Tokyo
June 15 1971

Dear Mr. G.,

You found it difficult to be aware while doing complicated things. I will quote from your letter:

'When I do things which can be performed automatically, like shaving, eating and walking, there can be awareness. But when I do complicated things like remembering a combination of numbers in order to open a safe, there cannot be awareness. I find that a special effort is needed for awareness of nama and rupa. While I have to exert myself to do complicated things I have no energy left for awareness. When I, for example, study a foreign language and I make an effort to memorize the words, I exclude all other things from my mind. At such moments I could not be aware.'

Shaving, walking, eating, opening a safe, all these things we can do because there are conditions to be able to do them. If you had not been taught you would not know how to open a safe. Remembering something is nama, arising because of conditions. If we forget something, that also depends on conditions. The more we understand that realities are only nama and rupa, arising because of their own conditions, the less will there be hindrances to awareness. Realities such as visible object, hardness or feeling arise already because of their own conditions and you can begin to consider their different characteristics. You should not think of having to make an effort for sati because then there is still a notion of self who is aware. Sati can arise naturally in your daily life. When there is the study with awareness of one reality at a time there is a beginning of understanding. One should not try to hold on to realities in order to study them, because they do not stay.

We believe that realities are the way we experience them, but in fact we experience them in a distorted way. It seems to us that realities such as hardness or visible object stay because their arising and falling away has not been realized yet. Their impermanence cannot be realized so long as panna has not yet been developed to that stage. We know in theory that there is no self, but we still cling to the idea of self who is aware. We may take energy or effort for self. Effort or energy (viriya) is a cetasika, a mental factor which arises with many cittas, though not with each type. It arises with the citta and falls away together with it. When it accompanies kusala citta it is kusala and when it accompanies akusala citta it is akusala. There is no self who can exert control over effort, who can cause it to be kusala. When there is right awareness of a nama or rupa which appears through one of the six doors, there is already right effort accompanying the kusala citta. We do not have to try or to think of effort. When there is still wrong view, we may think that we cannot be aware while doing complicated things. We may think that at such moments awareness is more difficult than when we are walking or doing things which do not require much attention. In reality there is no difference. If one believes that there is a difference, one does not know what right awareness is. If there is less of a preconceived idea that in particular situations awareness is impossible, there can be awareness also while doing complicated things. We may be absorbed in what we are doing, but that doesn't matter. Being absorbed is a reality, it can be known as only a type of nama. Realities appear already because of their own conditions, and gradually we can learn to study their characteristics.

Misunderstandings are bound to arise as to what awareness really is and because of these misunderstandings people think that it is impossible to be aware in daily life. Someone wrote, for instance, that awareness is the same as keeping oneself under constant observation. We should observe ourselves in action, he said, and this can be done quite simply by asking oneself, "What am I doing?". He thought that in this way we learn to be aware of what we are doing and that this constitutes awareness.

The word awareness in conventional language has a meaning which is different from awareness, sati, of the Eightfold Path. When we ask ourselves, "What am I doing?", what is the reality at that moment? There are many types of citta which think at such moments. If we do not realize that it is nama which thinks while we ask ourselves, "What am I doing?", the wrong view of self will not be eradicated. There is only thinking about the self who is performing different actions.

There is no sati of the Eightfold Path, there is no development of understanding of the different characteristics of nama and rupa. When we are reading and we answer the question, "What am I doing?", with, "I am reading", without development of understanding, we live only in the world of conventional truth. We will continue to be ignorant of the absolute truth, the truth about nama and rupa. When we are reading, is there not the nama which experiences visible object, is there not the rupa which is visible object, is there not the nama which thinks about the meaning of what is read, and should these realities not be known? It is the same when we are walking, talking or eating, if we only know "I am walking, talking and eating", it is not at all helpful for the development of panna. There is still the wrong view of self. While we are walking, talking and eating there are nama and rupa appearing through the six doors, and right understanding can be developed of them. Some people believe that they have to slow down all their movements in order to be able to be aware. Is there desire for awareness? If one is not aware naturally in one's daily life panna cannot develop. The "Satipatthana sutta" (Middle Length Sayings I, no. 10) reminds us to be aware in our daily life, no matter what we are doing.

We read under the section of mindfulness of the body, regarding the postures:

'And again, monks, a monk, when he is walking, comprehends, "I am walking"; or when he is standing still, comprehends, "I am standing still"; or when he is sitting down, comprehends, "I am sitting down"; or when he is lying down, comprehends, "I am lying down". So that however his body is disposed he comprehends that it is like that. Thus he fares along contemplating the body in the body internally, or he fares along contemplating the body in the body externally, or he fares along contemplating the body in the body internally and externally...'

