Chapter 9

Dhamma Discussion in Hotel Sofitel, Phnom Penh (I)

Sujin: When paññå of the degree of insight knowledge, vipassanå ñåùa arises, it arises even against our expectations. We should not think ahead of time that it should arise in a moment, very soon. This is wrong, because the development of paññå must be with detachment. If desire slips in, we are not on the right way and we shall not reach the goal. The right way, the development of paññå, is very intricate, very subtle. As has been appropriately stated in the scriptures: it is difficult to understand the four noble Truths because they are profound. For the development of satipaììhåna, we should not sit and think of getting hold of sati in order to “use” it. We cannot “use” paññå, but there should be correct understanding from the beginning, from now on. This understanding is included in the khandha of formations, saòkhårakkhandha, which forms up conditions for the arising of sammåsati that is aware of realities. When one touches things which are hard during the day there is no sati, because one has the notion of touching things such as a table. But when we have listened to the Dhamma we understand that hardness is only a kind of reality. If we often listen and have more understanding, there can be firm saññå, we can remember that everything is dhamma, reality, and this is the first level of understanding. We should not forget that everything is dhamma. If we do not forget this, there are conditions for the arising of sati that is aware of the reality of hardness, odour or other dhammas. It depends on conditions whether sati arises and is aware of realities. When sati arises it can be aware precisely of a characteristic of the dhamma that we used to take for something hard. When there is awareness, paññå can know that this is only a kind of dhamma, and that the element that experiences hardness is not self. However, before we can know that it is an element that experiences, not self, we should develop paññå for a long time until there is no longer the concept of the whole world that we used to have. Then only the element that experiences remains, and this is the characteristic of nåma that is not blended or mixed with rúpa. Nåma dhamma is the reality that can know everything. From birth to death there is nåma dhamma, at every moment. When sati arises we can gradually begin to understand the characteristics of rúpa dhamma and nåma dhamma which we used to know from listening to the Dhamma and from the study of the different texts of the scriptures. When we are aware of the realities that are appearing we shall begin to understand the characteristic of rúpa and the characteristic of nåma. Sati is aware, not because we cause its arising or do something special to induce it. We should understand that each life is citta, cetasika and rúpa. When sati is aware and there is gradually more understanding, little by little, satipaììhåna develops, so that one day insight knowledge, vipassanå ñåùa, can arise. This kind of paññå can penetrate the true nature of the characteristics of nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma, without there being concepts of people and things blended in. The element that experiences appears through the mind-door. At the moments of insight knowledge nothing else exists but the element that experiences, nåma dhamma, and rúpa dhamma, and these appear one at a time. Insight knowledge is the paññå that realizes the difference between nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma, it realizes their characteristics as distinct from each other, as they appear one at a time through the mind-door. We have heard of sense-door process and mind-door process, and also now a mind-door process is in between the sense-door processes, it follows upon each sense-door process. However, the mind-door process is not evident because it is, as it were, hidden by the sense-door processes. Also when there is thinking of names and concepts on account of sense objects, the mind-door process is not apparent. At such moments the arising and falling away of realities is not evident. Realities have already arisen and disappeared anyway. When concepts hide the truth one does not know paramattha dhammas, ultimate realities. However, when pañña has been developed to the degree of insight knowledge, the mind-door process appears and then there is no more doubt about it. At this moment realities appear through the sense-doors, through the eyes or the ears, but while one is thinking, nothing appears through the eyes or the ears. While one is thinking, there is no colour, no sound. We know through the study of the Dhamma and by memorizing what we learnt that there is the mind-door process, but the reality of the mind-door process does not appear. However, the paññå that is insight knowledge knows all realities through the mind-door. Realities appear one at a time through the mind-door. How does one feel about that?

Jarurin: Perhaps one is frightened.

Sujin: It depends on conditions. It is an experience that never before arose in life, but pañña at that moment is able to know that characteristic as nåma, and that is vipassanå ñåùa. One may be frightened or astonished while thinking why realities appear in this way, because one never thought that the world one is familiar with does, in the ultimate sense, not exist. Usually the whole wide world appears, because one has eyes and ears and thus this world one is familiar with appears. It appears in this way until the time comes when the world appears as empty; then there is only the citta which knows the characteristics of dhammas that appear, and which knows that the realities arise and appear because there are the appropriate conditions. Paññå will clearly realize that rúpa appears through the sense-door and subsequently through the mind-door. This is according to the truth.

The saying: “There is nothing, then there is something and after that there is nothing to be found”, is according to the truth. Paññå knows that everything the Buddha taught is the truth that appears and that can be known, from the first level of paññå on, which is knowing the characteristics of nåma and of rúpa. People should not forego any stage of paññå and try to do something else. They should develop paññå so that they know first of all the characteristics of realities that are nåma and rúpa. We cannot know yet as it is lobha-múla-citta, and we cannot know yet whether it is accompanied by wrong view or not. When we study and we have theoretical knowledge of realities, the characteristics of nåma and rúpa do not appear, because we only know the terms. We may say that this type of lobha is accompanied by wrong view and that type by conceit, but this does not mean that we know the realities that arise and appear and then fall away. Realities arise and then fall away, they disappear very rapidly, but we only know the names of dhammas. If one wants to understand the true nature of realities, it is not sufficient to know only terms and concepts of the different dhammas. The purpose of listening to the Dhamma should not merely be theoretical understanding of realities, but it should be the practice, that is the development of paññå according to the method of the Suttanta, of the Abhidhamma and of the Vinaya, the Book of Discipline for the monks.

Jaran: In which way is the practice according to those three methods different?

Sujin: These are different methods of teaching. The Vinaya deals with conduct through body and speech. When we study the Vinaya we know that wholesome conduct through body and speech is developed by kusala citta. An example of this is the case of a monk who entered a house and sat down without having been invited by the owner of the house. When the Buddha heard of this he laid down a rule that only when the owner of a place had invited the monk he could sit down. Thus, when the monk goes to someone’s house, but the owner has not yet invited him, should he sit down? Even small matters, matters that concern etiquette and manners, such as while one is eating, are all explained in the Vinaya, and everybody can apply these. We do not need to sit down and consider how many more sílas in addition to the five precepts we shall observe. Síla concerns our conduct through body and speech.
As to the method of the Suttanta, this is very subtle and detailed, such as the teaching of dukkha-dukkha (intrinsic dukkha, bodily pain and unhappy feeling), vipariùåma-dukkha (dukkha because of change) and saòkhåra-dukkha (dukkha inherent in all conditioned realities) ¹. We should study the Suttanta so that we acquire a more detailed understanding of confidence, saddhå, moral shame, hiri, and fear of blame, ottappa ² . When we listen to the Dhamma there is confidence, sati, hiri and ottappa. We do not realize that there are hiri and ottappa, even though they are there in reality. Whenever kusala citta arises it is accompanied by hiri and ottappa, without the need to think that we are ashamed of akusala. We do not need to think first of moral shame in order that it arises and that we shall listen to the Dhamma. Whenever the reality of moral shame arises there is kusala citta at that moment. Thus, we should have more understanding of realities in detail.
With regard to the Abhidhamma method of teaching, this elucidates the true nature of all paramattha dhammas, ultimate realities. One should not merely know the concepts nåma and rúpa, but the characteristics of nåma and rúpa that are appearing should be realized. When satipaììhåna arises there is awareness and understanding of the characteristics of realities, one at a time. When anger arises, is there anybody who does not know this, even if he does not study the Abhidhamma? When jealousy or stinginess arises, is it necessary to study the Abhidhamma so that one knows it? People know it without study, but they take these realities for self, and they do not know that these are only different dhammas. Through the Abhidhamma method one can come to understand that all realities are non-self. When attachment, aversion or conceit arise, or when we enjoy ourselves, there is no person, no self. When there is the firm remembrance of the truth of anattå, a person will not have misunderstandings about it and believe that he can do whatever he likes because everything is anattå anyway. Then he uses anattå as a trick to excuse his behaviour and he gives his own interpretation of this term. As regards the truth of anattå, does paññå grasp already its meaning? Or do we just repeat that everything is anattå? There is a considerable difference in the understanding of someone who merely studies the theory of the Dhamma and of someone who develops paññå and knows the characteristics of realities as they are. We should understand this correctly: if we know only terms and names of dhammas, we shall remain only at that level, and we shall continue to know only terms. We should develop paññå so that the truth of anattå can be realized, in accordance with the teaching that all dhammas are anattå. Otherwise, to use a simile, we are like the ladle that serves the curry but does not know the taste of it ³. If we study but we do not realize the true nature of realities, how many lives shall we be only at that level, and this means that we study and then forget what we learnt.

If we know that we study with the purpose of understanding realities at this very moment, then such understanding will be in accordance with our ability. We can understand, for example, what årammaùa, object, is. It is impossible that citta does not experience an object. Citta is the reality that experiences and thus there must be something that is experienced. That which is experienced can be anything, it can be citta, cetasika, rúpa or nibbåna. A concept, paññatti , is the object of citta that thinks. We can know when the citta knows a concept and when an ultimate reality, paramattha dhamma. Every paramattha dhamma that is the object of citta, has a characteristic, and that characteristic is impermanence; it arises and falls away. When the object is not a paramattha dhamma with its true characteristic, the object is a concept. If we understand this, sati can be aware of the characteristics of paramattha dhammas, because satipaììhåna must know paramattha dhammas. The study can support correct understanding of the way of development of paññå. Everything we learn from the beginning is accumulated as the khandha of formations, saòkhårakkhandha, and this is a condition for the growth of pañña.

Question: Is it correct to say that paññå and ñåùa are the same in meaning, but that they are of different levels?

Sujin: It depends on the context, on the way it is used. For example, the term is used that is: kusala citta ñåùa sampayutta, kusala citta that is accompanied by paññå cetasika.

Question: If someone is at the beginning level of study, he learns terms and concepts. How can he go beyond this level and do without them?

Sujin: At the beginning level we learn terms and names, but what do such names designate? As to the term citta, for example, what does it designate? It is a term for a dhamma that is reality, for the element that experiences, the reality that experiences. Therefore, we should not cling to the term citta, we can change the term citta into viññåùa (consciousness) or into mano (mind). But these terms refer to the nature that experiences something, to the reality that experiences. When citta arises it must experience something, it is impossible that it would not experience something. If our understanding is correct, it will become firmer and more established. While we are asleep, is there citta? There is. While we are asleep, does citta experience an object? The nature of citta cannot be altered; it is the reality that experiences and thus, also that citta must be like that. However, while we are asleep, the object of citta does not appear, because it is the object of the bhavanga-citta, life-continuum. The bhavanga-citta succeeds the rebirth-consciousness and experiences the same object, and the rebirth-consciousness has the same object as the cittas that arose shortly before dying in the previous life. All bhavanga-cittas throughout that life experience the same object. Therefore we should know that the bhavanga-citta is not a citta that is depending on the doorways of the eyes, the ears, the nose, the body or the mind. However, it knows an object, because citta is a reality that must experience something. If we understand the true characteristics of realities there is correct understanding. If we cling and in that way interfere with the understanding of realities it is evident that they cannot be seen as they are.

Question: Does this mean that when I have understanding of the realities of citta and cetasika, I do not interfere with their functions?

Sujin: At this moment realities perform their own functions already, but we do not know that they are citta and cetasika. However, when we study the Dhamma, we know that citta is the leader, it is the chief in knowing an object; it does not remember, it is not angry, it does not love, it does not hate. Its only function is being the leader in knowing an object. Citta is able to experience the characteristic of what appears at this moment. The rúpa that presents itself at this moment through the eyes appears to citta. When sound appears, there are actually many kinds of sounds, but citta is able to experience each kind of sound. Thus, citta is the chief, the leader in cognizing an object, it clearly knows the different characteristics of the objects that present themselves. However, citta is not paññå; paññå is correct understanding that knows realities as non-self.

Question: Someone said that he thought of hardness, but this is a term. You said that this kind of thinking is better than thinking of other things.

Sujin: Thinking of citta, cetasika and rúpa is better than thinking of other things.

Question: That resembles clinging to samådhi, concentration, fixing our attention on one object.

Sujin: Nobody can prevent himself from thinking. There are conditions for thinking and thus we think time and again. However, before we listened to the Dhamma we used to think of this or that person, this or that thing. After we have listened to the Dhamma, we think of citta, of cetasika, but we should know that this is only thinking, not awareness and understanding of the characteristics of realities. Therefore, paññå should grow and understand realities more deeply.

Question: When we cling, we may keep on concentrating on realities, is that not so?

Sujin: Therefore, paññå should develop. We should know that at such moments there is no understanding of the characteristics of realities. People may merely think about realities when they experience the characteristic of hardness through touch. At such moments they are inclined to think, this is hardness, or, hardness is rúpa. They think of names, of words. From now on one should understand that when one knows at such moments just words, it is not satipaììhåna. Realities must have characteristics that appear. Hardness is a characteristic of dhamma that is real; hardness arises and falls away, but this can be known by paññå. When paññå does not arise it seems that a reality is present already all the time, but one does not realize the truth. A reality arises so that it can be experienced through contact; thus, it can appear, and then it falls away immediately. If people have listened to the Dhamma, the right cause can bring its appropriate result. When they have realized the truth they know that it must be in the way I just explained.

Krayadib: Before I practised, it seemed that I was clinging to the word bhåvanå, mental development. But gradually this inclination disappeared when I asked myself what kind of habit I was accumulating. Now I study the Dhamma and I have refrained already for a long time from clinging in that way. Now I am used to often think about concepts designating realities. I know that this is a dhamma that thinks. Acharn explained this, so that we know that it is a reality that thinks. I worry about it that I seem to merely repeat these words, and I wonder how this will gradually disappear.

Jonothan: Acharn says that hardness is a reality that arises and falls away all the time.

Sujin: Hardness arises and then it appears; if it does not arise it cannot appear. Is this true or not? Paññå should know the truth of everything.

Jonothan: Knowing the characteristic of hardness when it appears and knowing its arising and falling away is not the same. Is that correct?

Sujin: There must be different levels of pannå that realizes these matters. The paññå of the beginning level does not penetrate the arising and falling away of realities. In the beginning people have only theoretical knowledge of the elements of nåma and the rúpa, stemming from listening to the Dhamma, but they do not realize the characteristics of nåma and rúpa; they do not realize them as elements, dhåtus. At this moment there are nåma and rúpa, but their characteristics do not appear, they do not appear as elements. There are several levels of insight knowledege, and insight has to be developed stage by stage. It is impossible to realize the arising and falling away of realities immediately, before the preceding stages have been reached. We can know, when someone tries to “watch” nåma and rúpa in order to realize their arising and falling away, and pretends that he has realized this, that he is on the wrong way.

Phannipa: Do some people believe that this is the right development of satipaììhåna? In reality this is wrong understanding.

Sujin: Generally people use the term sati, but they do not know the characteristic of sati. They use the word paññå without knowing what paññå is. They say that they want to control paññå, but where is paññå?

Phannipa: People who study by themselves erroneously believe that satipaììhåna has arisen already, but that is wrong understanding, different from right understanding based on listening.

Sujin: Therefore, people should listen to the Dhamma and consider carefully what they have heard so that they will understand it. For example, sati is not samådhi, concentration, but people follow the wrong way because they take samådhi for sati. Samådhi is the reality that concentrates on one object, but sati is not samådhi. Sati is a sobhana sådhåraùa cetasika (general, common to sobhana); it accompanies only sobhana cittas, and it accompanies each sobhana citta. Sati accompanies each level of kusala, be it of the level of dåna, síla, samatha or vipassanå. There is satipaììhåna when someone is aware of the characteristics of realities as they are naturally appearing at this moment. This kind of understanding stems from listening to the Dhamma. Before one listened to the Dhamma one could not be aware of the characteristics of realities. When someone has listened and understood what he heard, he can be aware of the characteristics of realities. Gradually he can begin to understand the characteristics of realities which are of two different kinds: nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma. There is, for example, seeing at this moment. Seeing is the reality that experiences, seeing does not have any shape or form; seeing sees what is appearing through the eyes.

Seeing is nåma dhamma that is able to see something, this is the function of that kind of element. It is an element that has no shape or form. Paññå can gradually develop and penetrate the nature of nåma dhamma and that is satipaììhåna. When a reality appears, sati can arise and be aware of that reality, and then paññå can begin to gradually develop so that there will be correct understanding of its characteristic. If others say that it is not satipaììhåna at the moment when understanding of what is real and what appears gradually develops, is that true?. Satipaììhåna does not depend on someone else’s words; it is reality, and at such moments there are dhammas appearing. We are usually forgetful of realities, but when sati arises and is aware, there is gradually more understanding of the characteristics that are real, the characteristics that are appearing. This is satipaììhåna. We have theoretical knowledge of the four applications of mindfulness of body, feeling, citta and dhammas, but we should understand that these are real at this moment. Hardness, for example is a reality that is appearing. When sati arises and is aware just for a few moments, the understanding cannot not be clear yet, but this is like the knife handle that wears away each moment someone holds it. Therefore, each time paññå arises there is a condition for its growth and accomplishment. One must have the firm conviction that paññå can know only the reality that is appearing. Paññå is not able to know something that does not appear, something that has fallen away or that has not yet arisen. Paññå can know what is true at this moment, and in this way we can understand the dependent origination of phenomena, the paticca samuppåda: not knowing the truth is the first link of the dependent origination, which is ignorance, avijjå ¹ .

Avijjå, ignorance, accompanies citta, it cannot arise with rúpa. Whenever we do not understand the truth of realities there is avijjå. If we study the Dhamma more in detail we shall know when there is akusala citta and when vipåkacitta, citta that is result of kamma. Avijjå cetasika is not conascent with vipåkacitta, but there is the latent tendency of avijjå, avijjånusaya, in each citta so long as avijjå has not been eradicated. More understanding of the details of the Dhamma is a condition for beginning to develop the paññå that realizes the truth, and then there will not be clinging to mere words and concepts. However, we should know that reading, listening and studying a great deal is beneficial, because this is a condition for the growth of understanding. We should study and consider the Dhamma with right understanding and we should see the benefit of this. It is necessary to have patience with regard to the development of paññå, it is bound to take a long time. In the Tipiìaka the expression of “círa kåla bhåvana” is used, meaning, development that takes a long time. When we study the life stories of those who could attain enlightenment after they had developed paññå for an endlessly long time, we should not worry about it how long we have developed paññå already and how much longer we should develop it. At this moment we can evaluate the paññå we have developed because we can verify whether paññå can understand the paramattha dhamma that appears now. It is not a concept or idea; at each moment there is paramattha dhamma.

Question: Sati is a sobhana cetasika, it arises with kusala citta. Is it correct to say that sati can be aware of dosa, aversion, or another kind of akusala?

Sujin: What is reality is true in every respect. Akusala is reality, but sati cannot be conascent with akusala citta; sati can arise afterwards and be aware of its characteristic. Akusala has arisen, if it had not arisen it could not appear. Akusala arises and falls away, but in a following process there can be kusala cittas accompanied by sati which is aware of the characteristic of that akusala dhamma that arises and falls away very rapidly; processes of kusala cittas accompanied by sati can arise in alternation with processes with akusala cittas. This can go on for several rounds.

Question: At this moment I pay attention to it that this is dosa and that lobha.

Sujin: This is thinking, and when you know this, thinking will stop. Also when we do not think there are realities. The rúpa that is hardness is present without the need to think of it. Instead of thinking we can begin to be aware of characteristics of realities. We do not have to think of them or name them, but gradually we can pay attention to and understand what is real and appears. It is the same as when we see an orange and know that it is an orange without having to think that there is an orange.

Question: A friend of mine wishes to ask something. He used to sit and concentrate on something and afterwards he acquired knowledge such as we have now from the study of Dhamma, but he continues to cling and concentrate on something. When he is troubled by a problem, he sits down in order to concentrate on something and then he feels more confortable. I explained to him that that is clinging, that it is lobha. He likes to concentrate because it makes him feel contented. I said that he may not feel happy each time because this is anattå, and that sometimes he may not succeed in becoming contented. He said that most of the time when he sits down to concentrate he feels more contented and therefore he likes to continue doing this. Would you please help me to give him an answer?
Sujin: There are many kinds of Buddhists, some of them do not study the Dhamma, they do not listen and do not understand the Dhamma. Others again study just a little, and what they study is sometimes wrong, sometimes correct. The Dhamma is very difficult, profound and subtle. People should study it carefully and thoroughly. They should know to what purpose they study it, this is most important. Most people go to the temple because it makes them feel contented. When they enter a temple they feel happy already and they find this sufficient. Or when they listen to the Dhamma they feel contented and this is enough for them. They do not think of paññå, they do not consider what the Buddha realized through his enlightenment. The Buddha’s compassion that motivated him to teach the Dhamma he realized through his enlightenment is immeasurably great. The Dhamma is the truth that is profound and that can eradicate defilements completely. People who just think of being contented do not think of the eradication of defilements, they do not think of understanding. Therefore, they are Buddhists who are just of the level of wanting the means that make them contented.

Jonothan: We have different methods of suppressing dosa that arises. People may listen to tapes about the Dhamma or they may sit in order to concentrate. By these ways dosa will decrease, but they cannot prevent dosa from arising again, and it is the same with the other kinds of akusala cittas.

Sujin: Therefore, we do not have to think of what other people want to have, no matter they want contentedness or something else. We who are born into this world, have the opportunity to hear the Dhamma, but listening to the Dhamma is not easy, it is most difficult. We can notice this when we look at people in Thailand or all over the world. When we have the opportunity to develop understanding of the truth we should do so. We should use the word truth, because we do not need something that deceives, that is temporary, because that is of no use; it is not the teaching of the Sammåsambuddha. If people only wish to be contented, they do not need to pay respect to the Buddha; they can read any text that conforts them.

