The Buddha taught different ways of kusala, and one of these ways is dana or generosity. Do we know when there is true generosity?

Generosity does not last. There is no soul which is generous. There are only fleeting moments of consciousness, which change all the time. Citta (consciousness) arises and falls away immediately, and then it succeeded by the next citta. Many different types of citta arise and fall away, succeeding one another. Akusala citta (unwholesome consciousness) may follow shortly after kusala citta, but we do not notice this. Akusala citta cannot arise at the same time as kusala citta, since there can be only one citta at a time. There cannot be attachment and generosity at the same time, but attachment may follow shortly after generosity has fallen away.

There is very little generosity in a day. From the time we are getting up until we go to sleep we are getting things for ourselves and how few are the moments that we are giving things instead of getting them. Do we know exactly at which moment there is generosity? We may take for generosity what is actually attachment. Do we know when there is attachment to the person who receives our gift, attachment to the thing we give, attachment to our wholesome deed? We cling to the pleasant feeling we derive from giving and we do not even notice that there is clinging. We may think of 'my giving' and take the kusala for 'self'.

There are many more moments of attachment than
we ever thought. One may think that attachment arises only when one wants to possess things, when one is greedy. But there
are many forms of attachment, some of which are gross and some more subtle. Isn't there very often, after we have seen
something, like of what we have seen? Do we not cling to seeing or to our eyes? We would not want to part with an eye or
lose the ability to see. That shows that there is attachment. There is bound to be attachment after we have seen, heard, smelt,
tasted, experienced objects through the bodysense and also when we experience objects through the 'mind-door'.

 One may wonder what the term 'door' means. A door is the means through which citta experiences an object. Seeing experiences
visible object through the eye-door. The eye-door is the eyesense, a physical phenomenon (rupa), which is capable of receiving visible object. Eyesense itself does not see but it is a condition for seeing. There are six doors of eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind-door. There is no self who experiences objects. There are only different types of cittas, succeeding one another, which experience an object through one of the six doors.

Attachment, aversion and ignorance can arise on account of what is experienced through each of the six doors. Often we take citta for kusala when it is in fact akusala citta. For example, I was helping someone to get buckets of water for an old lady. While I was helping I talked about the Dhamma, but there were many moments of attachment to 'my kusala'. When people in the temple wished me well showed their appreciation of kusala, I appreciated their generosity, but I was immediately attached to them and also to 'my kusala'. Since different cittas succeed one another so rapidly it is extremely difficult to know precisely when the citta is kusala and when it is akusala. When the citta is kusala, there are no attachment, aversion or ignorance.

When we come to know ourselves better we learn that even when there is clinging to a pleasant result of our good deed such as a happy rebirth or we realise when there is conceit about our good deed: we may think that ourselves are better than other people. One has to develop right understanding in order to know the difference between kusala and akusala.

Right understanding or wisdom does not always accompany kusala citta. For example, one may help others because it is one's nature to do so, without there being right understanding with the kusala citta. We may offer food to the monks or offer flowers in the temple because these are good traditions we were taught to observe. At such moments the citta is kusala, but there may not be right understanding accompanying the kusala citta. After the kusala citta has fallen away, there is bound to be akusala citta but one may not realize this. One may think that there are kusala citta all the time while one is in the temple or when one is helping others. We may think that generosity can last for some time, while there are actually many moments of kusala citta.

It is useful to know the truth about oneself. Thus we can be reminded to develop right understanding in order to know more precisely when there is kusala and when there is akusala. We have to be very sincere with ourselves, and we should realize that there is akusala more often than kusala.

Sila is another way of kusala the Buddha taught. Abstaining from ill deeds through body, speech and mind is kusala sila. Paying respect to those who deserve respect and helping others are included in sila as well. Especially during the sessions in Anuradhapura people asked many practical questions about sila. Someone with a military profession asked whether it is akusala to follow up the order to kill. Khun Sujin asked him: 'Did you want to kill, or did you have to kill?'
There is a difference here. Killing is akusala kamma (unwholesome deed), but there are many degree of akusala kamma. When one wants to kill wholeheartedly the degree of akusala is higher than when one follows up orders.

When one has not attained enlightenment one should not think that one will never break the five precepts. The tendencies to all kinds of akusala are latent in us and when there is an opportunity we may commit akusala kamma. One may for a long time not be in a situation that one would kill, but when one is in very difficult circumstances, who knows for sure that he will not kill? One may for example, kill insects because guests are coming to one's house.

A police officer asked whether he could do his duties with kusala citta. Khun Sujin said that his profession has many opportunities for helping: helping to keep order, helping people who are in trouble. A judge asked whether one commits akusala kamma when one has to condemn someone to death. There is the law one has to follow. The signing of the verdict may not be akusala kamma, but it is likely to be done with akusala citta.

One afternoon the judge and his family had come to meet Phra Dhammadharo under a tree in the area of the 'Maha Vihara', the area
between the 'Ruvanvelisaya' (the great Stupa) and the Bodhi Tree. We found this place where the Dhamma was discussed in olden times very suitable for a conversation about the Dhamma. Phra Dhammadharo spoke about the danger of ambitions in life. They may cause the arising of many akusala cittas and one may even commit akusala kamma such as telling a lie in order to attain one's goal. But the receiving of pleasant objects such as honour and esteem are the result of kusala kamma; they can never be the result of akusala kamma. When there is no right understanding we do not know when there is kusala citta and when there is akusala citta and we do not know how to develop kusala. Thus we are enslaved to our many defilements.

The judge gave some money to a poor woman who came around to our group. Khun Sujin said: 'This moment of giving is conditioned. If there were no conditions for giving there could not be any giving'. It is useful to be reminded that there is no 'self' who gives, no person in the giving; it is only a citta which arises because of conditions. If there had not been giving in the past there could not be giving today. The citta which is generous arises and then falls away, it does not stay. However, this citta conditions the following citta and the following citta conditions the next one . That is why good and bad tendencies can be carried on from moment to moment, from life to life.

Abstaining from wrong speech is a form of sila. We understand this in theory, but do we remember it in our daily life, when we are about to say something unpleasant? For example, someone suggests a plan to us which we do not like. Are we impatient and do we say straightaway that we do not like his plan, or do we abstain from  unpleasant speech out of consideration for his feelings? We may know that when we shout there is wrong speech; that is very  obvious. But do we realize that there is also wrong speech when we speak with lack of consideration for someone else's feelings, even though we do not shout? Showing one's dislike in one's speech is speech motivated by aversion and thus how can that be right speech? And even when we do not say anything but keep quiet with aversion at the moment we do not agree with someone else, it is not kusala citta which abstains from wrong speech.

In the suttas we read many times about gentle speech. For example, in the 'Lesser Simile of the Elephant's Footprint', the sutta which Mahinda preached to King Devanampiya Tissa, we read about gentle speech:

...Abandoning harsh speech, he is one who abstains from harsh speech. Whatever speech is gentle, pleasing to the ear, affectionate, going to the heart, urbane, pleasant to the many folk, agreeable to
the many folk...

Phra Dhammadharo told me about an event which I find an excellent reminder to be patient in one's speech. One night the bhikkhus had no microphone during the session and whenever they wanted to speak they had to wait for the microphone being handed over to them. They all found this waiting very helpful. If one speaks at once one may speak with akusala citta when one does not agree with something spoken by someone else. If one has to wait one has time to collect oneself. How difficult it is to always speak with kusala citta. Even when the topic is Dhamma there can be attachment to one's own words and ideas, or aversion about what others say, or there can be pride of one's own knowledge. When akusala citta
motivates one's speech even if the topic is Dhamma, one cannot be of great help to others. Thus we see that right understanding of one's different cittas is most helpful for the development of kusala.