The commentary to this sutta, the "Papancasudani" [6] explains the words, "When he is going, a monk understands 'I am going'" as follows:

'In this matter of going, readily do dogs, jackals and the like, know when they move on that they are moving. But this instruction on the modes of deportment was not given concerning similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging to animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not knock out the perception of a soul and neither becomes a subject of meditation nor the development of satipatthana.'

The commentary explains that there is no living being. There is going on account of the diffusion of the process of oscillation (motion) born of mental activity. There are only nama and rupa which arise because of conditions. When the monk is walking, standing, sitting or lying down, he contemplates the body in the body, he does not take the body for self. He is mindful of the realities which appear.

We read in the following section of the sutta, the section on clear comprehension:

'And again, monks, a monk when he is setting out or returning is one acting in a clearly conscious way; when he is looking in front or looking around...when he has bent in or stretched out (his arm)...when he is carrying his outer cloak, bowl and robe...when he is obeying the calls of nature...when he is walking, standing, sitting, asleep, awake, talking, silent, he is one acting in a clearly conscious way. Thus he fares along contemplating the body in the body internally...externally...internally and externally...'

If one thinks of the body as a "whole" the arising and falling away of rupas cannot be realized and one will continue to cling to the idea of "my body". During all one's activities there can be the development of right understanding, so that wrong view can be eradicated.

Sati is not: observing oneself in action. Sati arises with each "beautiful" (sobhana) citta and its function is being non-forgetful of what is wholesome. Sati is different from the cetasika sanna, remembrance or "perception", which arises with each citta. Sanna recognizes or "marks" the object, so that it can be recognized later on. Sati of the Eightfold Path is mindful of the reality which presents itself at the present moment, and then right under-standing of it can be developed. We do not have to think of sati, it arises when there are conditions for it. When right understanding of a reality which presents itself is being developed, there is also sati which is mindful, non-forgetful, of that reality. For example, when the characteristic of hardness appears and it is realized as a kind of rupa, it is evident that there is sati. When we think, "I am eating" and we are not aware of different namas and rupas which appear, there is a concept of self who is eating. When right understanding is developed the "self" is broken up into different nama-elements and rupa-elements. In order that right under-standing can be developed there should be mindfulness of a characteristic of nama or rupa, not mindfulness without knowing anything.

If one thinks that sati means keeping oneself under constant observation, one is bound to believe that it is impossible to be aware while doing things which require special attention. One may be urged to make special efforts in order to create conditions for a great deal of sati. Any speculation about creating conditions for the arising of sati distracts from the study of the reality appearing right at this moment. It is thinking of the future instead of being aware of aversion now, seeing now, thinking now. There is clinging to an idea of self who can control awareness, and in that way there will not be detachment from the concept of self.

If we understand more clearly that our life consists of nama and rupa which arise because of conditions, we will be less absorbed in the idea of self while we do complicated things. Also at such moments there are only nama and rupa. We may believe that while we are talking there cannot be awareness, since we have to think about what we are saying. There is sound and can there not be awareness of it? It is citta, not self, which thinks about what we are going to say and which conditions sound. There can be awareness of realities in between thinking. I noticed that while I am writing the Chinese script (Kanji), it is possible to hear other people talking or to think of other things. This shows that there are many different types of cittas which succeed one another so rapidly that it seems that they occur all at the same time. Since there can be hearing or thinking in between the writing of Kanji, there can also be awareness in between.

You mentioned that you could not be aware while learning a foreign language. Learning a foreign language can teach us about reality. When we learn a foreign language such as Japanese we cannot in the beginning translate quickly. Later on we acquire skill and it seems that we do it automatically. When we hear a Japanese word we immediately know the meaning, it seems that hearing and knowing the meaning occur at the same time. However, we know that they are different moments of citta. Also when we hear words spoken in our own language there is hearing and then "translating" going on, we interpret the sounds so that we understand the meaning. The process of translation goes on very rapidly, it goes on the whole day. When there is seeing, visible object is experienced, but immediately we translate what we see, we interpret it, and then we discern people and things.

If we consider the process of translation we can understand more clearly that seeing and hearing are different from thinking. The moments that we do not translate seeing and hearing can be studied. Thus, no matter whether you learn a foreign language or whether you are merely thinking after seeing or hearing, there is translating going on time and again. No matter what we do, there are nama and rupa, and sometimes sati can arise and be aware of them. We cannot control the cittas which arise. They arise and perform their own functions. So long as we believe that we can create conditions for the arising of sati, the right awareness will not arise. One may believe that there is sati when there is only ignorance of realities.

