Vipallasa, not as it is because the truth is not known at all

-



[A. Sujin] Shall we clarify just one point or one question at a time until it's clearly understood? What is just one or the first question about? What shall we begin [with]?

[Marc] Maybe the question is why does an arahant help another person, if he sees that it's not a person?

[ A. Sujin] Because of understanding of the truth, it conditions compassion and kindness because of understanding what is the unwholesome situation and [its] truth and what is that which understands the truth. So the point is that you'd like to help people not to have suffering, right? Can you do that? Because you see that can you live until the moment you can help the others not to have suffering at all?

[Marc] I'm sorry, can you repeat the question?

[A. Sujin] Do you think that you can help everyone in the world, not to have suffering?

[Marc] No, I can't, no.

[A. Sujin] So, it's impossible to help the others not to have such suffering or situation because there must be conditions for everything, right? Why don't you have suffering while you have[n't]?

[Marc] But I can help one person, I think, at the time.

[A. Sujin] Okay, there is the kind feeling, compassion, wanting to help the persons in need or when they have suffering, right? But we can help with understanding or without understanding, right?

[Marc] Sorry?

[A. Sujin] You can help the other with your understanding or without any understanding at all, is that right? But what is better, to help with understanding or just wanting to help... no pleasant feeling at all because they have suffering and you just want to help [them]. It's different from the moment when there is the understanding of what moment it is because it's there, so real, and what is that? One might take it for wholesome, but what about the unpleasant feeling there? Thinking about bad situation or unpleasant surroundings and so on. There can be moments of being wholesome, being friendly, helping the other with kindness and understanding, not just with kindness without any understanding at all. When there is understanding there can be kindness too, compassion too, helping the others too

[Marc] When I see someone at the door with their hands filled with with packets I just open the door for them so they can go in easily, most of the times that really happens very natural, very relaxed.

[A. Sujin] And as long as there are conditions for suffering to arise, can anyone stop it to arise?

[Marc] No, no.

[A. Sujin] So, the best way is understanding what conditions such situation of suffering, so that there won't be suffering again, or less, better than not understanding what condition is arising at all.

That's why we learn to understand what is wholesome and what is unwholesome. Who can manage it, who can control it, who who can change wholesomeness into unwholesomeness? Impossible! To understand the absolute truth: it's there by conditions, no one can make anything arise at all, even opening the door: by conditions.

So, actually, doing anything, by conditions and understanding the conditions for that very moment it's better than just do it without any understanding at all Right?

[Marc] Yes, I would say so, but at the same time when I say it's better I don't really know what I mean, why would it be better?

[A. Sujin] Better because of understanding the truth. And when there's no understanding about conditions and the truth of that very moment, it's not as good as helping with understanding the truth, and what is the truth? What is the truth of conditions for suffering? And if you'd like the others not to have suffering let them understand, help them to understand the conditions for suffering because no one can make it arise but there are conditions for its arising.

So, understanding is better than ignorance and understanding what? What is there now? What is the truth of it? Otherwise it's not the understanding of the truth at all, the truth is the truth, nobody can change the nature of that reality not to be true at all, for example kindness is there, anger is different, unpleasant feeling is not [like] the moment of pleasant feeling. So, even at moment of helping, it can be done with unpleasant feeling, just thinking about the bad situation and so on, and at that very moment the feeling is not pleasant at all and [with] right understanding understanding what conditions it and helping the others and better of all is also helping them to understand the conditions for whatever is there, and whatever is there is a reality, each reality is different by different conditions. Isn't it better to understand the truth?

And you can help the others to understand the conditions for suffering or pleasant situation, or fame or wealth and anything, but by conditions. Otherwise it's just helping helping helping endlessly because there must be conditions for the unpleasant situation to arise, by conditions, all by conditions.

So, the best thing to give, not just the food or anything but understanding is the best, the most precious thing, to help the others to give [to] the others, to share with the others. When they have the understanding, what about their behavior which [was] conditioned by ignorance and unwholesomeness and letting go that which is the condition for suffering, little by little.

Is there any way to understand the truth? Because it's now. What is there is not yet understood, the absolute truth of it. That's why there is still the idea of self, but what is taken for self? Do you have the body? Is the body you? Or no body at all.

That's why there can be the understanding at moment of giving too, no one there but there are the unpleasing moments unpleasant feelings and unpleasant thoughts thinking about this and that and right understanding can see what's right and what's wrong, what is beneficial and what is not beneficial at all.

Helping them to have their own conditions for no matter it is suffering or pleasant moments, by conditions.

[Marc] What I think I understand is that when there's more understanding in the world and within me there will be less suffering, less dukkha.

[A. Sujin] And what is dukkha, in the absolute sense? You can help them not to have suffering but you cannot help them not to die.

[Marc] But maybe I could help them die with more understanding, maybe I can help them do that.

[A. Sujin] People take that more seriously than just having no food or [being] in need.

[Marc] Sorry?

[A. Sujin] People think that this is worst than just being in need or wanting something to live and so on. So there can be the understanding of that to have less and less ignorance and conditions for bad situations. Who knows when it will come? It can be you at any time or me at any time, by conditions, but the best thing in life is to understand the conditions for whatever arises.

We use the word kamma, when it's wholesome it conditions the wholesome result, pleasant result, and when it's akusala, unwholesome deed, how can it conditions such pleasant moment? Impossible! that kamma, the cause, is not pleasant at all, so how can it condition pleasant moments?