It is most difficult to know what the truth is at this moment. If a person is not the Sammåsambuddha he cannot teach the truth of the reality of this moment. Therefore, we should study so that we understand the truth. Paññå is saòkhårakkhandha, the khandha of formations, that is accumulated and in that way there can be conditions for its development. Is there anybody at this moment who says that he wants to realize nibbåna or that he wishes to go to nibbåna? At this moment we do not know yet what nibbåna is. Although people do not understand yet the reality at this moment, they think that nibbåna is a place and they hope to go there. They wish to go to nibbåna without knowing what nibbåna is. How will they attain nibbana? When paññå knows and understands the truth of realities, paññå will tend towards nibbåna, and then there is no idea of self who is forcing himself to do so. When one knows and understands the truth it will be a condition to gradually incline to nibbåna. Whether this is a slow or a rapid process depends on the power of defilements and on the power of paññå.

There is no self who can force his inclinations he has accumulated for an endlessly long time, hundred thousands of aeons or more. However, the paññå that has been developed will know the truth of dhammas that are non-self, but realities which have been accumulated and arise at this moment. There are conditions that a person is such or such, and therefore nobody can establish any rules with regard to what one should do. People are not identical, each person is unique, and thus each person has his own accumulated inclinations. Therefore nobody can establish any rule that would cause the arising of paññå. The only conditions for paññå to gradually develop are listening to the Dhamma, studying it, investigating the Dhamma and taking part of Dhamma discussions. Some people believe, when they come to listen to the Dhamma, that they have to dress in white, but this is not the right condition for the development of paññå, for correct understanding.

Question: I have a problem in daily life. I am a person who worries and who is tense. I like to sit and concentrate on something in order to get rid of my tenseness, but I can only concentrate, I do not know how to progress further.

Sujin: What do you want to acquire?

Answer: I want to acquire happiness, I hope for a great deal of happiness. I experience a lot of unhappiness in my life and if my suffering can disappear I will be happy and I wish happiness to last for a long time. I think that if I sit and concentrate there will be happiness. I believe that this is wholesome.

Priya: I used to sit and concentrate for a long time, two hours daily, and I thought that this was happiness. I kept on concentrating, but was this real happiness? When I came to study the Dhamma I changed my ideas. I knew that when I concentrated I did not know anything, thus, this did not mean happiness, it was rather ignorance. But during the time I was concentrating I was not unhappy. When I came to study the Dhamma, I realized that I had lobha during the time I was sitting with concentration.

Nina: We can verify everything ourselves. Acharn Sujin speaks about seeing what appears through the eyes, hearing sound that appears through the ears, and we can verify this. Seeing is not the same as thinking about what we have seen. Seeing or hearing are different from thinking of concepts of beings, people, a table or a chair. We can verify everything ourselves through the six doorways of the senses and the mind. There are only six worlds appearing one at a time through these doorways. We think that there are people, beings, a table or a chair, but in reality there are only nåma and rúpa, and we can prove this ourselves.

Nipat: How can we prove this ourselves? By means of which?

Nina: We should listen to the Dhamma very often; we need to hear about seeing and hearing, and then we shall have more understanding. This is a condition for sati to very gradually be aware of the characteristics that appear. However, we should remember that it is not self who develops understanding.

Pradhib: I understand that when someone sits and concentrates, he accumulates akusala.

Sujin: Some people think that it is akusala to sit and concentrate, but I feel that someone simplifies matters when he says that as soon as he is contented and relaxed there must be akusala citta. This shows that if someone does not understand realities, he does not know precisely when there is kusala citta and when akusala citta at the moment of feeling contented. Or someone may erroneously think that there is kusala citta and he may try with attachment to make it arise. In reality kusala citta can arise without the need to sit with concentration. Whenever there is right understanding, it is a kind of kusala. There are many kinds of kusala. Some people think that only giving things away is kusala. However, when one abstains from akusala it is kusala. When we listen to the Dhamma at this moment, there is kusala citta accompanied by paññå. This is kusala of a higher level than kusala of dåna, generosity, or síla, morality. Also other religions teach kusala of the level of dåna and of síla, but they do not teach the development of paññå that understands the true nature of realities; this is only taught in Buddhism. Other religions do not teach that the truth of realities is penetrated through the attainment of enlightenment.

Priya: Kusala of the level of satipaììhåna is much higher than the development of samatha. We should listen to the Dhamma so that we have more understanding. When someone performs meritorious deeds, puñña, there is purity of citta. There are ten kinds of meritorious deeds that can be classified as threefold: as dåna, síla and bhåvanå, mental development. Dåna includes giving, transference of merit, that is, giving others the opportunity to rejoice in one’s kusala, and rejoicing in the kusala of others. Síla includes: abstinence from akusala, kusala through body and speech, the observance of five or eight precepts and kusala such as helping other people.

Nipat: Respectful behaviour through body, speech and mind towards people who are superior in age, in rank or superior with regard to kusala dhamma, is also kusala included in síla.

Jaran: Do we have to remember each subject of the Dhamma we have learnt?

Nipat: We should understand the Dhamma that is within ourselves, not in the texts.

Fongchan: Does listening often to the Dhamma help our understanding?

Sujin: Remembering is not the same as understanding.

Kulvilai : If we listen to Acharn who explains the way to understand realities in daily life, it will help us to have more understanding

Soun Osoth: I know that it is very important to remember the theory of the Dhamma one has learned. In the “Questions of King Milinda” Nagasena speaks about seventeen kinds of sati. Sati that remembers is most important. There can be remembrance with sati. Would Mother Sujin explains this, please?

Nipat: It is useful to remember correctly. But what is the benefit of remembrance?

Soun: It is beneficial for the development of satipaììhåna. We should remember the objects of satipaììhåna.

Nipat: There should be remembrance that leads to understanding. Remembrance of terms will not lead to understanding. When you only remember the terms you will not understand the characteristics of realities.

Sujin: Remembrance is not sati, it is saññå cetasika. When we come across a certain term we should have correct understanding of its meaning. We cannot change the characteristic of the reality conveyed by a certain term. No matter whether saññå arises together with effort or with paññå, saññå is still saññå. There are other cetasikas which also arise together with saññå; saññå can be firm remembrance and that is because paññå cetasika arises together with it. Saññå that is just ordinary remembrance is different from saññå that arises with viriya, effort, or with paññå, and these cases saññå is of a different level. We should not overlook the original meaning of saññå we are familiar with. We should not confuse saññå with sati.

Soun: Saññå can arise with kusala citta or with akusala citta. Sati is a sobhana cetasika. There is a level of sati when we listen to the Dhamma or read the texts and understand the Dhamma. In the “Questions of King Milinda” it is said that while counting there can also be sati. Please would you explain this?

Sujin: We used to remember a great deal, but don’t we also forget what we learned? It makes, however, a great difference if we remember something that we have understood. We shall not forget what we have understood. But if we only remember names, concepts or different topics, don’t we forget? It is useless to follow all the texts without understanding the meaning of those topics and words. When we read certain texts we should know their meaning, we should know why different topics are stated in a specific order, because then we shalll have more understanding. We should know the reason for such classifications. However, it is more important that we understand realities at this moment. If Khun Soun would not hold on to all the things he has memorized and he would consider the realities that are appearing in order to understand them, he could explain the meaning of what is real at this moment by correct understanding. Then it is his own understanding stemming from reading, listening, thinking, investigation, careful consideration and awareness of the characteristics of realities.

Therefore, the real benefit of the study of Buddhism is the understanding of the realities that are appearing. Perhaps we have studied the Tipiìaka a great deal in former lives, but who can remember this? If we in this life do not understand realities, we may try again to memorize them. But it may happen that, as soon as we hear explanations about realities, we immediately understand them and this is conditioned by former moments of listening. That is why we can consider and investigate the characteristic of nåma that is different from the characteristic of rúpa. When somebody speaks about nåma and rúpa we do not think of them as mere names. In some texts the terms nåma and rúpa are translated as name and form and one may wonder what the reason is. One should understand the meaning of the reality of “name”, that is the translation of nåma. Nåma is a Pali term that can be translated as that which bends towards an object ¹, thus, the realities of citta and cetasika which arise because of the apppropriate conditions. Whenever citta and cetasikas arise, they must experience an object, their characteristic is different from the characteristic of rúpa. We should really understand this and not merely remember names and terms, so that we shall not be confused.

Amara: We are different from someone who is dead because for us there is nåma. If we do not study nåma and rúpa more profoundly, we do not know that there is the element, dhåtu, that experiences; we do not know that there is nåma. Because of nåma we are different from someone who is dead.

Jaran: Acharn said that when there is understanding you can remember what you learnt. Did I understand this correctly? When I listen to the Dhamma and I understand what I heard, kusala citta arises. Then there is sati with the level of kusala that is listening to the Dhamma, thus, the level of theoretical understanding. Saññå cetasika that arises with sati of that level will be of such strength that one can remember what one has heard. Is that correct?

Sujin: Saññå accompanies each citta and it depends on conditions what type of citta arises. Saññå accompanies kusala citta of the level of dåna, of síla, of samatha and of satipaììhåna. Thus, the degrees of saññå are different, but saññå is not sati.

Amara: Saññå and sati can arise together, but they perform each their own function.

Soun: All dhammas that arise do so because there are conditions, paccayas, for their arising. These conditions are realities. We should often study the Dhamma. Mahå-kusala cittas are of different degrees, and confidence, saddhå, in the Buddha is of different degrees. Also sati has different degrees: sati arises when we read the scriptures or when we listen to the Dhamma. Saññå, remembrance, arises with sati. I would like to ask what sati arising with the fivefold Path is.

Sujin: It is satipaììhåna. It is of the fivefold Path, without the three factors which are the abstinences ² .

Soun: When sati arises with paññå, the kusala citta is ñåùa-sampayutta (accompanied by paññå), and kusala is of the level of satipaììhåna.

Jaran: What are puñña, merit, and påpa, evil?

Pradip: Puñña are the citta and cetasikas that are kusala of the level of dåna, síla and bhåvanå, including samatha and satipaììhåna. When citta is not engaged with the ten meritorious actions, it is påpa, evil.

Sujin: Påpa are the realities that are not good, not beautiful. Puñña are the realities that are good, that are beautiful. Dhammas are very intricate because they arise and fall away very rapidly. Citta and its accompanying cetasikas arise and fall away together. Sometimes they are kusala, sometimes akusala, and the series of kusala cittas and of akusala cittas alternate with each other extremely rapidly. Sometimes people mistakenly say that at this or that moment there is kusala or akusala. They should study the Dhamma so that they know that when lobha, dosa, moha and other akusala dhammas arise there is påpa, unwholesomeness. Jeaoulsy, isså, and stinginess, macchariya, for example, are characteristics of akusala dhammas. Kusala or puñña is the opposite of akusala, thus, at that moment citta and cetasikas that are beautiful and wholesome arise together. Body and speech are the doorways of kusala citta and of akusala citta. There are not only citta and cetasika, there is also rúpa. If there would only be citta that is kusala or akusala, could other people be troubled? There is rúpa, and thus, when akusala citta arises, there are doorways of kamma, namely, bodily action and speech that are evil. Such action and speech originate from akusala citta and they harm and trouble other people. In reality, when akusala arises someone harms himself first. When akusala arises he does not feel contented and peaceful.

