Dependent origination it's here and now, no need to look for it or try to get it

[Hang] Ajahn, could you please explain more about the paṭiccasamuppāda, thank you.

[A. Sujin] Is it not now? Or is it now, but we don't call it anything because we just talk about the reality. So, paṭiccasamuppāda, what is it, is it real, is it a reality, what it's about? What is the first word of the paṭiccasamuppāda? So that we understand what is meant by paṭiccasamuppāda: dependent origination, otherwise nothing could be appearing now at all. It talks about reality at any moment, not just one subject apart from the other subject, but each word is all about life, it's all about that which is there, unknown, and from understanding each word of the Buddha one realizes that we don't have to look for it or try to have it because it's here and now. That is the way to understand the paṭiccasamuppāda, conditioned realities, their relationship: without this there cannot be that, because there is this so there must be that, conditions, all about now. So it's daily life.

The first one, is there ignorance now? Daily life, unknown, but thinking about paṭiccasamuppāda: far away from this moment. So there's no understanding of paṭiccasamuppāda, but when there is the understanding of this moment there is the understanding of paṭiccasamuppāda as well. Because there is ignorance now, and what does ignorance bring about? Because of ignorance what is there? So the world goes on, life goes on because of ignorance. If there is no understanding of ignorance, can there be understanding of the paṭiccasamuppāda? So when there is the understanding of reality right now, it's the beginning of understanding whatever the Buddha taught as Dhamma: paṭiccasamuppāda, ariya sacca, āyatana, and so on. They are not out or away from this moment at all. That's why understanding citta, cetasikas, and rupas, all about realities which are paṭiccasamuppāda, depending on the others.

So let's just talk about avijja, the first one of paṭiccasamuppāda: it's there now, and what does it condition? And when there is understanding of this, it is the understanding of the second paṭiccasamuppāda, second dhamma, which is the result of avijja. So avijja is there, at each moment of whatever is there, from waking up to the moment of falling asleep. Is that clear, even just a little bit, that it is now? Why do we think like this, how did this question come, avijja or not?

At moment of waking up is there no avijja, or avijja is there, from then on? This is the understanding of paṭiccasamuppāda, thinking with avijja, liking, doing, anything, whatever. When there is no understanding there must be ignorance, not understanding the truth of this moment. Full of avijja, more and more, while one lives when there is no understanding. Beginning to see avijja or ignorance is very difficult, to know it.

After seeing, what is there, after? What does avijja condition? Sankhara, and the links of samsara begin with avijja conditions sankhara, which, at that moment, means the cetana which is kamma. That's why we have to study each word as it is, because there are many meanings of sankhara too. When we talk about all dhammas [which] are sankhara dhammas we don't just mean cetana: whatever arises is conditioned reality, is sankhara dhamma. But when we talk on the subject of paṭiccasamuppāda, we talk about the core that conditioned the life, or sankhara, of the world or life. So sankhara in the paṭiccasamuppāda means only cetana cetasika. Cetana is sankhara dhamma but it is sankhara in paṭiccasamuppāda, to condition this life. So the cetana cetasika which is not kamma yet, even it's sankhara dhamma, but not [sankhara] by way of paṭiccasamuppāda.

[Tam B.] Ajahn, can you say that again, I didn't get that last sentence.

[A. Sujin] Because there is the cetana cetasika arising with each moment, but when we talk about it in paṭiccasamuppāda we don't talk about cetana which always arises with each citta, but we just talk [about] the kamma, that which [has been] finished, completed, to be puññābhisaṅkhāra, apuññābhisaṅkhāra, āneñjābhisaṅkhāra, which will condition life in different worlds.

Liking banana, is it sankhara dhamma? When we like a banana, when we are eating, having a banana, isn't there cetana cetasika too, with lobha? But can that cetana be apuññābhisaṅkhāra, will it condition birth, next life? But when it is completed as a kamma, it becomes cetana which is sankhara by way of paṭiccasamuppāda. Is there any question about this point?

Is there cetana now? What is there as paṭiccasamuppāda, at this moment? And what about cetana at moment of seeing, isn't it there by way of paṭiccasamuppāda too? But not by being the second one, what about āyatana, isn't it also in paṭiccasamuppāda? That's why is not about reciting the paṭiccasamuppāda, but to understand the truth, the absolute truth, there must be realities which are explained in different ways, but to understand that they are not self at all. So, instead of trying to think about how to learn, just to remember that as paṭiccasamuppāda, there should be the understanding of Dhamma before, so that we can know that "Oh, it can be said or explained by way of paṭiccasamuppāda as well."

So, when it's not the confidence in the Buddha's words about the truth of each reality, there is not condition for right, direct understanding to arise: with understanding, not just arise without understanding, that cannot be satipatthana, which is understanding what is there from hearing, and the intellectual understanding is so very skillful.

So the pariyatti or the intellectual understanding doesn't mean just remembering the words and knowing their meaning, but understanding the truth, the reality which is taught, to understand that actually that cannot be taken for anything permanent or atta at all.

For example, when we talk about kamma, it will condition birth consciousness after death, when time comes or when it's proper, when it's ripened enough, to condition that moment. We just talk about kamma, but is it paṭiccasamuppāda as well? Avijja conditions sankhara, which is kusala kamma or akusala kamma, which is puññābhisaṅkhāra or apuññābhisaṅkhāra. Or āneñjābhisaṅkhāra (kusala kamma at level of jhāna).

[...]

