondering how there can be different characters of people, a
"personality", if there is no self. There are accumulations,
tendencies which are accumulated in the citta. Cittas arise and fall
away but the citta which falls away conditions the next citta and that
is why accumulations can be "carried on" from one citta to the next
one. That is why we can notice that people have different
inclinations, that they behave in different ways. Our behaviour is
conditioned, it is not self. We cling to our personality, to the image
we have of ourselves. We want to be good, we cling to our good deeds.
We have not realized that there is no self, no matter kusala citta or
akusala citta arises. We do not possess kusala, it cannot stay. It
only arises for a moment and then akusala citta is bound to arise.
Because of our ignorance we do not even notice when there is kusala
citta and when akusala citta. For example, when we give something away
with generosity there are kusala cittas which can be accompanied by
pleasant feeling. Very shortly afterwards akusala cittas with
attachment may arise and these can also be accompanied by pleasant
feeling. We may, for instance, think," I did this very well; I have
really achieved something; I did this." If there is no awareness we do
not know the different moments of citta and the different moments of
feeling. It seems that there is only one kind of feeling, pleasant
feeling, which lasts, and it seems that it is kusala all the time.
Thus we take for wholesome what is unwholesome. It is essential to
have right understanding of kusala and akusala, otherwise kusala
cannot be developed.
You wrote that you can be aware of more than one reality at a time.
This is not possible. Each citta can have only one object at a time
and thus also the citta with awareness can have only one object at a
time. One may take for awareness what is only thinking. For example,
one may have an idea of oneself seeing and hearing at the same time.
Then there is thinking of a concept, of a "whole" of different
phenomena which are joined together. If there can be awareness of
different characteristics of realities which present themselves one at
a time one will find out that awareness can be aware of only one
object at a time. It is unpredictable which reality will present
itself at which moment. It can be softness or hardness which impinges
on the bodysense, it can be sound, visible object or another reality.
So long as we do not distinguish between different realities which
arise closely one after the other we will keep on thinking that
realities last. For example, cittas with attachment may arise and then
there may be thinking of the attachment. We may think with aversion
about the attachment which arose a moment ago. If there can be
awareness of different characteristics it can be known that attachment
is one kind of reality and thinking with aversion another kind of
reality. They arise because of their own conditions, they are beyond
control, not self.
You asked me whether awareness of sound means recognizing sound as
sound.
Who is recognizing sound as sound? Is there an idea of self who
recognizes sound as sound? When two people say that they recognize
sound as sound one person may have right understanding and the other
person may not. We may understand in theory that sati is not self but
we may still cling to an idea of "my sati". When one has desire for
sati and one wants to create conditions for its arising one has not
understood that sati is not self, that it arises because of its own
conditions. One may imagine what sati should be like but instead of
speculation about it one should keep in mind that the realities which
appear and thus also sati and paññå are only conditioned phenomena
which are beyond control. Beyond control means that they are not self.
Our goal should not be to have many moments of sati but to develop
right understanding of the nåma and rúpa which appear now. Sound
appears time and again. Right understanding of sound can be developed
when it appears and we do not need to think about sati. One may say
that one recognizes sound as sound but one may not realize it as a
kind of rúpa which appears through the earsense. One may name it
"rúpa," but naming a reality is not the same as directly knowing its
characteristic when it appears. In the beginning there cannot be a
precise knowledge of nåma and rúpa but we should remember that it can
be developed only when there is study with awareness of the nåma or
rúpa presenting itself now.
You said that you can experience "something" of impermanence,
"fluctuations" of phenomena. Then there is only thinking about an idea
one has of impermanence. The arising and falling away of one nåma or
rúpa at a time can, as I said, only be realized later on. It cannot be
realized so long as one is still confused about the difference between
nåma and rúpa.
We live most of the time in the world of conventional truth, and there
is much ignorance about the world of absolute truth, the world of
paramattha dhammas. In your letter you give an example of young people
who are displeased with situations in their countries and who commit
acts of violence (dosa) in order to show that they are discontented.
Their accumulated violence is the real cause that they commit these
acts, and the situations they are displeased with are only
opportunities for their accumulated dosa to appear. Dosa will always
arise so long as it has not been eradicated.
In our daily life there are many moments of aversion, dosa. We may
wake up with a slightly unpleasant feeling. At first we do not realize
that there is dosa, but then we may remember an unpleasant event, for
example, unkind words someone may have spoken to us the day before. Or
we may worry about a difficult situation we will have to face that
day. These circumstances are not the real cause of our dosa. The
outward circumstances, the people we meet change, but there is still
our accumulated dosa and it will come out, always finding an object.
There will always be reasons for dosa so long as it has not been
eradicated yet. The person who has attained the third stage of
enlightenment, the anågåmí, has eradicated dosa. The way leading to
the eradication of defilements is the development of right
understanding of them when they appear. There is no other way.
