When it’s so very difficult to understand one can understand viriya and khanti

Azita: Ajahn, I have a question regarding everyday patience and khanti parami, what is the difference, if any?

A. Sujin: Between khanti parami and viriya?

Azita: And everyday patience, like being patient if you're waiting for a bus or grandchildren or whatever, is that viriya?

A. Sujin: Is there khanti cetasika or only viriya cetasika?

Azita: Well, I understand it’s just viriya.

A. Sujin: Okay, but sometimes it’s there unknown, for example, after seeing, after sampaticchana and so on, or, it depends what citta has viriya with it, unknown all the time. Even right now just move your finger, it has to be with viriya cetasika, otherwise only citta without viriya cannot do that at all. That’s why there are so many things now, many many things unknown. Only just one reality can be the object of citta at a time. That’s why instead of trying to understand that nature, the reality of viriya, if we try so much we cannot understand that, because it’s the lobha, which hinders the understanding of the truth of whatever is there.

That’s why when viriya is there, while you don’t want to do something at all, but you think that you have to do, it takes viriya, maybe right now it’s viriya to sit and listen, see, and when you are ... but you still want to hear or study the khanti parami as viriya cetasika is there, when there’s something that’s so hard to to get away, but it’s still there, see.

So we don’t mind about whatever that which should be understood is, it must be the nature of that which experiences now, and that which is the object of the experiencing. Otherwise no way to understand the true nature of the nama, the experiencing, and that which cannot experience anything at all.

Instead of trying to know the name or the level of it, how very little, and how it has to be taken more than just that. Trying to do something, difficult or hard, see, it’s viriya with khanti when it’s harder and harder see. That’s why it’s not the wanting to distinguish the nature, the difference between the different moment of viriya. What about that which is it as a reality only, no one there. This is the point, because when reality appears no time to think about whether it is viriya or khanti, but the characteristic of that which experiences is there, and that which cannot experience is there as well, but at different moments.

That’s why without understanding the nature of the nama and the rupa it’s impossible to just let go. Now we don’t have to think about cetasikas which arise with seeing moment. But that which sees is not known as a reality that just arises and falls away because there are conditions for the arising of that. The conditions conditions its arising, only that, and then it falls away, which means that what conditioned it conditions it to arise, and it has to fall away when there are no more conditions for it to stay on.

So now, is there viriya, or nama which experiences? Only thinking about it, estimating, but not the moment which has it as object of understanding with direct awareness, and we can understand at level of intellectual understanding as long as it’s not the level of directly understanding just a reality which was unknown before, that which should be, or what can be, the object of direct awareness because they haven’t arisen yet, either of them.

All the way must be the development of understanding the truth of reality that: they are only in a moment and then gone. So how can that be something or someone permanent at all? And this is the absolute truth that can be directly experienced, but not by anyone who tries so hard, who wants to do. But pañña develops little by little and whenever pañña arises it lets go, just a little, even from moment to moment. That’s the way, which is the fourth ariya sacca, the only way.

Even at moments of thinking viriya does not appear, but there can be thinking about whether that moment has viriya with it because it’s that kind of citta which is not seeing, hearing and so on. And this is the truth of the word of the Teachings of the Buddha that it develops the wise attention or the very careful considering so that it can bring about the understanding of the no one and no self little by little.

And without the understanding so clear as vipassanañana, and being a sotapanna, how the other kilesas, defilements, can be eradicated? It has to be from the lowest, the wrong understanding taking realities for self so that there can be more and more understanding of that which is there as it’s not by me or no one can make it arise, but by conditions.

That is to let go the trying or whatever you’d like to do in order to have more understanding of that object. So the point is to understand the truth, that nothing can be self or anything at all, because it is conditioned just to arise and fall away instantly, never to return in samsara. So if there is attachment to anything now, it attaches to nothing, nothing, it’s not there anymore, but wrong understanding takes it has so very permanent, it’s still there, like now it’s still you, in front of me, see. Actually, that which is seen is gone completely, the seeing is gone completely, from moment to moment.

And the truth is that now there is seeing, how much understanding of seeing as not self? As just a moment of experiencing only that which has impinged on the eye-base, the whole table, the whole chair, cannot impinge on it at all, but that which impinges on is a kind of rupa, which is there with the four primary rupas, but the hardness and the other rupas cannot impinge on the eye at all, only that which is now appearing, and it’s there, no one can take it away from hardness, wherever, whenever hardness is there, that has to be there, which can impinge on the eye base. So everything is conditioned just to arise and appear very shortly, that’s all in life, from life to life. Understanding this will condition more and more understanding, and only the understanding itself can make attachment less and less.

So comparing the moment of hearing about seeing as not self, and even now how many years ago, but what about the understanding? It cannot be as much as we like, but it develops very very slowly. That’s why listen, again and again, this can condition moment of thinking of seeing right now, and then it will lead to even no more thinking: it is there to see that’s all, only that which sees, it cannot hear, it cannot think, it arises just to see, by conditions, that’s all. And this is the life, the truth of life, of each moment of each reality which is conditioned to arise.

As long as there is attachment to whatever appears, it hinders the understanding of the arising moment of the next one, because it is attached to that object. That’s why the understanding of that which appears develops little by little, to know that it’s not there anymore. And then there can be the moment when it sees or experiences the arising of the next one, unknown, while there are so many realities in between. And this is the unknown truth of life.

Right now, sampaticchana does not appear, the whole process of seeing, this process, doesn’t appear: only a moment which sees, so many other moments before, and so many moments after, but they do not appear, to be studied, to learn to know, to understand that actually seeing cannot be anything because it’s gone. So it has to be a very keen level of understanding, intellectually understanding must be keen enough to let go of the wrong idea, wrong practice, wrong understanding. Until it can condition the moment of pañña which has learned from hearing and considering with direct awareness, by conditions.

And only one object, no thought about it, to choose or to want anything at all. It cannot be as anyone thinks about, what is there. Because thinking, but what is there arises to fall away all the time. And thinking follows all the time too, even in that process. So just listening and the understanding from listening little by little will be able to be condition, to condition the direct awareness, but it has to be with the understanding of that object, little by little.

What is seen now? It is easy to say visible object, how many times we said this, but what about the understanding of the truth. So the truth is that, when it can appear as it is, there is nothing else, no one else, nothing there, the world is lost, but there is not only that object which is seen, and the seeing, to be understood about the difference, the distinction between the seeing and that which is seen. And that it’s not thinking about it, it’s only direct awareness and direct understanding at that very moment, no one. Because seeing is there, only seeing, how can that be I see, and the object is there like that which is seen, they are different, and at that moment no one at all, no thing.

That’s why there is the word "appears well", as it is. So now does anything appear well? Not at all, because it falls away instantly, all the time, this one is not the previous one, not the next one, unknown. That’s why from learning and understanding, letting go of the idea itself little by little, the attachment to that which appears now will become less and less, until, when there’s not much attachment to that and enough conditions to pay attention to the next one which follows instantly, it can bring about more and more of the different realities as different realities which cannot be taken for anything permanent like people and things, at all, stage by stage, uncontrollable, on the way of anatta.

Azita: you spoke before about almost immediately after seeing attachment lobha arises but it’s not always that we really like the object but again I suppose it requires a bigger understanding to know whether it’s strong lobha or just subtle lobha because I think most of the time it’s probably subtle lobha that comes in so quickly after seeing and hearing and tasting we’ve always got an idea you know a tree or nice food or something.

A. Sujin: And can a moment be known, just one moment? Is it possible? As one moment of seeing has fallen away, can there be right understanding of that which has just fallen away? No, there must be conditions for sampaticchana only to arise after seeing. So how fast it is, between seeing and hearing, so many citta have arisen and fallen away completely, not known because they do not appear. So only a moment of seeing is there, while what is now seen, in a day, all day?

Even the moment of closing one’s eyes, this object which is seen cannot be there, unknown. It seems like that there is seeing all the time, without moments of thinking, or liking, or whatever at all. That’s why it can deceive people to think that it’s still there all the time, it’s me, while no me at all. That’s why there is the beginning of understanding the very subtle reality like anusaya and then asava, see. They’re different, but they do not appear, anusaya does not arise, it cannot appear at all because it doesn’t arise. But asava, because of the accumulations of anusaya condition asava, three moments after seeing or hearing, see. How can it be known but from the teachings of the Buddha? It’s there all the time, so it seems like I all the time, because of the asava, kamasava, bhavasava, ditthasava, avijjasava. It’s there, unknown, but it’s there until pañña is strong enough and the understanding begin to eliminate little by little wrong understanding, even it does not appear but the understanding of the object which is understood, will bring about understanding that there is not only the strong akusala but there is also the very subtle akusala to be known before becoming enlightened in the four noble truth, before vipassanañana, before the direct awareness with understanding, see. So pañña knows at what level is now, more understanding, intellectual understanding, or some moment of direct awareness. Only pañña can know because now everything is there, but without pañña nobody knows the truth of whatever appears, as what is seen. Even that it takes quite a long, long time, to be honest, to be truthful, sincere, to understand what level it is, without the direct awareness it has to be intellectual understanding. But without it no conditions for direct awareness to understand directly an object by conditions. Is this khanti?

Azita: Probably, a little bit, while you were talking I was thinking of khanti that it must take patience but not my patience just the viriya to listen and allow understanding to grow by conditions.

A. Sujin: And when it’s so very difficult to understand, one can understand viriya and khanti, see.