Sati, the moment of being aware, not thinking about other things

-



Jon: And Ajahn, talking about characteristics, I wonder if you could say a few words about the characteristic of awareness, and I ask that in the context of the reminder that's often given that it's important to know the moments with awareness from the moments without awareness.

A. Sujin: Without the teachings of the Buddha no one would know what is there at moments of kusala at all, how many cetasikas are there. No way to understand that at all, even what is kusala and what is akusala but the Buddha realized the truth, enlightened the truth, all of the truths. So, what the others cannot know he knew, that's why he taught about what is there in one moment of kusala and akusala.

For example, hiri, ottappa, saddha, sati and alobha, adosa, amoha are there, who knows? That's why we learn to understand [each] different one as it is. For example, hiri, we can understand that, and when we talk about sati, usually each moment is taken by lobha and ignorance all the time, but the understanding is different from ignorance, that's why what is there at moment of understanding? And what is there at moment of ignorance? Not just one reality, not just one cetasika or mental factor, there are many. That's why sati is wholesome cetasika, no matter it arises with kusala or vipāka or kiriya which is wholesome. That's why we learn to understand little by little about the different characteristic of each mental factor, cetasika.

That's why we're used to being dragged away or taken away to such and such story and situation, until there can be a moment of thinking which is different from that, like giving for example, in a day, does everyone think about giving all the time? Or when the situation is there, some will give and some will not give? What conditions such different moments, and when it's wholesome, to see the benefit of helping the other, because what we give is so useful for that person. That's why at that moment no I, but the accumulation of the wholesome realities are there, ready to arise, and sati is that which thinks about it or is just aware. We use the word aware, but we cannot really understand the characteristic of the reality just by the word, but from considering the moment, but it is aware to give, different from moment with no thought about it at all. So at moment of wholesome thought sati is there, just not following the ignorance and situation as usual, with akusala.

So, it is the characteristic of sati, for example, it is sati to have Dhamma discussion, to understand what should be understood from different ones who attend the meeting. That is sati, to see the benefit of: it is there, for the development of wholesomeness, no matter of what level or by what way or manners. That's why, beginning to understand that sati is that which is aware of wholesome moments, forgiving, helping, and so on, being kind and what is there, which is different from moment which is not those wholesome ways or manners.

Can that be understood? Just that, at any moment of wholesomeness it's sati which arises and is aware of such manners of wholesomeness, like Dhamma discussion, reading Tipitaka, considering more carefully and deeply, wisely and so on, to just really understand the truth, not just the word, because the words are so very close, like phassa, it's there, not vitakka, not sati and so on. That's why any moment of even thinking in good way or wholesome moment, or the action of the body or the speech, it is sati which is aware of that wholesome reality, to act in wholesome manners or doing good things.

J. Thanks Ajahn, that's helpful, I think what you're saying is that sati is also a common mental factor for all moments of kusala citta, and can its characteristic be known?

Su. Sati has to be studied from the very beginning, the characteristic of sati, in different manners, in daily life, before satipatthāna [can arise], right? Otherwise the characteristic of satipatthāna cannot be understood, if we don't understand sati in daily life, as it is that which is aware of wholesome realities to be done or to arise or to behave.

This is sati in daily life, without right understanding, right? But when there is some understanding, at that moment, how come to understand without awareness of what is said about this and that, considering carefully. So sati it's not pañña, but it's there for pañña to develop, to perform its function, better and better when sati is there. But when there's no sati, how can pañña be there, how can pañña arise? And pañña cannot arise without hearing the right words, the truth, the Teachings of the Buddha. That's why it's different, sati with pañña and sati without pañña. And after pañña there can be sati at moment of understanding, because it doesn't think about other things, but it is aware of the characteristic, and the word, the meaning of it, and on and on to the moment of understanding what is that, like nāma or citta or cetasika.

A moment of understanding, not just reciting, is different, that's why beginning to understand the difference between all dhammas can lead to the understanding of those as not self. But is the sati, because sati is that which is aware of wholesome realities, deeds speech and whatever is there. So, at moment of listening, without sati there cannot be any understanding at all, just hear the word and then forget. Many people just study for many many years, but no right attention or considering, that cannot be pañña, pañña it's conditioned too.

That's why without sati, can pañña arise? Or wholesome deeds, speech arise? That's why we learn the factor, the function of sati little by little until it's strong enough, clear enough to be condition for understanding that which is hard right now, not just touched, because many people touch and they know what is touched, a table or chair, bed or something. But at that moment, pañña from understanding, the intellectual understanding, is there, enough to understand what is there when sati is aware. So the characteristic of all realities can be known only when sati is there, being aware of that characteristic. So now we are talking about sati and there is sati at moment of understanding, but the characteristic of sati does not appear, because it's not the samma sati with pañña, enough to understand what is there as anatta, no selection no choice no time to think about anything, because pañña understands anatta. If anatta is not there to be known, how can pañña understand it? But since all dhammas are anatta, but no pañña to understand it.