When lobha arises we believe that this is good. Lobha is clinging to and desire for something. When we acquire what we want we are glad, we are absorbed in it and rejoice in it; we believe that it is something good. What we ourselves believe to be valuable is different from what is valuable in the way of the Dhamma. We estimate happy feeling to be valuable. However, in reality, lobha is akusala, it is the reality that clings. People are not satified to cling just a little, they want to cling more intensely, so that they have pleasant feeling accompanying clinging. No matter what they are doing, they desire pleasant feeling, not just indifferent feeling. Thus we see that if we do not study the Dhamma we have wrong understanding of it. When people, for example, do not feel happy, they sit and concentrate. They believe that at such a moment the citta is kusala, but they do not know that there are likely to be both ignorance and clinging at such moments.

If someone has studied the Dhamma, he will more clearly understand that there cannot be lobha, dosa and moha at the moment of kusala citta. When kusala citta arises he will correctly understand what the objective of kusala citta is. It is not easy to know the characteristic of that citta, but when it expresses itself by deeds through body or speech we can know it. However, someone’s understanding should be correct, otherwise he will be misled and have wrong understanding. When we see a poor person and we think of helping him, is there kusala citta or akusala citta? When we think of helping, it is kusala citta, but kusala has not been completed, because we did not perform any action. If kusala that has not been completed would be regarded as an accomplished action, everybody would have a wealth of kusala. When someone thinks of performing kusala, it is not sure that the wholesome action he intends to perform will arise. There are three times, kåla, of kusala: the time before one performs kusala, and then cetanå, intention or volition, is called: pubba cetanå (pubba meaning former); there is the actual time of performing kusala, and then cetanå is called: muñcana cetanå (muñcana meaning emitting or bestowing); there is the time after one has performed kusala, and then cetanå is called: apara cetanå (apara meaning following)³. The citta is kusala, it is pure, when one can help someone else to be free from suffering and to be happier. Kusala are the meritorious actions which can be classified in brief as threefold: dåna, síla and bhåvanå. In the case of the monk, kusala can be classified as síla, samådhi and paññå. Kusala dhammas arise with the citta, they are the dhammas that are good and wholesome. Akusala dhammas arise also with the citta, they are the dhammas that are unwholesome, such as lobha, moha and dosa. Do we have today a great deal of kusala or of akusala? If a person is truthful he is actually taking his refuge in the Dhamma.

Fongchan: Someone may be sincere, but he has akusala time and again. At least he knows that it is important to be sincere.

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 paññå and some unaccompanied by paññå. If we have theoretical understanding of realities but we do not realize their characteristics, can we say that there is paññå?

Sujin: There is paññå 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, bhåvanå, but it is not yet of the degree that satipaììhåna can arise.

Kulvilai: Kusala of the degree of dåna and of síla do not arise easily in daily life. If we understand the characteristics of realities and develop satipaììhåna, 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 paññå 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 saññå 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 dåna, abhaya dåna. 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 dåna, 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 dåna, there is kusala citta, and when we do not forgive there is still anger.

Kulvilai: The performing of abhaya dåna is actually mettå, 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 paññå, namely, pariyatti, theoretical knowledge, paìipatti, practice, and paìivedha, realization.

Question: In what way are these levels of paññå 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: Paññå 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, bodysense and mind-door. Through the eyes only colour 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 paìipatti, 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 paìipatti. But I still think that there is a self who is here.

Sujin: Paìipatti is different from pariyatti. When there is only pariyatti, theoretical understanding, and not paìipatti, 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 paìipatti?

Jaran: Pariyatti.

Sujin: If there is paìipatti, what is it?

Jaran: When a characteristic of reality appears to sati there is paìipatti.

Sujin: That is the difference. We understand the name or the meaning of the word sati. However, when sati arises with dåna 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 satipaììhåna 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 odour appears, smelling-consciousness experiences odour. When flavour is experienced, tasting-consciousness experiences flavour. 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 bodysense and the mind-door. The realities that appear through the bodysense 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 paññå 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 satipaììhåna, but not yet of the level of paìivedha, 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 Tipiìaka it has been stated that seeing Dhamma is seeing the conditions for nåma dhammas and rúpa dhammas. If one is aware of rúpa dhamma there must be paññå that is powerful. At such a moment akusala cannot arise, there is only the dhamma that knows realities as they are. The development of satipaììhåna begins with understanding and considering the body, outside as well as inside. Is thinking of conditions the practice, paìipatti?

Sujin: Thinking is not practising. There are three levels of paññå: paññå of the level of knowledge based on listening, suta-mayå-paññå; paññå of the level of investigation, cintå-mayå-paññå; paññå based on mental development, bhåvanå-mayå-paññå. 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 vipassanå ñåùa. The first stage is knowing the difference between the characteristic of nåma and the characteristic of rúpa, 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 paññå.

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. Paññå 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 bodysense 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 paññå of the level of paìipatti, 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 paññå can develop and realities appear as just dhammas, not self. Paññå should be developed continuously so that it is understood that everything is dhamma and there is no doubt about the characteristics of nåma and rúpa, no matter through which doorway realities appear, through the sense-doors or through the mind-door. When we are seeing and satipaììhåna 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 rúpa 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 . Paññå of the level of satipaììhåna that investigates the characteristics of realities should develop to the degree of paìivedha, the realization of the truth, when realities appear as they are through the mind-door. If paññå has not been developed to that degree it is impossible to penetrate the characteristics of realities.