How can we realize that dosa is a conditioned nåma? Not by thinking
about the dosa which has fallen away already, or about the events
which conditioned its arising, but by being aware of it when it
appears at the present moment. Only if there is mindfulness of
phenomena as they appear through the six doors will we gradually
realize that they are conditioned realities, not self. If there is
awareness only of phenomena appearing through the eye-door or through
the ear-door, it is not enough. There is not only visible object or
sound, but also seeing, hearing, attachment, lobha, aversion, dosa,
and other realities.
There can also be awareness of the different kinds of feelings which
arise. Our feelings change all the time. There are feelings arising on
account of what is seen, heard, smelt, tasted, of what is experienced
through the body-sense and of what is thought. At each moment of citta
the condition for the accompanying feeling changes and thus feelings
change all the time. It does not appear to us this way when we cling
to the feeling which has fallen away already. It exists no more but we
keep on pondering over it. If we cling to feelings of the past, we
live more in the world of illusions than in the world of realities, of
paramattha dhammas.
In the Visuddhimagga (XX, 96) nåma and rúpa which arise and fall away
are compared to the sound of a lute which arises because of conditions
and falls away again. The text states:
`...But just as there is no store, prior to its arising, of the sound
that arises when a lute is played, nor does it come from any store
when it arises, nor does it go in any direction when it ceases, nor
does it persist as a store when it has ceased, but on the contrary,
not having been, it is brought into being owing to the lute, the
lute's neck, and the man's appropriate effort, and having been, it
vanishes-so too all material and immaterial states, not having been,
are brought into being, having been they vanish.'
It is beneficial to be reminded that the nåmas and rúpas which appear
in our daily life arise because of conditions and then fall away. If
we consider this thoroughly there will be less inclination to keep on
thinking about what is past already. In this way there will be less
forgetfulness of what appears now. You don't have to do anything
special to be aware, there are objects impinging on the six doors time
and again. When you touch water which is too hot heat presents itself.
You may think, "This water is too hot", and then there is thinking.
Hot water is a concept we think of, but heat is a reality, a rúpa,
which impinges on the bodysense, it can be directly experienced. The
rúpa which is heat, the nåma which experiences heat or the painful
feeling can appear again and again, in between the thinking. These are
all different phenomena which do not stay, which are not self. There
is no person who has painful feeling, there is a nåma which feels.
Painful feeling arises because of its own conditions. When there are
not the right conditions for it it cannot arise.
When we hear harsh words there are conditions for unpleasant feeling,
but there can also be moments of awareness in between. Besides
unpleasant feeling there are sound, hearing and other realities
appearing. In this way we can realize that unpleasant feeling is only
one phenomenon among many other realities which each arise because of
their own conditions. Whereas if we are not mindful we think that
there is only "my unpleasant feeling" which seems to last. We may
believe that this particular person, this place and this situation are
the causes of our unhappiness. However, these are not the real causes.
The real cause is our accumulated dosa.
When we are aware of nåma and rúpa there is less enslavement to the
objects we experience. When there is awareness of visible object which
appears through the eyes there is no enslavement to visible object.
When there is awareness of sound which appears through the ears there
is no enslavement to sound, and it is the same with regard to the
objects which present themselves through the other doorways. Wisdom
can make us free, but we should not expect results within a short
time. Do you remember the sutta about the handle of the knife which
wears out very slowly, in the Kindred Sayings (III, Khandhå-vagga,
Middle Fifty, Adze-handle)? The Buddha speaks about the handle of a
knife which one holds each day. It gradually wears away, but one
cannot notice how much is worn out each day. We cannot control the
frequency of awareness, since it is anattå, not self, arising because
of its own conditions. However, even a few moments of awareness in
between lobha, dosa and moha is very beneficial. One begins to develop
the Path which will surely lead to freedom. We read about the
condition for freedom from defilements in the Kindred Sayings (IV,
Saîåyatana-vagga, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Third Fifty, Chapter III;
§ 124). We read about a conversation the housefather Ugga had with the
Buddha:
`Pray, lord, what is the condition, what is the cause whereby in this
world some beings are not wholly set free in this very life, while
other beings are wholly set free?'
`There are, housefather, objects cognizable by the eye. sounds
cognizable by the ear¤scents¤savours¤tangibles cognizable by the
body...mind-states cognizable by the mind¤If he has grasping for them,
housefather, a monk is not wholly set free. That, housefather, is the
condition, that is the cause whereby in this world some beings are not
wholly set free in this very life.
Likewise, housefather, there are objects cognizable by the eye¤If he
has no grasping for them a monk is wholly set free. That, housefather,
is the condition, that is the cause whereby in this very life some
beings are not wholly set free, while other beings are wholly set
free.'
When there is seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching or
thinking, are we free? Don't you find that at the moment of
mindfulness of one object at a time there is a beginning of freedom?
There is less enslavement to objects and one is on the way leading to
the eradication of the wrong view of self, of "personality belief".
There is no other way but the development of understanding of the
realities which present themselves through eyes, ears, nose, tongue,
bodysense and mind-door.
With mettå,
Nina van Gorkom
|