Tokyo
15 January 1971

Dear Mr. G.,

You asked me questions about mindfulness in daily life. You said that you can be aware while shaving, but that you are not yet sure about the experience of different characteristics of nama (mental phenomena) and rupa (physical phenomena). I would like to quote from the Kindred Sayings (IV, Salayatana-vagga, Second Fifty, Chapter IV, § 84, Transitory). We read that Ananda asked the Buddha what the world is:

"The world! The world!" is the saying, lord. Pray, how far, lord, does this saying go?

What is transitory by nature, Ananda, is called "the world" in the Ariyan discipline. And what, Ananda, is transitory by nature? The eye, Ananda, is transitory by nature...objects..tongue..mind is transitory by nature, mind-states, mind-consciousness, mind-contact, whatsoever pleasant feeling or unpleasant feeling or indifferent feeling arises owing to mind-contact, that also is transitory by nature. What is thus transitory, Ananda, is called "the world" in the Ariyan discipline.

We cannot yet directly experience the impermanence of nama and rupa, but we will know the "world in the sense of the ariyan discipline" if we develop right understanding of absolute realities, paramattha dhammas, by being mindful of their characteristics as they appear one at a time through the six doorways.

We are used to thinking that there are the world of our work, of our home, of meditation, so many kinds of worlds. Actually we should consider what the realities are which can be directly experienced. These are the nama and rupa which appear through the six doors. There is seeing-consciousness, which experiences visible object through the eye-door. There is hearing-consciousness which experiences sound through the ear-door. There is smelling-consciousness which experiences odour through the nose. There is tasting-consciousness which experiences flavour through the tongue. There is body-consciousness which experiences tangible object through the body-door. There is mind-consciousness which experiences mind-objects through the mind-door. Thus, there are actually six worlds appearing through the six doors. It will take a long time to develop a clearer understanding of the six worlds. Thinking about them is not enough. In being mindful of different characteristics we will come to understand "the world in the sense of the ariyan discipline" through our own experience.

Coming back to your example of shaving, you notice different moments. Can you notice that there are different realities with different characteristics? When you look into the mirror, touch the razor, when you are thinking , could you simply, without any need to "detect" nama and rupa, just realize that these different moments are different experiences which have different characteristics ? We should know that there are different realities. When you are looking into the mirror is there no seeing? It experiences just what appears through the eyesense, visible object. When you close your eyes the reality which appeared when you were looking does not appear anymore. Considering this is the first step to know what realities are. Later on one will learn more through direct experience.

You write that you experience "touching the razor". Which realities appear? Cold, motion or hardness? These are physical phenomena which can be experienced through touch. Or does a nama appear which experiences one of these rupas? Can you realize that they have different characteristics? This will help you to know the world in the ariyan sense.

When you eat breakfast you touch the fork. We call it "fork", but what can you directly experience through the bodysense? The rupas which are cold, hardness or motion? You can learn that, no matter whether we touch a razor or a fork, rupas such as cold, hardness or motion can be experienced through the bodysense. It is not you who experiences them, but only a type of nama which experiences them. Through the eyesense the rupa which is visible object or colour can be experienced. The world of tangible object is different from the world appearing through the eyesense.

You might say, "But I experience the razor and the fork. I know when I touch the razor and when I touch the fork." How do you know what is a razor and what is a fork? Because of remembrance or perception, sanna, a mental factor, cetasika, which arises with every moment of consciousness, citta. There isn't any experience which is not accompanied by sanna. Because of sanna we remember things, we remember what different things are used for. We remember, "when we do this, it has that effect". Sanna is another reality, it is a kind of nama, not self.

In the "absolute sense", or, in the "ariyan discipline", there is no fork, no razor, no mirror; these are only ideas we can think of, but they are not realities. When there is seeing, it is visible object which is experienced; when there is touching, it is hardness, coldness or another rupa presenting itself through the bodysense , which is experienced. When we remember that we call a particular thing a "fork" or a "razor", or when we remember how to use them, the reality presenting itself at that moment is a kind of nama. Realities are experienced through the six doorways, presenting themselves one at a time. They are not a person, not a thing which can stay, they are nama and rupa which arise and then fall away immediately. This is the truth which can be directly experienced, this is the "world" in the ariyan discipline.

