Dhamma with Ajahn Sujin

[Roti] I have a question, does nimitta arise and fall? [A. Sujin] What is nimitta, again? Without the reality which is conditioned to arise, nobody can stop the arising of that particular one because it has arisen by conditions, but since there's no understanding of conditions and [of] the reality which is conditioned to arise and then falls away, without that could there be nimitta? And if there was no reality which can experience could there be nimitta? So nimitta is not real, but it's the shape and form of that which arises and falls away so very rapidly, so it appears as something, like now: seeing is there, appears as seeing, what is seen is there, appears as what is seen, but in truth the seeing which is seeing now it's not just only a single moment, one single moment is impossible. So it sees, no one knows the moments, the processes of seeing and [of] the mind door and the bhavangas in between, until it appears as: it sees something, not only that which i

Updated: 2021-12-26 [Sarah] Tadao was just bringing up the topic of nimitta, Ajahn... [A. Sujin] In order to understand what's meant by nimitta we have to talk about the truth of this very moment. If nothing arises at all, could there be any nimitta? In order to understand what is meant by nimitta, nimitta of what? Of that which is now appearing. Why is it nimitta? Because it does not appear as it is, because it arises and falls away in split second. How could that be now appearing as it is? So very rapidly, from one moment to another moment, different functions. And even right now, as much as we can understand, it's the nimitta of that which experiences an object. It's different from the nimitta of that which is there but cannot experience anything at all. Just learn to understand the difference between the two kinds of nimitta: the nimitta of that which experiences: seeing sees, many many moments arising and falling away, unknown, so it is the nimitta of seei

[A. Sujin] And I think that the best thing is to understand reality as not self because now it's appearing. For example, is there seeing right now? How many moments of seeing? Or it's only one single reality directly experienced? Impossible! According to the processes that the Buddha taught, after bhagavanga what is there? Not seeing yet, but there must be a citta before seeing, can that be known? Impossible? And can the citta after seeing be known? Impossible. That's why now: because seeing performs the function of seeing, so the characteristic of that which sees, which is the citta, the seeing consciousness, can be known because it's there, experiencing an object, from moment to moment, never lost at all, there must be citta arising and falling away, no matter whether one is fast asleep or one is seeing or hearing or whatever. It is that which experiences the object, unknowingly, only that which is taken, which appears, as something, and that is what we say n

[Ann] Ajahn, I have a question, last week we were talking about vipaka cittas which experience sense objects, and we were differentiating between vipaka cittas and kusala and akusala cittas because the kusala and akusala cittas do not see or hear, you said something: when it is kusala it cannot be vipaka when it is akusala it cannot be vipaka because the akusala is jati of the reality arising to be hetu and whether it is a hetu but kusala, then you said: that's why kusala hetu can be vipaka, but akusula hetu cannot be vipaka. Can you talk more about that please, that would be helpful, Ajahn. [A. Sujin] That's why we have to study just one citta at a time, for example moha[-mula citta]: how many cetasikas arising with it? And how many cetasikas arise with lobha[-mula citta]? And how many cetasikas arise with dosa[-mula citta]? Is it enough or strong enough to condition akusala vipaka with the akusala hetu? Impossible. Because akusala hetu cannot be vipaka, this is the

[Roti] Ajahn, my question is what do you mean by life, anything that it's not bhavanga? [A. Sujin] So now we're talking about the other citta which does not perform the function of bhavanga, right? So, what we take for life is that which experiences the object and rupa conditioned by that which experiences the object, too. So what is life? Without that which experiences, can it be life? Door, cupboard, bed, window, is it life or it's not life? It cannot experience anything at all. [Roti] So bhavanga is not life... [A. Sujin] It is, because it is citta. The kamma conditions vipaka and vipaka is the word for that which experiences an object. Even kamma conditions the rupa, like the hadaya vatthu and bhava rupa at moment of birth, but it cannot experience the object. That's why when we talk about life, it's that which experiences the object, including that which is conditioned by that which can experience an object, [for] which we use the word kamma. So

[Tam T.] In the satipatthana, is the seeing part of the kaya [anupassana]? [A. Sujin] While one is sitting and there is seeing, what can be the object of satipatthana? This is a question, please. While one is sitting, lying down or doing something, what can citta or what can sati be aware of, with understanding of that object? What can be the object? [Tam T.] Like when you're sitting down the body is touching... [A. Sujin] Yes, but can there be the other object instead of [the] body? [Tam T.] I don't know the answer. [A. Sujin] Because you think about the word about rupa about seeing and so on, but the truth is that the rupa cannot experience anything at all and at moment of seeing the reality which arises and sees has no rupa at all, it just arises to experience. So no matter while one is sitting, doing something, cooking and so on, can anything be object of awareness? When there is understanding. But when there's no understanding no condition to u

[A. Sujin] And what is the important [one] now? [T. Tam] Yes sometimes I think it's pleasant feeling we are always looking for it. [A. Sujin] That's why when everything is so pleasant, the source or the main faculty is that which arises and feels, so any kind of feeling is very important. The importance of what is there is indriya, so great, like without it that moment cannot be such and the other realities just follow it because when everything is fine, it's so pleasant by that kind of feeling. So, is any kind of feeling not important? That's why we learn to understand what's meant by indriya, the main faculty, or it's so very important, right then. And at the moment of pleasant feeling or indifferent feeling. What is there too as indriya? But different indriya, what else is there as indriya? At moment when feeling is indriya, what else is indriya? At that very moment? It is also citta because citta performs its function and it is the main faculty [

[Tam B] Ajahn, last time you were talking about indriya, can you explain a little bit about that? [A. Sujin] Would Khun Sarah just talk a little bit about the meaning of the word indriya in English, what's that. [Sarah] Indriya is like the leader, usually in English is translated as faculty, it's the leader in its own function. [A. Sujin] And when we understand the reality which is indriya we can understand the meaning of indriya because it's not just the word. So, how many realities are indriya? [Sarah] 22 indriya, 22 leading faculties. [A. Sujin] So, when we understand [them] one by one we can understand more about the meaning of indriya. For example, shall we talk about just one at a time, one by one, what is the first one? [Sarah] The first one is the eye base, the cakkāyatana, cakkhu, the eye sense. [A. Sujin] So we can see that, as there is a reality which is conditioned to arise to experience, it cannot arise without conditions, so, one condition,

[Sarah] Ann's having quite a difficult time, but if you would like to say anything that may be helpful for her then I'm sure she would be glad. [A. Sujin] All are dhammas, see. As long as there is no understanding of the truth there are conditions for different dhammas to arise without understanding. And this is life, it keeps on, rolling on unknowingly all the time, endlessly. And we think that this moment's so true. But what is the absolute truth of it? No one there at all. Otherwise nothing could cure what is there as sufferings and so on because, actually, when there is the understanding of the truth of no one and no world because what it's meant: [there] is world only when it's there, conditioned to arise, to be something, but actually it's not there anymore. To consider whether this is true or not, this is the only way to understand whatever is there, in any situation. Just right now seeing sees, so, how can [what] is seen last or be someone or somet

[Sukin] Ajahn, I have a question about conventional reality. For example if I think about a unicorn, which is something that's imagined and that's not a conventional reality... [A. Sujin] Not conventional? When it's something? [Sukin] When it's conventional it has to be something. [A. Sujin] Because sañña is there, marks and remembers, it depends on whether there is the idea of self or not. When there is the understanding of the function of sañña, that it marks and remembers what is there appearing from moment to moment as different shape and form and idea it is sañña, not me. So understanding what is really meant by conventional truth. Even the Buddha called Ananda and Sariputta and so on, conventional? That's why to understand the truth of it and the way how it conditions such idea of conventional thing, if there is no thinking there cannot be conventional ideas at all, but understanding that at moment of experiencing the conventional term, what is th

[Nina] When we are thinking of concept it is not always wrong view, but we should remember that they are there all the time. [A. Sujin] it doesn't matter because there is the understanding that it's gone completely. That which is gone cannot be known, just about what is there now, beginning to let go of the past and not worrying about the future, and know that what is there can be directly understood, little by little, but not by anyone, but by the development of right understanding of the truth, that is not there at all. Even it's now appearing, it's not there, it just arises and falls away in succession. Seems like it's always there, but when the truth is there, revealing itself, showing up as it is, from when it's so coarse and then more and more subtle, to be known as what is there. For example attachment, who knows? Otherwise, without understanding, how can there be no more attachment? But it's there as long as ignorance is there. So natural, j

Hang: Ajahn, I have another question about the samatha bhāvana, as I know that there are three stages of samadhi, can you elaborate more? A. Sujin: Would you like to understand or would you like to develop? H. I would like to understand Su. So, what is samatha? We have to begin from: what is it that we'd like to understand. H. Kusala citta with some understanding about the kusala and akusala. Su. So, is it wholesome or unwholesome, when we talk about samatha? H. It is wholesome. Su. and why do we call it samatha? H. I think that the object of the citta is the concept, including the the kasinas, the 40 kinds of kasinas. Su. Just wanting to experience the object of samatha or understanding the difference between the kusala at level of kāmāvācara and the rūpāvācara? Just wanting to have the moment of being samatha, the kusala at level of rūpāvācara, developed to the degree that it does not experience the sense object. Because the kusala which has the sense ob