Tokyo
April 10 1971

Dear Mr. G.,

You asked me about the way to know the difference between nama and rupa. You find it difficult to realize their different characteristics. I will first summarize the points that you have doubts about:
When feeling hot, there are both nama and rupa. What is the characteristic of body-consciousness (kaya-vinnana)? What is the characteristic of bodily feeling which accompanies body-consciousness? What are the characteristics of other feelings besides bodily feeling which arise at other moments? What is the characteristic of the rupa which is heat?

These are questions which are bound to arise when we learn about different namas and rupas and we begin to be aware of them. There are different levels of understanding of realities. First there should be theoretical understanding about nama and rupa, and then one can begin to be aware of their characteristics when they appear. Through awareness direct understanding of realities can be developed.

Body-consciousness is the citta which experiences rupas which impinge on the body-sense. These rupas can be the following:

the "Element of Earth" or solidity, to be experienced as hardness or softness;
the "Element of Fire", to be experienced as heat or cold;
the "Element of Wind", to be experienced as motion or pressure.

These rupas impinge on the bodysense all the time. The body-sense through which these rupas can be experienced is also rupa. The bodysense does not know anything, but it is a condition for the nama which experiences tangible object. The bodysense is to be found all over the body, except in those parts which are insensitive, such as hair or nails. The bodysense is not only on the outside of the body, but also inside the body. The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 52) states that it is to be found everywhere, like a liquid that soaks a layer of cotton. Also in those parts of the body we call "kidney" or "liver" there is bodysense; pain can be felt in these parts. When we notice any bodily sensation, be it ever so slight, it shows that there is impact on the bodysense. When we remember this it can be a condition for awareness of different kinds of realities, also when the impact on the bodysense is very slight, or inside the body.

All day long rupas impinge on the bodysense but we do not realize that they are only rupas. We always think of a being, the body or a thing which is touched, but these do not impinge on the bodysense. The experience of tangible object through the body-sense is one moment, and the thinking of stories about that object is another moment. There are different realities appearing at different moments through different doorways. This is the truth and it can be proven by our own experience.

Body-consciousness which experiences tangible object impinging on the bodysense is vipaka-citta, a citta which is the result of kamma. When it experiences a pleasant tangible object it is the result of kusala kamma and when it experiences an unpleasant object it is the result of akusala kamma. When the object which impinges on the bodysense is pleasant the body-consciousness is accompanied by pleasant (bodily) feeling, and when the object is unpleasant the body-consciousness is accompanied by painful (bodily) feeling. There cannot be indifferent bodily feeling. The object is unpleasant when the temperature which impinges on the bodysense is too cold or too hot, and it is pleasant when the temperature is just right.

The pleasant feeling or painful feeling which accompanies body-consciousness is nama, it experiences something. It is different from rupa which does not experience anything. Since body-consciousness is vipaka, the accompanying feeling is also vipaka.

Body-consciousness which experiences tangible object arises in a process of cittas which experience that object. Each citta in a process performs it own function while it experiences the object which is impinging. The body-consciousness which is vipaka-citta falls away immediately and it is succeeded by other cittas. There are cittas arising within the process which can be kusala citta or akusala citta and they experience the same object as the body-consciousness. When they are kusala cittas they can be accompanied by happy (mental) feeling or by indifferent feeling, and when they are akusala cittas, they can be accompanied by happy (mental) feeling, by indifferent feeling or by unhappy (mental) feeling. These feelings can be called "mental feeling" in order to differentiate them from the bodily feeling which accompanies body-consciousness. As we have seen, bodily feeling is not rupa, it is nama. It can be called bodily feeling since it accompanies body-consciousness.

Sometimes we have an idea that painful feeling and aversion which can arise shortly afterwards can hardly be separated. However, they are different realities arising because of different conditions. When we burn ourselves the heat, which is an unpleasant tangible object, impinges on the bodysense and it is experienced by body-consciousness which is accompanied by painful bodily feeling. At that moment there is no dislike, the body-consciousness which is vipaka-citta, the result of kamma, merely experiences the unpleasant object. The painful feeling which accompanies the body-consciousness is also vipaka. It merely feels, it does not dislike the object. The citta with aversion, the dosa-mula-citta, which is accompanied by mental unpleasant feeling arises later on. It experiences the object with aversion, it is akusala citta. When sati arises it can be mindful of one reality at a time, and thus gradually different characteristics of realities can be known. If we try to "catch" realities and if we have desire to know whether the reality which appears is citta, feeling, rupa or any other phenomenon, there is thinking with attachment, not mindfulness.

