Different objects as just arammana or arammana-adhipati paccaya

-



[A. Sujin] Arammana-adhipati-paccaya and arammana-upanissaya-paccaya, is that right? (Yes) So now we understand arammana, it's the object of the experiencing, so, in a day there must be moments [when the] arammana [is] unattended at all. Is there any thing which is the very interesting object in a day or none at all? Do you have any interest in some thing today? And at that moment it is the adhipati of that object, arammana-adhipati, which can condition the interest. Is there any thing which is object of interest now?

[Tam B.] Dhamma.

[A. Sujin] So you understand that now Dhamma is the arammana-adhipati-(paccaya), because it conditions moments of being interested in such objects, it means that that object is more meaningful than other objects in a day that's all.

Today Khun Jit (Ajahn's sister) went out shopping, she likes shopping, but i stayed at home, no interest in shopping at all, no chanda, so shopping is not arammana-adhipati for me and having such and such interest in such object is accumulated to be upanissaya-paccaya, to condition more interest in that object. So, i don't have upa-nissaya-paccaya for shopping and when there are many many objects around that I'm not interested in, those objects are not arammana-adhipati [for me], but if one is the object that I like or would like to experience, it would be the arammana-adhipati, at that very moment.

Dhamma is daily life but without understanding it is the object of attachment almost all day, and the Buddha taught about the truth of everything, the different objects as just arammana or arammana-adhipati, is it clear now?

[Tam B.] Dosa cannot be the object to be adhipati.

[A. Sujin] Do you desire to have dosa?

It is not arammana-adhipati-paccaya.

It (arammana-adhipati) clings so much to that object that it would like to experience it again and again and again.

That is different from dosa to its object at all.

[T. Tam] So what about like when you are seeing a movie even it's very sad and makes you cry but you still like to keep on thinking about it...

[A. Sujin] At that moment, do you really want to experience dosa as much, all day, or just for some time? What you're saying means that dosa can be object of lobha, but it's not arammana-adhipati that you like it so much to have it all day, something like that. Would you like dosa to finish or to have more and more and more? At moment of having dosa is that dosa the object or the other thing is the object of dosa?

So whatever object it is, no matter what, it can be arammana-adhipati, when you want to have it, wish to have it, you want to take it, want to keep it, that is arammana-adhipati not only arammana. That's why dosa can be object [of lobha] for someone or anyone, but it cannot be arammana-adhipati for anyone at all, not as strong as that. Because you see that somebody might like to see or to hear about the crime and so on, but it's not arammana-adhipati that one just want it for oneself at all, you just like some kind of [gross] movies, but would you like that to happen to you? That's why it cannot be object [as] arammana-adhipati, cruelty and so on. It can be object of attachment because anything can be object of attachment, except lokuttara dhammas, but it cannot be arammana-adhipati. If it was arammana-adhipati then you'd like it to happen to you - to be killed, tortured and so on... is it so?