Awareness can arise if there are conditions for it. The conditions are listening to the Dhamma and considering it. We may believe that we have listened and considered enough, but, when there are still misunderstandings about the Eightfold Path it is evident that our listening and considering have not been enough. We should not assume too soon that we studied enough. We have accumulated ignorance for aeons and therefore it will take aeons before it can be eradicated. This should not discourage us, but we should continue to listen, to read and to study, and we should consider thoroughly what we learnt. We should consider the Dhamma with regard to our own experiences in daily life.

Rahula, the Buddha's son, attained arahatship when he was only twenty years old. For him the conditions necessary for enlightenment were fulfilled: he associated with the right person, the Buddha, he listened to the Dhamma, he considered it and he developed the Eightfold Path. We read in the Middle Length Sayings (II, no. 62, "Greater Discourse on an Exhortation to Rahula") that Rahula asked the Buddha how mindfulness of breathing, when it is developed and made much of, is of great fruit, of great advantage. The Buddha did not speak immediately about mindfulness of breathing, he first taught Rahula about the elements of solidity, cohesion, heat, motion and space. No matter whether these elements are internal or external, they should not be taken for self. The Buddha then said to Rahula:

'Develop the mind-development that is like the earth, Rahula. For, from developing the mind-development that is like the earth, Rahula, agreeable and disagreeable sensory impressions that have arisen, taking hold of your thought, will not persist.'

In the same way the Buddha told Rahula to develop the mind-development that is like water, fire, wind and space (air). What are we doing when there are agreeable or disagreeable sense-impressions that take hold of us? Do we take them for self, or can we realize them as only elements? Rahula had to be mindful of all realities appearing through the six doors in order to see them as only elements.

Further on we read that the Buddha encouraged Rahula to the development of lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, equanimity, the contemplation of the foul and the perception of impermanence. It was only after the Buddha had taught all this to Rahula that he spoke about mindfulness of breathing. Rahula did not apply himself to this subject without knowing anything. While he applied himself to mindfulness of breathing he realized the true nature of all namas and rupas appearing through the six doors. He had accumulated great wisdom and therefore he was able to develop mindfulness of breathing so that it was of great fruit, of great advantage. The Buddha said that if it was developed in that way the final in-breaths and out-breaths too are known as they cease, they are not unknown.

The Buddha taught Rahula about the eye, visible object and seeing-consciousness, about all realities which appear through the six doors. He taught Rahula until he attained arahatship. We read in the Kindred Sayings ( IV, Salayatana-vagga, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Third Fifty, Chapter II, § 121, Rahula) that it occurred to the Buddha, while he was near Savatthi, at the Jeta Grove, that Rahula was ripe for the attainment of arahatship. He wanted to give Rahula the last teachings and he said to him that they would go to Dark Wood. We read:

Now at that time countless thousands of devas were following the Exalted One, thinking:

"Today the Exalted One will give the venerable Rahula the last teachings for the destruction of the asavas."

So the Exalted One plunged into the depths of Dark Wood and sat down at the foot of a certain tree on the seat prepared for him. And the venerable Rahula, saluting the Exalted One, sat down also at one side. As he thus sat the Exalted One said to the venerable Rahula:

"Now what do you think, Rahula? Is the eye permanent or impermanent?"

"Impermanent, lord."

"What is impermanent is that happiness or dukkha?"

"Dukkha, lord."

"Now what is impermanent, woeful, by nature changeable-is it fitting to regard that as 'This is mine. This am I. This is myself?'"

"Surely not, lord."

(The same is said about the other phenomena appearing through the sense-doors and through the mind-door.)

Thus spoke the Exalted One. And the venerable Rahula was delighted with the words of the Exalted One and welcomed them. And when this instruction was given, the venerable Rahula's heart was freed from the asavas without grasping. And in those countless devas arose the pure and spotless eye of the Dhamma, so that they knew: "Whatsoever is of a nature to arise, all that is of a nature to cease."

When we read this sutta we may find it to be a repetition of so many suttas. We may read it countless times, but we may only have theoretical understanding of the truth. One day the truth may be realized but this depends on the degree of the development of panna.

Is the eye permanent or impermanent? Is what is impermanent happiness or dukkha? Should we take it for self? Are the other realities permanent or impermanent? The Buddha spoke about all the realities which appear now. If we do not yet have a keen understanding of seeing and visible object which appear now, at this moment, if we cannot yet distinguish between the different characteristics of nama and of rupa which appear now, their arising and falling away cannot be realized.

When the Buddha asked Rahula about the true nature of realities, would Rahula only have been thinking about nama and rupa, or did he at that moment realize their true nature? We know the answer. Rahula was mindful of realities appearing through the six doors, and thus his wisdom could be fully developed. Otherwise he could not have attained arahatship.


With metta,

Nina van Gorkom




[6] Translated in The Way of Mindfulness by Soma Thera, B.P.S. Kandy, Sri Lanka.

 Glossary

December 2004