That's why from hearing and understanding better and better, it's the moment of beginning to understand that which is there, hardness, and I think that sometimes it depends on conditions, but when we take a bath, what we take for body and soap and things, it's only hardness and softness, because if it's the characteristic of coldness appearing, because the water is not warm, but when it's hot heat appears, but no leg, no form, only that. That's why it begins to let go little by little, with enough understanding, from intellectual understanding. Otherwise we take a bath without understanding what is there at all, it's still the soap and legs and so on. But the sati is there because pañña is there, enough to condition the direct awareness of samma sati. So at moment of beginning to be, we can say aware, of the reality, but it's different from other moments, when there is touching, no awareness at all, just continuing on the story and thoughts about everything. But at that moment it's the moment of very short attention or awareness of that object.

Without right understanding, how can that sati which is aware of that reality, the nature, the characteristic of the object which is there, be known? And pañña is there too, and it's different from moment when we touch and no awareness at all, but at that moment it's touched and there is awareness of hardness, even the pañña is so weak, but it is the beginning to understand the characteristic of awareness, that it is different from hearing now and understanding, and there is awareness and other cetasikas perform their functions all the time. But it's the moment of beginning to be aware, we use the word aware, to understand that as just hard, and understanding better and better when there are more conditions to understand it, not just only hardness. And what is being taken for self for so long, no matter through what doorway, but usually there is seeing in a day, almost all the time, when we are awaken, not fast asleep yet. So, in a day no understanding of seeing, because seeing is conditioned all the time, while there are other moments of kusala and akusala and thinking and other doorways, but seeing is there, all the time. So the clinging to seeing is much, so much that it hinders the truth of the other moment as it is, but when there is sati it's the moment of beginning to study that, that is the function of awareness, to be that.

Very very simple, ordinary, but it has to be with right understanding, to understand, and right understanding is so very truthful, because how much understanding is there at moment of awareness, which is aware of an object, no matter how much or how many moments develop, little by little, what about that which is very deeply accumulated from life to life in eons, it can just begin to show up, but not clearly, not well, but as just that, as it is, that which is seen, not thinking about other things. That is the moment of being aware, not thinking about other things, only the characteristic which is there is aware, and begins to study, kiccañāna of that which appears, little by little. So when sati arises, it's there, but it has to be only pañña which understands it, otherwise it's ignorance as usual.

J. Thank you Ajahn, as you said it has to be pañña that would understand and would know that sati was there.

Su. And in Tipitaka it says too, that the characteristic of pañña can appear only with satipatthāna, and everything, appears to satipatthāna, even pañña appears at moment of satipatthāna too. Now pañña does not appear, we understand what is meant by citta, cetasikas, nāma, rūpa, but the pañña which understands doesn't appear.

Sarah: When it mentions in the Tipitaka that the characteristic is not floating away, not moving away, I think this is what you're mentioning about, like not thinking of other objects at that moment or remembering what is wholesome when it arises.

Su. Yes, that's why the meaning is very important, not just the word. We can use different simile and other things, or way of speech, but the characteristic is there to be considered.

When there's more understanding, the words of the Buddha become true not just by thinking but by: it's there to be understood, little by little, for now, at moment of touching, it can be reminded as the object of understanding too, and what can be the moment, to understand it? Sati? Beginning to understand what is meant by sati. Even it does not show up when it's not the samma sati, direct awareness yet, but it develops from understanding little by little.

Sa. Can we say whenever sati arises, no matter with kusala cittas or even vipāka cittas, it is guarding?

Su. It is guarding, so that akusala [dhammas] cannot arise.

Sa. Like in one discussion, we were discussing about bhavanga cittas, so even when they are kusala vipāka cittas, such as bhavanga the sati at that moment still has the function, or that it's still manifested guarding from akusala at that moment of vipāka, even though it's just result?

Su. Can bhavanga citta appear as an object?

Sa. Of course not.

Su. So, can the characteristic of that sati appear, when it's vipāka?

Sa. No, not when it's vipāka, not when it's bhavanga citta. But it still has the same function and the same proximate condition and same manifestation even though it doesn't appear at all.

Su. That's why we understand what's meant by javana. Not vipāka, which performs the function of bhavanga, and how many functions the vipāka can perform? By way of patisandhi citta, bhavanga moments, cuti, and seeing hearing smelling tasting touching, sampaticchana, santirana and tadārammana, that's all. It's not like javana, it doesn't taste or experience the object.

Sa. Different function completely.

Su. That's why thinking about bhavanga while bhavanga is now. It does not appear as object.


  • Audio of the entire discussion: