Dhamma with Ajahn Sujin

Maeve: Ajahn, while you are speaking you are teaching us the truth of the Dhamma, but even in in the short time of listening so many other thoughts arise that I found myself thinking that I really want to listen carefully to what you are saying, and the mind is, as we said before, just like a monkey, swinging on something else, and so many things even while the truth of the Dhamma is being spoken, and so many other moments are arising at that time, it made me think about how when the Dhamma is not being heard, how much more frequent that is. But there must be some recollection otherwise there would not be some inclination to listen again, and maybe that is enough. A. Sujin: Is there memory? The memory of what has been heard, as: no self, what is now appearing is gone. It can condition moments of considering the word of the truth of that, even it does not appear as it is yet. But it begins not to forget to understand the truth that it's there just for a moment, very shortly. Ri

Maeve: May ask you a question about the Buddha's compassion, because I found myself thinking about how the Buddha hesitated to teach because he knew how subtle and deep the Teachings were. However he still proceeded, he made the decision to proceed to teach and given his infinite compassion I actually believe that embedded in the Teachings is something that enables that experience of the compassion to help and support the development of understanding, but how does the Buddha's compassion affect the understanding of the teachings? A. Sujin: Shall we start with what is compassion? Is it I or you or anyone, or what is it? Maeve: It's the cetasika that arises and sees the suffering nature, understands the suffering nature of another being. A. Sujin: When it does not arise, can you know it, as you know that it's not me? When it does not arise when it does not appear when it's not there, can we know it? But what about the moment when it's there. There must be a

Azita: I have a comment, many more mind door processes than sense door processes, could you talk a little about that please, that's always confused me a little, it doesn't appear that way. A. Sujin: Can anyone understand the sense door process and the mind process now? What can be understood right now: what kind of citta? What doorway? Or just the reality which is now experiencing an object unknown as it is, because no understanding of what is meant by seeing. When we ask someone: where is seeing, is there seeing? They might get some perplexity about why do we say or ask about that, see. Because is there anyone understanding seeing as it is, not self? We just keep on talking about seeing, now there is seeing for sure, but what is that? See, not self, so what is it? Only the moment of experiencing an object, no thought about sense door or mind door yet. That's why when there is no understanding of the difference between that which experiences and that which is experienc

Betty: Tan Ajahn, would you say that the... I guess you're going to call it the cure for the problem, is that we need to listen more read more, study more and of course there will be conditions, but it's not something where we can say all right I must do it, I have to do it, it's not an I doing it, if there are conditions the thought arises in the mind to do, to read more, or there's viriya to read more or to do more then okay, but if it's something where you set a schedule and say, well I have to do this then it's not natural. A. Sujin: I think that there is a thing around, one by one, and no understanding of life, of that moment, of the reality right then at all. That's why when we hear the term or the word Buddha, what does it mean? The one who has enlightened the truth, and he taught us everything about what is now. So the point of studying the words of the Buddha must be just to understand what is there now. That's why we listen to each word of

Azita: What’s a good way of introducing a small child to the Dhamma? A. Sujin: Just talk about reality, that which is true, for example: what is there now, and she may say something. The first question is not the explanation about the truth yet, because she cannot understand it for sure, but you can say: is it real? What is real is real, but we don’t talk about the truth of that, as she cannot understand that yet. But she can understand dhamma: is this dhamma? It’s dhamma: it’s real, it tastes… what is it… sweet. Is it sweet? She says yes, and that is dhamma, or real. But even if you don’t use the word dhamma, you use the word in her language, she can understand that we are talking about that which is there, but not deep as it is yet. But she begins to understand that what is there is real. In the sense of everyone who can understand in the beginning, because we are talking about realities, but even the word reality is very hard to understand, because: what is it which is real? It’

Vincent: Sawadee kap, Ajahn, did you hear the discussion, or would you like to say something? A. Sujin: About what? So many words, so what you would like to talk about, discuss? V: We were discussing how people would like to respond nicely, Sarah had some explanation and the person who asked the question said that she understands. S: So, what is the understanding? I'd like to understand the nature, the truth of what she said "I understand". What is the understanding? Or, what is that which understands? V: Pañña understands. S: What is that which is pañña? V: Is the dhamma which understand. S: What kind of dhamma is that? Can seeing be pañña? Seeing is not pañña, so what is that which is pañña? Is it there now? V: Maybe there is pañña, but it arises and falls away. S: We try to think about maybe, but what exactly is that which is pañña? No one, or "I understand"? There is the word pañña, but is there pañña at that moment? The truth can be und