Clear comprehension of the truth of what is there
Excerpt from the EN-VN Dhamma discussion with Ajahn Sujin on Zoom on Sun 23rd Nov 2025. Part 2 of 2.
The beginning of clear comprehension of citta as gocara sampajañña
[A. Sujin:] All depends on sampajañña.
So now, are we talking about satthaka, or sappāya, or gocara, or asammoha?
All depends on understanding the truth, not just the word.
[Tam B.:] Yes, I think these aspects come from understanding.
[A. Sujin:] That is why understand the truth of the very subtle realities: the cetasika, the citta and the rupa, until understanding the nature of nibbana - not at the very beginning. That's why we are learning to understand the ultimate truth, the reality, the absolute reality; citta is citta, it cannot be cetasika.
Can citta itself be clear comprehension? [No, the citta only knows or experiences the object clearly.]
And this is the beginning of understanding, the comprehension of citta, until it becomes clearer and clearer, as gocara sampajañña.
Citta, the leader of the world, in going to war or to peace
[Tam B.:] Acharn, citta experiences the object clearly. Does that mean there is clear comprehension or not?
[A. Sujin:] Not at all. That is just the function of citta - a reality which experiences the object, but it experiences the object so clearly, for the other moments, when the sañña and other realities know the difference between the fake and real one; the fake diamond, real diamond; fake pearl, real pearl. If citta does not experience very clearly, how could it be known that these two are different?
However, knowing that the two are different - that one is fake and the other is not - is not the function of citta; the function of citta is just to experience the object clearly, to be the chief, the leader of the world, in going to war or to peace, or to whatever is there, to any subject or any thought.
So, the world is under the power of citta, which experiences the object so clearly; otherwise, how could there be the moment of knowing the difference between this and that? So, remembering or sañña just marks and remembers what citta experiences; it cannot perform the function of experiencing the object clearly at all, because it merely experiences the object which citta has already experienced and just marks and remembers that object.
So now, there is citta and there is sañña cetasika, cetana cetasika, manasikara cetasika, phassa cetasika. There is no rupa within or arising together with these realities which just experience the object - no color, no sound, no smell, no taste at all - just the pure experiencing reality.
Satthaka sampajañña, not the purpose of understanding
[The Sister said that one should be more careful about the situation or the conditions that don't lead to understanding Dhamma.]
Is that your purpose? [Yes, Ajahn.]
So, it is not understanding. The purpose cannot be the understanding at all, because everyone can have purpose in life without understanding, but now we are talking about the sampajaññas, the clear comprehension of the object, gocara.
No matter what, it can be gocara (object) of right understanding, when it has developed to the degree that it doesn't matter at all what is there, because it can understand the truth of that reality.
While watching movies, can't there be moments of understanding the object? Because right understanding has been developed to that degree, it is the condition to experience any object with understanding.
So, no matter what, it can be the object of understanding only when there is understanding, but when there is no understanding, it cannot be the object of understanding, it is the object of pleasure, of lobha, enjoying it so much, in such situation. But right understanding is not afraid of anything at all because it can understand the truth - when it's there. So can the purpose understand? [Ms. Ha said no.]
That's why understand each word, what is meant by sampajañña, pañña and sampajañña and sati and so on, each one is different; they cannot be the same at all, just one reality at a time, different from the other.
So, understand what is meant by sampajañña, and understand the four kinds of sampajañña; all depends on understanding, clear comprehension of the truth of what is there. So, when there is the clear comprehension of the object of understanding, there is no doubt - any object, by conditions; becomes the object of understanding when time comes by conditions, not by anyone's will or anyone's purpose at all.
Clear comprehension, how it can begin and develop as sappāya
And after hearing what Khun Sarah just said, clear comprehension of how pañña develops, sappāya sampajañña; without the moment of clear comprehension of - how it can begin and develop, as sappāya, there cannot be very clear comprehension at all, or even understanding what is there as it is.
So, all depends on understanding; be true to this moment, how much understanding is there? It is not clear comprehension yet, but how to develop it? Not just - no understanding, not enough understanding; "let's just have a drink or go to the movies or play" and so on. That is not the understanding, not the clear comprehension of how right understanding develops.
But now, understanding that those situations - being intoxicated and so on, cannot be the beginning of the development of understanding, that is clear comprehension of how right understanding can develop. That's why there is the term "clear comprehension of what is suitable" - sappāya sampajañña; is that true?
The only way to have a little more careful considering and understanding
[Achan, earlier you said that asammoha sampajañña is the level of direct understanding of realities.
So, does that mean that the three other kinds of sampajañña can be of different levels?]
Leave it to the moment of asammoha - now. Otherwise, when will it be? No doubt about the nature of that object as just - a reality experiencing the object, or that which cannot experience the object.
Hardness appears all day, no thought about it being real, being a reality; it isn't a table, it's not a chair, it's not a glass at all - just hardness. Isn't that a-sammoha? No-moha, no misunderstanding, taking it for something. So, the moment of direct understanding with direct awarenes - no moha about the truth of it.
[I'm also thinking that sappāya can refer to what is kusala.]
And when, where and how can kusala arise? [By conditions.]
By understanding - when you don't have anything to do... do you just watch TV or read the Tipitaka? what one will do, it depends on what purpose is there, with clear comprehension about what conditions the moment of understanding to arise, little by little.
I don't know how it's translated from Pali to English or in Thai, sampajañña, but even if the word "purpose" is there, it's not the purpose, because a purpose can be kusala as well as akusala: the purpose to watch TV or the purpose to read Tipitaka, Dhamma; that's why even purpose depends on understanding or no understanding, but when there's the understanding, there is the purpose to develop wholesomeness - understanding that there's not yet understanding enough to realize the truth of gocara-dhamma, because it's so deep; that's why the understanding that just reading or considering the truth, or having Dhamma discussion, is better, it's the only way to have a little more careful considering and understanding.
It has to be right understanding of clear comprehension at that level, at that stage; clear comprehension of what the gocara is.
Sampajañña, clear comprehension of the truth of what is there
Is there clear comprehension of sappāya sampajañña now? Or not yet? If there's no clear comprehension of the four at all, how can there be understanding of the truth of what is there right now? From no understanding to the moment of no doubt, because at that moment there is direct awareness with direct understanding, asammoha sampajañña. If it's not there yet, it needs the other three sampajaññas to be condition for the fourth sampajañña.
[She said that it is understanding of the purpose of developing realities.]
So, what reality is purpose? Is it you... or what is it? [Thinking, Ajahn.]
What is thinking? What thinks? [Cetasika, Ajahn.]
What cetasika? [Vitakka cetasika.]
Is it the purpose? [The purpose is connected to the cetana cetasika.]
What do you mean by connected? Is it different from cetana? Is it another reality, which is connected to cetana or what? So, is clear comprehension purpose or not? [The beginning.]
Clear comprehension of that which has to be the object of understanding
What is the beginning? [The beginning of understanding, to become clear comprehension, Ajahn.]
That's why we have to study again and again to understand more and more clearly the truth of one reality at a time. We're talking about citta, not cetasikas, because citta is different from cetasikas; even they experience the same object, arise together, but citta cannot be any cetasika, and any cetasika cannot be citta at all.
So, what is the difference between citta and cetasika? This is comprehension, understanding the difference between citta and cetasikas. So please, again, to understand citta a little more, until it becomes clear comprehension of that which has to be the object of understanding. [Now is the beginning of sampajañña.]
What is sampajañña, is it real? [It's real and it's pañña cetasika, Ajahn.]
So, it is not citta, is it? [Yes, Ajahn.]
And it's not vitakka cetasika, is it? [Yes, Ajahn.]
It is not cetana cetasika, is it? [Yes.]
So, what cetasika is sampajañña? [It's the pañña cetasika, Ajahn.]
It's easy to go wrong because the Dhamma is so very subtle
That's why clear comprehension begins little by little, understanding a little more, understanding gets clearer and clearer. Clear comprehension, more and more. For 45 years, the Buddha taught about the truth, to be realized, to be understood, to be developed, stage by stage, clearer and clearer, see, because the Dhamma is so very subtle, it's easy to go wrong. That's why it takes time again and again to consider just one reality until confidence it's so firm, about its nature, as not that of another reality.
Citta cannot be any cetasika, it cannot be pañña - it cannot understand, it cannot comprehend; and pañña cannot experience the object clearly - the object, not understanding, but just to experience the nature of the object is not the function of pañña. Pañña is moment of understanding the truth of the object; aren't they different? A little more clear comprehension, clearer than before, a little bit.
Kha, sawadee kha, everyone.
Mp3 audio file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZPrf_dsc7mFdv2Faybo-oj2jK5S84e3Q
#Dhammahome source video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYmLCgvcJQc