Tokyo
July 15 1971

Dear Mr. G.,

You wrote: "When I am aware of nama and rupa, I find that their appearance is not always followed by wisdom about them."

We are bound to have doubts about the characteristic of sati and the characteristic of panna. Objects are experienced time and again without sati. We are absorbed in pleasant objects and we have aversion towards unpleasant objects; there are akusala cittas and there is no mindfulness of realities. Sometimes there can be conditions for awareness and then it arises just for a short moment. There can be "study" with awareness of realities, such as hardness which appears or feeling which presents itself. When there is the "study" of a characteristic of nama or rupa, there is a beginning of the development of panna, although panna is still weak. When you say that the appearance of nama and rupa is not always followed by panna you assume that there is first aware-ness and that panna follows later on. There can be sati without there being panna at that moment, but then there is no development of the Eightfold Path. Sati accompanies each kusala citta and there are many levels of sati. When there is awareness of a characteristic of nama or rupa there is development of understanding of that characteristic right at that moment. Panna of the Eightfold Path is not thinking about realities which have fallen away already.

Right awareness of the Eightfold Path is difficult. There has to be awareness of one nama or rupa, of one object at a time. Do realities appear one at a time? It seems that there can be seeing and hearing or seeing and thinking at the same time. We may have begun to study what appears through the eyes, visible object, but is the characteristic of seeing known already? The nama which sees seems to be hidden, we cannot grasp it, it seems to escape us. It is only panna which can know nama and rupa as they are. Don't we take the study of realities for self? Then we are on the wrong way and nama and rupa will not be known as they are. We have an idea that they escape us. So long as we are not sotapanna we have to continue to take into account that we have wrong view and that we follow the wrong practice.

The development of the Eightfold Path is not different from developing understanding of the reality which appears right now. If there is awareness of visible object than that reality can be studied so that it can be known as only a rupa. If seeing is not the object of awareness that reality cannot be studied and we should not try to be aware of it. It depends on panna which types of realities are understood, it does not depend on us. When panna grows there will be conditions that more types of realities will be known. There is hearing time and again, and we can learn that when there is hearing only sound is heard, that words cannot be heard. There is thinking when we distinguish different words and know their meaning. There can be a beginning of under-standing of different characteristics and this is the development of the Eightfold Path. We should not worry about the moments of sati and panna, but we should remember our goal: the understanding of realities which appear now.

You wrote that when you do gymnastic exercises you can experience the difference between motion and seeing the motion.

When we speak about "seeing motion", what is the reality which can be experienced? What can be seen? Can motion be experienced through eyesense? When we use the word motion in conventional language we think of a whole situation, of people or things which move. We believe that we can see people and things move. Through eyes only colour or visible object is experienced, but seeing conditions thinking of people and things which move. If there were not the experience of visible object we could not think about concepts of people and things which move. Sanna, remembrance, is the condition that we know that there are people and things and that we can observe their movements. As regards motion, this is a kind of rupa, the element of wind, which has the characteristic of motion or pressure. This type of rupa can be experienced through the bodysense. It is different from what we mean by motion in conventional language.

We think of a person who moves his body, but actually there is no person and there is not a body which stays. The body consists of the four Great Elements of Earth (solidity), Water (cohesion), Fire (temperature) and Wind (motion), and of other types of rupas. The rupas of the body arise and then fall away immediately. There is no living being who goes, but it is citta which conditions the movement of the rupas we call "our body".

There can be awareness of different realities which appear one at a time. Through eyes only visible object appears, through bodysense hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion or pressure can appear. A concept of the whole body or of a person is not a reality, but the thinking of it is real, it is nama. We may notice that there is thinking and just be satisfied to know that. We call it "thinking", but do we have right understanding of it? When there is thinking there are many different types of cittas, succeeding one another. Sometimes there are kusala cittas, but most of the time there are akusala cittas when we are thinking, cittas rooted in lobha, dosa and moha. We are inclined to take the different moments of thinking as a "whole", thinking seems to last. Do we cling to an idea of self who thinks? If we learn to be aware of nama and rupa as they present themselves one at a time, the self will begin to disintegrate.

Someone asked me: "How can we ever know different realities which succeed one another so quickly? Do we not have to be extremely fast?"

There is no self who knows realities, it is panna which is able to know them. If we think that we have to be fast we cling to a concept of self and this hinders the development of right understanding. When there are conditions for the arising of awareness panna will gradually develop and it will perform its function. We should consider the definition of panna or non-delusion given in the Visuddhimagga (XIV, 143):

'Non-delusion has the characteristic of penetrating things according to their individual essences, or it has the characteristic of sure penetration, like the penetration of an arrow shot by a skilful archer. Its function is to illuminate the objective field, like a lamp. It is manifested as non-bewilderment, like a guide in a forest....'

When panna has been developed it is as fast as an arrow shot by a skilful archer, and it is sure in its penetration of the true nature of realities. It illuminates the object which is experienced so that it is known as it really is. It is panna, not self, which is so keen that it knows precisely the reality which appears as it is.

It is important to know when there is clinging to awareness, it may be so subtle that we do not notice it. The best cure is studying the reality which appears right now. Even clinging to awareness can be realized as a type of nama. It arises because we have accumulated clinging.

When panna has not been developed we have doubt about all the realities which appear. We do not know precisely when there is kusala citta, when akusala citta and when vipaka-citta, citta which is the result of kamma. Someone had a question about the nature of vipaka-citta: "Can we know when vipaka-citta is kusala vipaka, the result of kusala kamma, and when akusala vipaka, the result of akusala kamma? Can we know when the object which vipaka-citta experiences is a pleasant object and when an unpleasant object?"

We cannot always know whether an object is pleasant or unpleasant. Moreover, we may take for pleasant what is not pleasant, since we are attached to particular things with which we are familiar. When we see something there is visible object which impinges on the eyesense. Seeing is vipaka-citta and it experiences only visible object. It does not experience things such as a house or a tree. Those are concepts which are experienced by cittas arising in a mind-door process. There are sense-door processes and mind-door processes succeeding one another very quickly. When we are looking at something there are eye-door processes and mind-door processes. Visible object impinges on the eye-door time and again and it is hard to tell when visible object which is pleasant and when visible object which is unpleasant impinges on the eyesense. It is difficult to know which of the many moments of seeing and hearing are kusala vipaka and which akusala vipaka. Akusala vipaka and kusala vipaka arise in different processes of citta but cittas succeed one another so quickly that what are in fact countless cittas seem to be one moment.

We do not clearly distinguish between different realities, we "join" them together. When we think of vipaka, we usually think of a whole situation. For example we think that being in a swimmingpool is kusala vipaka and we cling to this situation. When I was swimming there was at one moment the experience of a pleasant object through the bodysense, at another moment an unpleasant object. When we enjoy doing something like swim-ming, we do not always notice it when the object which is experienced is unpleasant. The object is unpleasant when, for example, the temperature of the water is just a little too cold. We are ignorant of the realities which appear one at a time. Swimmingpool is not a reality which can be directly experienced. Phenomena such as cold, softness, attachment or aversion are realities which can be directly experienced when they present themselves one at a time.

Vipaka is such a short moment, why should we try to find out whether it is kusala vipaka or akusala vipaka? When the vipaka has already fallen away we continue to think about it. We find it so important whether there is kusala vipaka or akusala vipaka in our life. We regret the days when there is a great deal of akusala vipaka and we think of a "self" who has to receive it. Vipaka is the result of kamma. It arises just for a moment and then it falls away. When we hear unpleasant words the experience of sound is a moment of vipaka and it falls away immediately. At the moment of hearing we do not know the meaning of the words yet. When we know the meaning there is thinking, and then there are usually akusala cittas which think with aversion about those words. We cannot change what has happened, but what can be done is the development of right understanding of realities. It is essential to know when there is kusala citta, when akusala citta and when vipaka-citta, but we should not try to find out whether the vipaka was kusala vipaka or akusala vipaka. Seeing, for example, is vipaka and after it has fallen away there are kusala cittas or akusala cittas, but most of the time there are akusala cittas. We are attached to visible object or we have aversion towards it. It is important to know these types of akusala cittas which arise after the vipaka-citta.

Someone asked me whether it is possible to have kusala cittas after akusala vipaka and akusala cittas after kusala vipaka.

There can be kusala cittas after akusala vipaka and akusala cittas after kusala vipaka, because the conditions for these different types of cittas are entirely different. Vipaka-citta is the result of kamma, a deed committed in the past. Akusala cittas and kusala cittas are conditioned by our accumulations of akusala and kusala.

I will give an example of an unpleasant object after the experience of which there can be different types of citta, kusala citta or akusala citta, depending on one's accumulations. If one sees a dead cat, different types of citta may arise on account of what is seen. We may think of the dead cat without awareness of realities and we may take the cat for "something" which stays. We may have aversion towards it. What is the dead cat? When we are looking there is visible object, when we touch it there is hardness or softness. Through the nose odour presents itself. It is because of sanna, remembrance, that a "whole", the dead cat, is remembered. In reality there is no dead cat, there are only different elements arising and falling away. Someone who has developed calm may have kusala cittas with calm when he sees a dead cat. He may take it as a meditation subject, the foulness of the body. He may remember that also his own body is subject to decay. If he has accumulated skill for jhana, jhana can be attained with this subject. Someone who develops vipassana can be reminded of the true nature of realities, their nature of impermanence and anatta. He is aware of whatever nama or rupa presents itself at that moment in order to know realities as they are. He may even at that moment attain enlightenment.