You wrote that you find that attachment, lobha, and aversion, dosa, can be known more easily than seeing or hearing. Can we say that anything is easy? We may think that it is easy to know lobha and dosa but do we realize their characteristics when they appear? Or are we merely thinking about them? Do we know them as conditioned namas, not self or is there still "my lobha" and "my dosa"? We should realize lobha and dosa also when they are of a lesser degree. For example, when there is seeing there is bound to be clinging to what is seen or clinging to seeing, arising closely after the seeing. When we hear a sound which is loud there can be a slight aversion but we may not even notice it. When there is lobha or dosa there are nama and rupa, there are so many realities we are still ignorant of. Lobha and dosa condition rupas. Don't we look different when we are angry or when we are glad? When we are afraid or when we dislike something we may notice bodily phenomena conditioned by citta. It is not easy to distinguish between the different characteristics of realities. We tend to join different realities into a "whole" of "my personality" and thus we will not know them as they are, only nama and rupa, devoid of self.

In your letter you gave examples of moments of awareness. You write that when walking you are aware of the feeling of pressing the ground. Is there not thinking of a concept of "pressing the ground"? Do you picture yourself as walking? That is a way of thinking. The object one thinks of at that moment is a concept or idea, not a reality. We may easily mislead ourselves and take thinking for awareness. When you touch hardness and you know that it is hard is there clear understanding of the true nature of the rupa which is hardness? There may still be "something" hard there which seems to stay. Does the ground seem to stay? Even when one does not name it "ground" or "feet" there can still be wrong understanding of reality. The rupa which is hardness can be experienced through the bodysense and it arises and falls away, it cannot stay. Hardness seems to stay so long as we have not understood the truth of impermanence. We cling to sati and we want to hold on to realities in order to know them. We should not expect there to be full understanding of nama and rupa which arise and fall away, but we can learn to be aware of one characteristic of reality at a time when it appears. When we remember that realities and also awareness cannot last we will be less inclined to try to be aware and to hold on to realities. When it is the right time for sati it arises and then it can be aware of any reality which appears. We cannot plan to be aware of such or such reality.

You write that when eating you are aware of flavour. There is not only flavour, there is also the nama which experiences flavour, otherwise flavour could not appear. Do we know already the difference between nama and rupa? There can be mindfulness of only one reality at a time, but it seems that flavour and the experience of it appear together. When understanding develops one reality can be known at a time, but now there is still confusion. You say that you can be aware of the movement of the jaws when eating. Again, is there not thinking of the idea of "my jaws" instead of being aware of one nama or rupa at a time? When we become more familiar with the characteristics of nama and rupa we will be less inclined to name them or to select a particular object of awareness.

Some people may be inclined to sit and wait for the appearing of hearing, sound, like or dislike. In that way realities will not be known. We can go on with all the things we usually do and we do not have to do anything special in order to have awareness. For instance, when one is writing, there may be sound, hearing, like, dislike or any other reality. When moving the hand hardness or motion may appear and these realities can be object of awareness. We should not mind what kind of reality presents itself. One may be trying to "catch" the difference between hearing and sound, seeing and visible object, but in that way realities will not be known. Sometimes there may be mindfulness of rupa, sometimes of nama, it all depends on the sati.

I am glad to hear that while you talk there can also be awareness. One may be inclined to think that it is impossible to be aware while talking, since one has to think of what one is going to say. Now you can prove to yourself that also at such moments there are namas and rupas appearing. The thinking which occurs while one is talking is also a reality which can be object of awareness. If there never is awareness of thinking one cannot learn that thinking is anatta.

Our life consists of nama and rupa. When there is the development of awareness everything appears as usual, but before we did not know that what appears is a characteristic of reality. There is hearing, seeing or feeling all the time, but when there is no awareness we do not realize that they are only conditioned realities, namas. There is a reality at every moment but when we are forgetful we do not realize this. We should develop right understanding until we are familiar with the characteristics which appear, until there is no more doubt about them. When we are hungry or when we have a headache there are different kinds of nama and rupa. There is rupa such as hardness, there are namas such as painful bodily feeling or unhappy mental feeling, there are many realities appearing. If there is no awareness when there is painful feeling we will think that pain can last for a while. When there is mindfulness we can find out that there are many other kinds of nama and rupa presenting themselves besides the pain caused by the impact on the bodysense. Pain does not stay, it falls away immediately, and then it arises again.

We find our likes and dislikes very important. We let ourselves be carried away by like and dislike instead of being aware of different realities. We read in the Kindred Sayings ( IV, Salayatana-vagga, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Third Fifty, Chapter III, § 130, Haliddaka):

Once the venerable Kaccana the Great was staying among the folk of Avanti, at Osprey's Haunt, on a sheer mountain crag.

Then the housefather Haliddakani came to the venerable Kaccana the Great. Seated at one side he said this:-

'It has been said by the Exalted One, sir, "Owing to diversity in elements arises diversity of contact. Owing to diversity of contact arises diversity of feeling". Pray, sir, how far is this so?'

'Herein, housefather, after having seen a pleasant object with the eye, a monk comes to know as such eye-consciousness that is a pleasant experience. Owing to contact that is pleasant to experience arises happy feeling.

'After having seen with the eye an object that is unpleasant, a monk comes to know as such eye-consciousness that is an unpleasant experience. Owing to contact that is unpleasant to experience arises unhappy feeling.

'After having seen with the eye an object that is of indifferent effect, a monk comes to know as such eye-consciousness that experiences an object which is of indifferent effect. Owing to contact that is indifferent to experience arises feeling that is indifferent.

'So also, housefather, after having heard a sound with the ear, smelt a scent with the nose, tasted a flavour with the tongue, experienced tangible object with the body, cognized with the mind a mental object, that is pleasant. Owing to contact that is pleasant to experience arises happy feeling. But after having cognized a mental object which is unpleasant. Owing to contact that is unpleasant to experience arises unhappy feeling. Again, after having cognized with the mind a mental object that is indifferent in effect, he comes to know as such mind-consciousness that experiences an object which is of indifferent effect. Owing to contact that is indifferent arises feeling that is indifferent.

'Thus, housefather, owing to diversity in elements arises diversity of contact. Owing to diversity of contact arises diversity of feeling.'

We do not come to know seeing, visible object, contact and feeling "as such" merely by just thinking about them. Panna should realize the characteristic of seeing when it presents itself; it should realize seeing as nama which arises because of conditions, not self. The nama which sees is different from the rupa which is visible object. When we learn to see realities as elements which arise because of conditions and which we cannot control, we will be less carried away by pleasant or unpleasant objects. We are attached to the feelings which arise on account of the objects which are experienced. Feeling accompanies each citta but we are mostly forgetful of feeling. Is there any understanding of the feeling which presents itself now? If there never is awareness of feeling there cannot be detachment from the idea of "my feeling".

There are realities appearing through the six doors, wherever we are. There is no need to go to a quiet place in order to know them. When we are in the company of many people, for example at a party, there are only realities appearing through the six doors and gradually we can learn to be aware of them. We see pleasant objects and on account of these we feel happy. However, we can remember that it is only feeling which feels, feeling which has arisen because of pleasant contact. We will see or hear unpleasant objects and owing to the unpleasant contact unhappy feeling is bound to arise. We will get tired when we have to stand for a long time while we listen to speeches and we may feel tense.There are only different realities appearing such as hardness or aversion. All the time there is diversity of elements, diversity of contact and owing to that contact diversity of feeling.

We can consider the Dhamma wherever we are and if there is no clinging to sati there can be conditions for its arising. There cannot yet be the precise knowledge of realities but we can begin to learn.


With metta,

Nina van Gorkom



 Glossary

December 2004