There is so much self that is unclear even just talking about it
Excerpt from the Dhamma discussion with Ajahn Sujin in English in Kaeng Krachan (TH) on 4th June 2013 am.
There is so much self that is unclear even just talking about it
[A. Sujin] Is there attachment to oneself now?
[Annie] I think there is. Yes.
[A. Sujin] Just thinking is not enough. It must be very precise to really understand any word we are talking about, like self or oneself. Is there I or self at this moment? Or none at all? [I think there is I.]
Just think. So it's not precise. Where's the I at this moment? [Yes, there is.]
So it's only the idea and just thinking about everything like we used to think about this and that. But actually, there can be more understanding about whatever appears now, not just thinking about it. Are you friendly now? Talking about friendliness, but now, are you friendly? Yes or no? So people talk about friendliness, having more and more friendliness, but what is it?
Without understanding that which we are talking about, it's impossible to know more, further about that.
So what is the self now, if you think that you are not clinging to the self now, or are you? [Yes, I think I am.]
To what? What is the self that you are clinging to? Like now. No you, or you? [I don't know.]
This is the beginning of understanding whatever appears. Otherwise, there's the purpose of going somewhere and trying to have very good time, splendid time, very rewarding. No understanding, even of just "what's appearing now?" or "where's the self now?", or "is there self now?", or "is there no self now?" So when we're talking about friendliness, it's not just the word that anyone can think about it, being friendly. That's not enough. But what is it? [To feel loved or accepted by others.]
That is natural for everyone. The same feeling. But what is the understanding? Because the Buddha taught the truth of whatever appears as it is. That is what is meant by Enlightenment. Understanding thoroughly, deeply, as it is, not as we guess or as we used to think about.
Even the self, see, it's not clear. When it's not clear, it seems like there's no self, but actually there is so much self that it is not clear even to talk about it.
Without understanding can anyone know whether it's attachment or metta?
So did you go to the meditation center to have less attachment and more understanding, or do you still cling to get something without understanding? Even clinging is not clear. Because without right understanding, who can tell the difference between clinging and being friendly? And that is the self who does not know.
When there is understanding, understanding is not anyone. It's a reality which can understand that which hasn't been understood before. That's why we learn, listen, and think over it whether it's worthwhile studying, developing understanding. So the bhāvanā, it's translated usually as meditation. What does it mean? [I don't know.]
So it begins with no-understanding. So it has more and more no-understanding or ignorance.
When you think of a funny thing, you smile or laugh alone. Right? Anywhere. Even there's silence, but the story is so funny. So it can condition laughing, pleasant moment.
And what about being friendly in such or a certain place? What about now? No more or what? Or it can be anywhere and anytime. To anyone. That is the development of mettā. And what do you do in order to have more mettā? There, I mean in a retreat to have more mettā, what do you do? Not like now? Or what? [I don't know.]
See, not understanding anything that can be understood anywhere at any time too. And without understanding, can anyone know whether it's attachment or metta? You think that you can be friendly to those around you in the meditation center, right? When they all come out, do you still have such feeling of being friendly to all of them?
Not only at the meditation center, but anywhere. Or it's just only there that you can have such feeling of being friendly with them. Like you, see, in the meditation center, you are friendly, right? And after that, are you still friendly, after retreat? [In the meditation center also aversion can arise.]
Anything. Not different. Like seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, here and there or anywhere. Seeing is seeing. If there is understanding right now, is this place meditation center?
No or yes? [Yes.]
No. No. Very natural. No rule. No time to set friendliness or schedule to study. We can talk about whatever appears anywhere, on the train, in the bus, or here. Let's say seeing itself, can it be on the train, under the water, up in the sky? Seeing is seeing. So there can be the understanding that at moment it sees, there must be that which conditions its arising; to be seeing, not other moment at all.
Is that the self which sees now? Seeing, is it self? [No.]
So what is it?
Thinking about that which is seen without seeing it, like in a dream
This is the way to learn to have less attachment to what we used to take for I or a thing because of ignorance. Otherwise, there would be no way to get rid of the idea of self at all. No matter where you're going, to this or that place, without understanding, ignorance is there.
So many people have different sessions, ordinary life and meditation life, by the self.