So we can understand different degrees of a dhamma. When it's just akusala cetana, not akusala kamma: the akusala cetana cannot condition the birth consciousness, but it is that which has been accumulated, to condition the way or the reality which has been accumulated, to be moment of (being condition for) birth consciousness too.

The way life is, it's just like... very complex, not easy to understand until right understanding with khanti develops: considering again and again even just one word, by all levels or aspects, to understand the difference of each moment as not self.

So it's not just wanting to understand the paṭiccasamuppāda, directly, but to understand what the truth of paṭiccasamuppāda is. All about dhammas, and they are all dhammas in daily life, each moment unknown as it is: paṭiccasamuppāda, āyatana and whatever Buddha taught, in different aspects.

So the understanding of the anattaness of all dhammas depends on the wise considering. When there is hearing about a word, only a word, can't that be studied carefully too? In order to understand the nature of that which cannot be anything or cannot be controlled, the way it is. Just remembering the word, is that the understanding of the truth of it? Because the truth is at this very moment, all dhammas are now, here.

So what's another meaning of citta? In order to know it, to begin to understand its different aspects. Because we're now talking about citta and how there can be the understanding of different cittas right now. There is seeing and then? No understanding of seeing, but then after seeing what's there, in a day or any time?

[Tam B.] Do you mean ignorance?

[A Sujin] To understand citta, because there is citta every moment, but when there is seeing, there is not [the] understanding of seeing yet, but what is there after seeing? It's now, this moment: it's followed by thinking, all the time, right? So citta is that which thinks, so much in a day, and even [though] seeing just arises only for a moment in the process, but it seems that there is seeing all the time, while there is thinking more than seeing, right? So, another way, we can say that [it's] the world of thoughts or thinking, all the time, about that which appears, and there's no understanding of seeing and thinking.

So by way of paṭiccasamuppāda, avijja conditions sankhara, but there are a different levels of cetana, cetana arises with each moment of citta.

Phassa is not sankhara by way of paṭiccasamuppāda, but all realities which are conditioned by ignorance are there, but that which will condition next life or, sankhara, what does it condition? Avijja conditions sankhara. And what does sankhara condition? It's not just remembering the word, but understanding the truth of it. Even cetana is sankhara, but it has to be cetana which is kamma. It seems like everyone knows kamma, but who knows that kamma is not-self, who knows that kamma is not just rūpa or whatever, or just liking, daily life, liking coffee, liking this or that.

But cetana which is paṭiccasamuppāda must be cetana of the degree of kusala kamma or akusala kamma. By way of paṭiccasamuppāda the words are puññābhisaṅkhāra, apuññābhisaṅkhāra, and āneñjābhisaṅkhāra. Because there are different levels of cetana as well. You might have heard about the three vaṭṭas, the circle of samsara: kilesavaṭṭa, vipākavaṭṭa and then what, [before] vipākavaṭṭa?

[Tam B.] Kammavaṭṭa.

[A. Sujin] Yes, kilesavaṭṭa first, and then kammavaṭṭa, and then vipākavaṭṭa. It indicates the difference between kilesavaṭṭa, and kammavaṭṭa, and vipākavaṭṭa. So, when we talk about a reality, to understand it, we might not know that we are learning about paṭiccasamuppāda, because even the understanding of the truth of realities is not enough yet. So, if there's not enough understanding of the truth, how can there be the understanding by way of what the Buddha taught as paṭiccasamuppāda? All about dhammas, now.

As long as there's not enough understanding of what is there now as dhamma, no-self, there cannot be the understanding by way of paṭiccasamuppāda, but at moment of understanding it [as] conditioned reality, it's the beginning of understanding what the Buddha taught by different ways or varieties. So when we talk about anything, without understanding, it is that which will be forgotten, in this life or in other lives.

When we try to think of the paṭiccasamuppāda, what conditions what, what conditions what, the 12 conditions, it's just trying to think about the word without understanding, right? So it is the object which will be forgotten later, no understanding, but when there is understanding, it's there, little by little, to understand it, when one talks about it, again. So when there is the understanding of reality right now little by little, there's no doubt about what is said in paṭiccasamuppāda: avijja conditions sankhara, and what is meant by sankhara there: kusala kamma, akusala kamma, at different levels, which condition next life. That's the way to remember what is the first paṭiccasamuppāda, avijja, and then? Sankhara, and then?

So if there's not the understanding of just one word at a time, better and better, little by little, there cannot be the understanding of what the Buddha taught: deeper than this. Because no matter whether it is paṭiccasamuppāda, it is this moment and now, whether it is āyatana, it's here and now. Everything is now, no matter we talk about whatever way the Buddha taught.

So when the intellectual understanding is not firm enough there cannot be conditions for understanding what is there now, directly, with pañña, as not self. It's still my leg, or my arm, or my head. So, when there's no I, [how] can there be "it's my leg" or "it's my arm"? Because there's no I. And each word of the Buddha can be directly the object of higher levels of understanding, from now.

Thinking about "it just experiences one object at a time", what does it really mean? One object, it has to be only one object. And "it's not being aware of just one object, with understanding", what does it mean? Is there understanding of the moment when that object appears, as it is, or is there doubt?

So the best way to go on studying Dhamma is not forgetting that it's no-I, but that's only just thinking, because each moment the I is there, because the reality does not appear as it is yet. That's why there are many levels of understanding. So only oneself can understand, and that is pañña which knows correctly, directly, what level of understanding of each moment of hearing or studying the word of the Buddha. And by then one realizes how much ignorance, the first paṭiccasamuppāda, is there, all the time. Is there any question?

Video image: Bull and tiger jataka, railing detail, Bharhut stupa