It all depends on one's accumulations whether there are, after having seen a foul object, akusala cittas, maha-kusala citta (kusala cittas of the sense-sphere), jhana-cittas or lokuttara cittas. The "cemetery-meditations" are included in the "Applications of Mindfulness", under the section of "Mindfulness of the Body". We read in the "Satipatthana-sutta" (Middle Length Sayings I, no. 10):

'And again, monks, as a monk might see a body thrown aside in a cemetery, dead for one day or for two days or for three days, swollen, discoloured, decomposing; he focuses on this body itself, thinking: "This body, too, is of a similar nature, a similar constitution, it has not got past that (state of things)."...It is thus too, monks, that a monk fares along contemplating the body in the body.'

This passage can be applied by all who develop vipassana, no matter whether they have first developed the "cemetery-meditations" as a meditation subject of samatha or not. What we take for our body are only elements which are each moment subject to decay. We should "contemplate the body in the body", we should not take it for something which stays, for "self".

In the Visuddhimagga (I, 55) we read about the monk Maha Tissa who met a woman when he was walking in the village. When she was smiling he saw her teeth and attained arahatship. We read:

It seems that while the Elder was going on his way from Cetiyapabbata to Anuradhapura for alms, a certain daughter-in-law of a clan, who had quarrelled with her husband and had set out early from Anuradhapura all dressed up and tricked out like a celestial nymph to go to her relatives' home, saw him on the road, and being low-minded, she laughed a loud laugh. (Wondering) "What is that?", the Elder looked up, and finding in the bones of her teeth the perception of foulness (ugliness), he reached arahatship. Hence it was said:

'He saw the bones that were her teeth,
And kept in mind his first perception;
And standing on that very spot
The Elder became an arahat.'

But her husband who was going after her saw the Elder and asked, "Venerable sir, did you by any chance see a woman?" The Elder told him:

"Whether it was a man or woman
That went by I noticed not;
But only that on this high road
There goes a group of bones."

Did you note the Elder's answer? Was he attached to concepts such as "man", "woman"? Did he take what he perceived for self? He saw the body in the body; he was aware of realities. Because of his accumulated wisdom he did not take what he saw for a being, a "self "--he only saw a group of bones, something foul. How often do we take for beautiful what is foul. He realized nama and rupa as they are and attained arahatship.

Those who have developed both samatha and vipassana may, when they have seen something foul, have jhanacittas which have foulness as their object. It depends on one's accumulations whether or not jhanacittas arise. But in order to know things as they are, one should see the body in the body, feelings in the feelings, citta in citta, dhamma in dhamma. In other words, one should realize the true nature of the reality which appears at this moment.

The Visuddhimagga explains, just before the passage about Maha Tissa, the virtue of restraint of the faculties (indriya-samvara-sila). There is this kind of sila when there is mindfulness of realities appearing through the six doors. When there is mindfulness and understanding of the objects experienced through the six doors these doors are "guarded" against akusala. The Visuddhimagga states: "He apprehends what is really there..."

Do we "apprehend what is really there", or do we have wrong view? Do we take realities for permanent and for self instead of being mindful of them? We do not have to refrain from thinking about concepts but there can be less clinging to them. When we think of concepts such as "man" or "woman" we can remember that thinking is a reality which can be object of mindfulness. It is only a kind of nama arising because of conditions, not self. It is because of sanna that we remember that this is a man and that a woman. Whatever reality is the object of mindfulness depends on sati, not on a self. The Elder, because of his accumulations, did not notice a woman, but there was the perception of foulness and then he realized things as they are. In that way he was not absorbed in the idea of a woman, akusala cittas did not arise on account of what was seen. However, even the thinking of a woman who smiles can be the object of awareness, and after that enlightenment can be attained if panna has been developed to that extent. Any kind of reality can be the object of sati and we should not try to select particular objects. If we select particular objects we will not see things as they are, as realities which arise because of their own conditions and which are beyond control, anatta.

The Visuddhimagga (I, 56) continues after the passage about Maha Tissa with the explanation of the virtue of restraint of the faculties:

'...if he, if that person, left the eye faculty unguarded, remained with the eye-door unclosed by the door-panel of mindfulness, these states of covetousness, etc. might invade, might pursue, might threaten, him. He enters upon the way of its restraint: he enters upon the way of closing that eye faculty by the door-panel of mindfulness. It is the same one of whom it is said he guards the eye faculty, undertakes the restraint of the eye faculty.'

This does not mean that we should avoid seeing or hearing, there are conditions for the arising of these realities. If the doorways are unguarded akusala cittas arise on account of what is experienced. We take the object for permanent or for self, we do not know what is really there. When there is, after seeing, hearing or the experiences through the other doors, the development of understanding, the doors are guarded.


With metta,
   
Nina van Gorkom

 Glossary

December 2004