The truth is that actually what is taken for things or people in truth [it's] just the arising of a conditioned reality to be different when they're a whole we take it for something like a flower, a shoe or a person, but in truth is there anyone or anything permanent at all, even right now? what appears seems so permanent, but in truth each one's arising and falling away by conditions, non-stop, from moment to moment as long as there are conditions for whatever arises. nobody can change no one can do because conditions only can condition such moments.

So, when one understands the conditions for being in need one has compassion for the deeds, past deeds, unwholesome deeds. so we can help them as much [as we can], but the best thing is to help them understanding the truth, so that they can have their own conditions for whatever will be from life to life.

[Marc] Yes, I think that if we say the best thing is to understand, there is a problem in the sentence that is about the best, why would it be the best?

[A. Sujin] So now, consider what is the best reality in life, what is the best reality in life? Right understanding or no understanding at all? What is better? Some people think that there's no need to understand what is there in life, just live, pleasantly, that's the goal, but what about ignorance? no understanding at all, taking whatever is there as life, so there's craving for life and doing something unwholesome to gain something for life... and then what's the result? Unpleasant situations, no understanding of the conditions for that very moment at all.

If there is more understanding it can condition less unwholesomeness and less unwholesome words and deeds, which are conditions for whatever will be, by that condition.

[Marc] But if I want to answer the question is wholesomeness better than unwholesomeness I can only do that from a conventional viewpoint and if I want to leave the conventional viewpoint wholesomeness it's not better or worse than unwholesomeness, wholesomeness it's just wholesomeness and unwholesomeness it's just unwholesomeness, it's just what it is .

[A. Sujin] That's why there must be clear understanding of just one word at a time, what is dhamma? Or, if you don't use the word dhamma you can use anywhere for anything, what is seeing, what is hearing and so on, but what is it?? Is it there? But what is it? I see, I hear, I think or it is seeing itself! What is the truth? What conditions seeing to arise is not "I" because it's there already, hearing is there already why take it for I when it arises to hear? And just to see.

So, is that right or wrong, to take that which is conditioned to arise to be me or mine? How can it be? Because before it arises there's no seeing, there's no hearing, but as soon as it has arisen no understanding [of the] conditions for its arising. Just taking it, when there's no one around, it's me who sees, now it's me who hears. in truth seeing is seeing itself, can it be anyone or anything?

[Marc] No.

[A. Sujin] Like seeing, it cannot be hearing, it cannot be thinking, it's conditioned just to arise to see and then gone, never to arise again. So, where's "I"? Where is me, where are people and where are things? the succession of the arising and falling away, so rapidly that it forms up the shape and form and the idea of something making it known as something, making it known as "I see", "I think", but in truth if it does not arise seeing cannot arise... can there be "I see"?

[Marc] No.

[A. Sujin] So, seeing cannot be "I" at all, at moment of seeing people in need... what about the feeling, pleasant or unpleasant? Isn't it better not to have unpleasant feeling? With understanding and pure kindness. At moment of being kind the feeling is not bad.

A reality cannot be another reality, that's why it is an absolute reality. Consider whether it's true or not, even it's not direct experiencing, but the truth is that which can be directly experienced, but not with ignorance, taking it for something all the time: it stays, it's some mark to be taken for something, to be known as this or that, that is only thinking and thinking it's conditioned too. Why is the Buddha's thinking different from the others? What conditioned that?

So, in truth there has to be the understanding and confidence of that which is there, no matter what, it cannot be taken for anything permanent, cannot be taken as I or cannot be taken as thing, as you, a cat, a dog, a flower... not at all. What is there is experienced very rapidly through one doorway at a time, the rapidity conditions the mark, symbol, shape and form of something, by sañña, a reality which arises with the citta, the chief of experiencing that object, marks it, takes it for something permanent, vipallasa, not as it is because the truth is not known at all.

Even [when] a person's coming at the door, knocking, the sound is heard and what is seen by seeing is gone, what is the absolute truth? To know that life is just like that, the continuation of the arising and falling away, succeedingly, rapidly, condition the world of paññatti, making it known as something all the time, but the truth of it is: breaking world, whatever arises falls away instantly, beyond expectations... how can it be? And this is what the Buddha enlightened: the truth and after his enlightenment he said all dhammas are so subtle. So, what is taken for a man, a door, so subtle, in truth: just one moment of one object experienced at a time.

And even the experiencing is not the same one at all, it seems like there's seeing all the time now but in fact, in truth, just arising to experience one object and then falls away. One doorway, one process at a time followed by many moments of mind-door processes, marking it and remembering it as something, a door, a man knocking and so on, from birth to death. And then what?

It has to be for everyone, [being] born and die and before death, is [there] any understanding of the truth: just experiencing and then gone all the time, to be forgotten! What was there yesterday, the day before? It's forgotten. Do you think about it? Sometimes, not as it is at all.

Different ones, from moment to moment never be the same one at all, is that not true? And when people do not have understanding of the truth ignorance conditions unwholesome realities to arise: clinging, attaching to the self so much that it can condition any unwholesome deeds and speech to get this and that for that [which] we take for self but it's not there anymore, from moment to moment, it's gone.

And having such understanding one has compassion for the others who understand too the best gift in samsara, not just only this life. Or just live and sometimes being unwholesome, unknowingly and sometimes be wholesome, unknowingly, until death, no more, no more this person. Just being able to be this person just only in this life and then who knows what will be there after death? Next life, by conditions again, as [this] birth is by condition, to be such, this person and that person, dog or cat, or mouse, or bird or human being, cripple or whatever, by conditions.