Dhamma with Ajahn Sujin

[Vincent] Yaya was telling me last night, she said she appreciates the discussion here because she said she is less angry now, she has more moments of being calm... [A. Sujin] If there is no understanding of dhamma, can there be the moment of being true to dhamma? Everyone knows anger as "I'm angry", but is anger a dhamma, a reality, conditioned? That's why when there is a little more understanding of dhammas there can be conditions for letting go of the clinging to dhammas, even to anger. So at the moment of being angry what has to be there as condition for its arising? If there is no understanding of the conditions for anger to arise it's impossible to have less anger. We can notice that anger doesn't arise as usual as before or as often as before, and that moment is not true to anger because there's no understanding of anger. That's why there can be a little more understanding of dhammas, even anger, as there can be the understanding of

[Azita] Ajahn, a moment ago you spoke about ignorance and I've been looking at the paticca samuppada (dependent origination) and the first step is avijja paccaya sankhara (ignorance conditions intention). [A. Sujin] What is there now? The reality which experiences now and the reality which experiences at moment of birth, is it (one) different (from the other)? It experiences but [it's] different by conditions [Azita] Ignorance seems to be the basis of it all, it's really the basis of the mess of samsara, is that true? [A. Sujin] Are those moments conditioned by ignorance? Or, just talking about a moment ago or even right now, what we are saying, the sankhara, which is cetana, is it not conditioned by ignorance? The core of life, to begin [there] has to be cetana, the intention to condition an action or deed, which is kusala-kamma-patha, to be able to condition moment of birth (as human being), in the past. So, in the links of paticca samuppada the past conditio

[Alberto] There's the Pali word vihara and viharati, which is translated as dwelling or where one lives, but I don't think that renders the meaning properly... [A. Sujin] Are you talking about vihara? Can it be dwelling place? Wherever the Buddha stayed. It is the place where the Buddha vihara[ti]. And [is it] just only the rupa or also the nama, for vihara[ti]? So, what about the Brahma-viharas? No matter where you are, but the citta's dwelling in that particular reality, like metta, karuna or mudita, or upekkkha. While it's staying there it doesn't go away from metta, or karuna, or mudita or upekka. Is [it] metta where you're living now? :) Kusala, being friendly, wishing well? :) Brahma-viharas. The same world as Brahmas, the qualities of one who develops the degree of wholesomeness enabling [him or her] to be born in Brahma world. Original dhammahometv source video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OPKBroSLNg