Is this not more simple than you would have thought at first? There is thinking when you are shaving. Is that not different from seeing, from touching? Attachment or aversion may arise on account of what is experienced. Are these not realities different from seeing, from visible object, from the experience of tangible object or from the rupas which are experienced through the bodysense? It would be helpful to realize that all these realities which appear are different, that they have different characteristics. They are nama and rupa which arise because of conditions, not self. We cling so much to concepts and ideas which we convey to others by means of conventional terms in language. We cling to sanna, we are infatuated with all the ideas and stories we remember, such as razor, fork, person. This blinds us to the world in the ariyan sense. It prevents us from understanding nama and rupa as they present themselves through the six doors, one at a time.

You wrote that you often wake up with mindfulness. I often wake up with attachment, lobha, or aversion, dosa. For example, I think, "What difficult thing do I have to do today?" Sometimes I have to hear unpleasant words from other people, and then I feel unhappy. Why? Because at those moments I do not see the world in the ariyan sense. When we hear unpleasant words, the hearing is only vipaka (citta which is result of kamma), it is nama which arises just for a moment and then falls away immediately. When I have aversion, there is akusala citta (unwholesome consciousness), which is another kind of nama. In the ariyan sense there is no "I" who experiences, there is no experiencer. There is not this or that person who says unpleasant words to me. There are only nama and rupa. There is seeing, hearing, thinking and other phenomena which appear for a moment and are then gone. There are different feelings arising because of different conditions. The teachings are very helpful for the understanding of our life. When we listen to the sutta texts we can be reminded to be aware of realities.

You find that there is more awareness when you do things which do not require so much attention, things which are done automatically, like shaving. You wrote "Shaving is there. It presents itself as if done by someone else."

"Shaving is there", these are words you use to describe a whole situation you can think of, but which are the realities you can directly experience? There is the world in the ariyan sense: different phenomena presenting themselves through the six doors. Seeing, touching or thinking are realities, but shaving is not a reality. "Shaving presents itself as if done by someone else". What is this? It is a thought, that is all. We should not cling to special sensations, they are only namas which do not stay. Thinking is only one kind of reality which appears, and then there are other realities.

Is it true that there is more awareness when we do things which do not require much attention? At the Japanese school I have to be attentive to the teacher who asks me questions in Japanese which I have to answer, applying the grammar I learnt. We should not exclude beforehand the arising of awareness in such situations. If there can be awareness sometimes of different realities one can begin to develop understanding of them. Mindfulness arises when there are conditions for its arising and we cannot say beforehand, "In such circumstances it will arise, in such circumstances it will not arise". Awareness is anatta, not self. We may think that it cannot arise in particular circumstances, but this is only our thinking. We should realize such a moment of thinking as only a kind of nama which arises because of conditions.

Sati, mindfulness, of the Eightfold Path will not arise often when it has not been accumulated enough yet. We may take for mindfulness what is actually only a sensation of quietness and "some notion of what is going on", as you write. But this is not knowing a characteristic of a reality which appears through one of the six doors, it is merely pondering at leisure.

When hardness is experienced through touch we may take for sati what is actually attachment. Do we wish to have many moments of sati? Then we are clinging and right understanding cannot develop. Our aim should be to learn more about the realities which appear one at a time. We cling to visible object, sound and all the other sense objects. We may not notice it that we cling to them, but is it not true that we are usually absorbed by these objects and think about them for a long time? We think that we see people and different things, but we can learn that what appears through eyes is only visible object. We think that we hear the voice of someone, but what appears through the ears is only sound, there is no person in the sound. We can learn to consider the phenomena of our daily life as only different realities which appear one at a time.

There can be "study" of visible object, sound, hearing and other realities when they appear one at a time. The word "study" is appropriate, because it is a learning process. It is not theoretical study but study of nama and rupa in daily life. We should not have expectations about the arising of clear, direct understanding of nama and rupa. When there are expectations there is attachment to an idea of self who is successful, whereas mindfulness and right understanding should lead to detachment from the idea of self. We should remember that mindfulness of nama and rupa accompanies kusala citta and that kusala citta does not arise as often as akusala citta. There are countless more moments of akusala citta than kusala citta. If we remember this we will be less inclined to false expectations. When we have understood that there should be study of the characteristics of nama and rupa in order to have more understanding of them, we will stop wondering what mindfulness is or doubting about it.