As long as there is no understanding of whatever appears now as it is, there must be the idea of something: self, people, things.
Close your eyes. What do you see? No one, right? But there's idea of: I'm sitting here with many people. But actually, it appears to seeing. The visible object has to be object of seeing. Seeing cannot see sound. It cannot see other thing else except that which appears at moment of seeing. Just that.
And after that, there's the idea of something because of memory of the marks, signs, shape, and form. And one keeps that idea all the time, but actually it's gone completely.
So one lives in the world of ignorance, not knowing what's what in a moment because seeing is not thinking.
There can be thinking about that which is seen without seeing it, like in a dream. No seeing, but there is thinking about many things, and they seem as if they're appearing, but actually only memory of what is experienced. Did you have a dream last night? [Yes.]
It's not as real as now. It's not as real. [No.]
Why? [When I'm dreaming, I feel like that's real though.]
But what's the difference between the two? Can anyone see in a dream? Can there be seeing in a dream? [It feels like I'm seeing, but isn't it just thinking?]
See, the difference between dreaming and not dreaming at all. Like now. Because the visible object appears to seeing before thinking. But in a dream, there's no seeing. No visible object appearing like now. It's only pure thinking. The whole story about this and that.
It's like now. When there's no seeing and visible object, it's like dreaming. Exactly the same. So the difference is that when it's not a dream, there is moment of seeing and visible object. That's all. [So when I'm awake with my eyes closed... that is thinking.]
Yes, or hearing or smelling. Anything can be the object. But not in a dream.
Believing in someone else, leading you somewhere unknown
So it's not you. There are only different realities conditioned to arise. This can be object of understanding when right understanding develops more and more. But ignorance cannot experience that because it cannot understand anything, even it's appearing right now. So we understand the difference between ignorance and right understanding. So in what world have you been living? For quite a long, long time when there is no understanding. [Ignorance.]
And the Teachings of the Buddha can condition right understanding about whatever appears now because it's the truth, the truthful words.
Nobody can change it because it's all about reality right now. So one listens to the Teachings or to someone else. See. Have you heard the words, Buddham Saranam Gacchami? [No.]
Dhammam Saranam Gacchami? [No.]
Sangham Saranam Gacchami? Then why do you go to meditation center? What for, when you don't know anything about the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha?
You just believe in someone else, leading you somewhere unknown without understanding.
So first of all, we should know what does understanding understand. Otherwise, we just talk about understanding, but what does it understand? So just all about daily life. Seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, clinging, aversion, liking, disliking. Everything in a day is taught. Otherwise, who is knowing, right now? Is there clinging now, attachment now? Who knows? Is seeing not me? Who knows?
So each word should be studied carefully because it will lead to more and more understanding of the whole Tipitaka. But if there is no understanding of one word, it's impossible to understand more at all. That's the way to understand. Not just listening, but to really understand what that word represents. Like seeing, it doesn't represent anyone at all. Just a reality which is conditioned to see.
Without the eye base, could it arise? Could whatever is appearing now appear? So it's just in the moment. Seeing is not only conditioned by the eye base, but also by that which can be seen, which impinges on the eye base to condition the seeing to arise and see it. That's all. Just that. It's gone. Seeing right now is not the seeing of a moment ago at all, different conditions, different visible object arising and falling away in a split second.
Just consider whether it's true, this moment, as we're just talking about. No one there — it's gone completely, like sound and hearing; they are all gone. So it's not me who hears, and what is heard is no-one's voice, it's only that which can be heard. This is way to have less and less attachment to what we take for self from birth. Everything is self or something permanent.
Without seeing right now, can there be the idea of "I see", "I am seeing"? While seeing just arises and it sees. But ignorance takes it for "my seeing" or "I am seeing". But when it doesn't arise, where is the I who sees?
When there's thinking, it seems like "I think", but actually thinking is conditioned. We think differently all the time by conditions. With right understanding, without right understanding, with attachment or with aversion — all day. Just in a moment, from moment to moment.
And now we are talking about the truth of whatever is appearing now; taught by the Buddha himself who had enlightened it long, long time ago. But the Teaching is still about reality right now, so it can be understood any time when anyone hears it.
Without primary understanding there is no condition for sati to arise
[Lan] Is that like the practice of meditation of mindfulness? What is arising passes away at the present moment?