Jaran: Can paññå 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 paìipatti and paìivedha?

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 colour, sound or thinking. Satipaììhåna 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 paññå 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 paìipatti, practice, is satipaììhåna 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 paññå. We should know that paññå cetasika is a reality that correctly understands the characteristic of what appears. There are many degrees of paññå. Paññå 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 paññå 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 paññå is developed in combination with the study of realities. People should not merely study and then wait for the arising of satipaììhåna 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 paññå 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.

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 vipassanå ñåùa, insight knowledge, which is knowing the difference between nåma and rúpa, nåma-rúpa-pariccheda ñåùa.

Soun: When satipaììhåna arises, one is aware of nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma.

Sujin: Satipaììhåna 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 vipassanå ñåùa can be reached. “Full comprehension of the known” is the pañña that penetrates the true nature of the characteristics of nåma and rúpa that appear, but this is not the beginning stage of satipaììhåna. Satipaììhåna 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 nåma and rúpa.

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 characterstic 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 nåma 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. Paññå which accompanies sati when one just begins to develop satipaììhåna is still very weak, it is merely paññå 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, saññå, 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 paññå 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 satipaììhåna. When satipaììhåna arises there is awareness of the characteristic of the reality that is naturally appearing, and in this way paññå gradually begins to understand that reality. When satipaììhåna arises, there is training in higher síla (adhi-síla-sikkhå), in higher citta or concentration (adhi-citta-sikkhå), and higher paññå (adhi-paññå-sikkhå)¹.

Pramesavan: There can only be paìipatti, 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 rúpa. However, we should have a deeper understanding, we should realize them as dhamma. We learn that the rebirth-consciousness, the paìisandhi-citta, the first citta of a new life, is an element that experiences, nåma dhåtu, different from rúpa arising at the same time. Nobody knows the moment of his rebirth-consciousness, but after that characteristics of rúpa dhammas and nåma dhammas appear. If someone does not study, there is no awareness of them, but if one studies and understands nåma and rúpa, 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 satipaììhåna 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 paìipatti 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 nåma dhamma at this moment is the reality that experiences, the element that experiences. Nåma dhamma is not theory, but there is nåma dhamma while we are seeing now. One may have heard and understood that seeing at this moment is nåma 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 nåma 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 nåma 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 nåma and rúpa. 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 paññå 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 paññå how someone can answer this question. People who had developed paññå 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 paìipatti, 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 bodysense, 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 sotåpanna or even an arahat. We may give the same answer as those people but has pañña reached the same level as their paññå? It depends on conditions what level paññå has reached. When satipaììhåna arises one can begin to understand the difference between sati of the level of dåna or síla and of the level of satipaììhåna. Sati of satipaììhåna has a characteristic that arises and appears. Not a self, but sati is aware of the characteritistics of realities. It is aware of the realities that naturally appear in daily life. Paññå that arises and is conditioned by satipaììhåna is the reality that clearly understands those realities as they are. Paññå is different from sati.

Sati is the reality that is aware, it is not paññå. Sati has the function of awareness from the beginning on, all the time. Whereas paññå has the function of understanding the characteristics of realities while it is gradually developed stage by stage. It depends on the degree paññå to what extent the realities that appear are clearly understood. At this moment everybody experiences hardness and knows that satipaììhåna 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 sotåpanna 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 paìipatti, and this will lead to the level of paìivedha, 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 bhåvanå. We do not expect to cause the arising of satipaììhåna 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 paññå 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.

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 Tipiìaka and the Commentaries, but we should take part of Dhamma discussions and it should be emhasized 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 Tipiìaka in all details during fortyfive years. All people read the same scriptures, but why do they practise 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 Tipiìaka, 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 paññå 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 earsense, 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, evenso 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 satipaììhåna, because there was the foundation of understanding that could condition the arising of satipaììhåna. The Buddha generally taught satipaììhåna when the listeners had already sufficient understanding of the Dhamma. People who have understanding of the Dhamma should continue developing satipaììhåna, that is, awareness of the characteristics of realities. This is actually the development of paññå 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 satipaììhåna, satipaììhåna 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 Tipiìaka 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 Tipiìaka, 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 satipaììhåna is. When someone has understood this he can develop paññå, but it depends on his accumulations to what extent he can develop it. When someone has right understanding and he develops paññå, 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 Tipiìaka. 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 Tipiìaka 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 twentyfour conditions contained in the Paììhåna, 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 rúpa, 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 nåma 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 nåma dhammas. Even though nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma arise and fall away together, their characteristics are different from each other, they cannot be as closely joined as nåma with another nåma. Therefore, nåma and rúpa cannot condition each other by way of association-condition. Nåma and rúpa 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. Nåma-dhamma is a condition for rúpa-dhamma and rúpa-dhamma is a condition for nåma-dhamma by way of dissociation-condition, vippayutta paccaya. Thus, they cannot condition each other by being closely joined together, such as nåma that is a condition for another nåma, 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 paññå.

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 Tipiìaka 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... cognised 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 relinquisment, 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 jhåna, but sees that these are “constructed”, conditioned phenomena. He sees their disadvantage, grasps after nothing in the world and attains nibbåna. 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 paññå 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 sotåpanna, 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 paìipatti, 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 paññå 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, saññå, was rúpa, he did not know that it was nåma. 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 satipaììhåna, 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 satipaììhåna. He has already sufficiently studied Dhamma on the theoretical level, and now he should combine the study of the theory with the development of satipaììhåna.

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