There is usually forgetfulness of nama and rupa, but sometimes there can be kusala citta accompanied by mindfulness of the reality which appears at the present moment, a nama or a rupa. We cannot do anything special to cause the arising of sati because sati is anatta. It arises because of its appropriate conditions. The right conditions for sati are: listening to the Dhamma, theoretical understanding of nama and rupa and deeply considering the Dhamma in our life. One may be discouraged about it that, although one has listened for many years, there is hardly any awareness in daily life. When one merely listens but does not deeply consider what one heard and does not test the meaning of it, there are no conditions for awareness. Through considering the Dhamma one builds up one's own understanding, one is not dependent on other people. Everybody should consider nama and rupa in his own situation.

You asked in your letter what the difference is between sati and thinking. There can be thinking with kusala citta and with akusala citta. Most of the time there is thinking with clinging or with aversion. When there is thinking in the right way about nama and rupa it can condition right awareness later on, but we do not know when. When we think about sati we will not know its characteristic, but when right mindfulness of nama and rupa arises we will know what sati is. We can notice that there are countless moments of thinking in a day, and when there is thinking it is time to study the characteristic of thinking. Then we can come to know it as a nama which arises because of its own conditions, not self. It is the thinking which thinks.

"Sometimes sati seems to be contemporaneous with its object, sometimes later", you write. We should be careful and not mistake thinking for sati. When there is study with awareness of one reality at a time, the reality which appears, one does not think about sati as being contemporaneous with its object or not. There is at that moment only the characteristic of the nama or rupa which appears.

You want to know when in the process of cittas sati arises. Sati has to accompany kusala citta, but it can be mindful also of akusala citta. When for example aversion, dosa, arises, it can be object of mindfulness. Cittas succeed one another very rapidly and after the dosa has fallen away there can be in another process kusala cittas with sati. Sati can then be mindful of the dosa which has fallen away. If there is unpleasant feeling now can there not be study of its characteristic, in order to know it as not self, not my unpleasant feeling? We are inclined to take feeling for self, but when we understand that feelings arise because of conditions we will be less inclined to take them for mine or self. Sometimes I take things to heart and I have unpleasant feeling, sometimes not. This is because of different conditions. We should learn that there is no self who can control feelings. We do not have to think of processes when there is the study of different characteristics. All that matters is to know the world in the ariyan sense. This world is a new world to us since we used to know only the world of conventional truth, the world of self, people and possessions.

When there is no development of understanding of nama and rupa, akusala cittas will arise very often: we are infatuated with the objects we experience, we have aversion towards them or there is ignorance about realities. When we, for example, see a teapot, we may be ignorant of the six worlds in the ariyan sense. When we are confused as to the different doorways, we think that what presents itself through the eye-door is a teapot and we take it for something which stays. However, through the eye-door it is only visible object that presents itself, just for a moment. When we touch the teapot, the rupas which are hardness, softness, heat or cold may present themselves. In order to know realities as they are we should be aware of them as they present themselves through the different doorways, one at a time. Like and dislike are again different phenomena and we should not confuse them with seeing or visible object. Thinking of the concept "teapot" is again another reality, a type of nama.

Whatever nama or rupa appears can be object of mindfulness and thus right understanding can develop. If there is preference for particular types of nama or rupa which seem to be so clear, there is clinging. We should learn different characteristics of nama and rupa as we go along in daily life; when walking, standing, getting up, taking a bath, eating, listening or talking. Only thus will there be the disintegration of the "self ". We will know the world in the ariyan sense. We read in the Kindred Sayings (IV, Salayatana-vagga, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Third Fifty, Chapter IV, § 136) that the Buddha said to the monks:

Devas and mankind, monks, delight in objects, they are excited by objects. It is owing to the instability, the coming to an end, the ceasing of objects, monks, that devas and mankind live woefully. They delight in sounds, scents, savours, in touch, they delight in mind-states, and are excited by them. It is owing to the instability, the coming to an end, the ceasing of mind-states, monks, that devas and mankind live woefully.
But the Tathagata, monks, who is arahat, a Fully-enlightened One, seeing, as they really are, both the arising and the destruction, the satisfaction, the misery and the way of escape from objects,-he delights not in objects, takes not pleasure in them, is not excited by them. It is owing to the instability, the coming to an end, the ceasing of objects that the Tathagata dwells at ease.

Is this real life or not? When we do not see things as they are we are enslaved. How did the Buddha become free? By fully knowing realities, by knowing their characteristics as they appear through the six doors.


With metta,

Nina van Gorkom

 Glossary

December 2004