[A. Sujin] It's too soon or too early to talk about sati. See, what is that? See, sati. Can it arise without conditions? Without the understanding of reality now, can sati arise? Usually there is ignorance, not sati. Until the theoretical understanding or intellectual understanding is firm enough to be condition for sati to arise. Because sati is also non-self, uncontrollable, like seeing and hearing. But when thinking about it, some would like to have it at will or do something to get it, without understanding. But without the pariyatti, intellectual understanding, there are no right conditions for sati to arise.
That's why we learn to understand step by step, little by little, and we don't mind what is sati because even right now there's no understanding of that which appears — which is not sati. And at moment of understanding the words of the Teachings, isn't there sati with that understanding?
So there are many levels of sati to talk about. Intellectual level, or direct understanding, or the penetration of reality as it is. As the right understanding develops with sati, not just sati by itself.
Without right understanding, no condition for sati to arise. We just want to have it, try to have it without any understanding that it is conditioned. And the Teachings of the Buddha are all about detachment. Because whenever there is ignorance, there cannot be detachment. Whenever there is attachment, there must be ignorance.
So there can be detachment only when there is understanding, not ignorance. Ignorance cannot detach from anything because it doesn't know anything at all. Seeing sees. Ignorance cannot understand that as just a moment of a reality, an element which is conditioned to arise and see just that, not another thing, not another moment, only seeing. Then it's gone completely, it will never come back at all.
Without this primary understanding, no condition for sati to arise. Because sati has to arise with right understanding when we talk about the moment with sati which can understand whatever appears. It needs to have intellectual understanding. There are many people who do not know anything and they go to the meditation center, wishing to understand or to get whatever they think about, but no understanding at all.
While listening to the Teachings there is sati at moments of understanding
[Lan] Is that sati or mindfulness when experiencing hardness, the nature of the hardness?
[A. Sujin] Now there is hardness and the experiencing of hardness. Is there sati? Is it there? At this moment of holding the microphone. [Yes.]
No. Ordinary experience, the kaya viññana, the body consciousness experiences hardness without any understanding, without sati. Like anyone in the world who doesn't have any understanding of reality, can you say that that person has sati at moment of holding microphone?
[Isn't there sati also without understanding?]
When it's dana, sila. But while one is listening to the Teachings, at moments of understanding, there is sati. Just that level, intellectual understanding, not the direct understanding of a reality which one has heard about.
So don't rush to do anything without understanding because it's the self wishing, trying to get something, not to understand and detach from clinging.
So the self is there, having more self without understanding. If anyone thinks of having sati without intellectual understanding, it's not according to the Teachings of the Buddha: pariyatti, patipatti, and pativedha.
There cannot be patipatti first and then pariyatti after. Because the meaning of patipatti — pati is particular, and patti is to approach with understanding.
The conditions for seeing are far apart from the conditions for hearing
Like seeing is seeing, hearing is hearing, thinking is thinking, attachment is attachment. This is said, but what is the moment of direct understanding of just one reality at a time? Like now, seeing, hearing, they seem to arise together, but actually different moments, far apart. The conditions for seeing are far away from the conditions for hearing. They're not as close as we think.
And when one wants so much to have sati, isn't that clinging? But when one knows — it's impossible to have direct awareness without the firm foundation of the intellectual understanding, because now we know that seeing is not permanent, right? Or is it permanent? It's not permanent.
This is very, very weak understanding because it's gone, arising and falling away all the time. And we just heard that seeing is not permanent, arising and falling away, and it's not hearing, it's not thinking; this is what we learn, consider, but not direct understanding of the moment when seeing arises and sees. At that moment of the clear comprehension of that, there is no other thing at all, just one at a time as it is. No wish to have such experience. It is anatta.
When there are right conditions, no one can stop its arising. But when there are no conditions, no one can have it arisen at all. Just trying very hard, but that is not the direct understanding with detachment, but it's attachment, trying so hard. So instead of understanding, there will be more and more idea of self who's trying, not to understand, but to get something and thinking that it's understanding, but it's not.
Like now, when pañña develops, so great, it can experience with detachment according to the level of pañña. While the intellectual understanding cannot know just that moment as it is because there are many things in succession so fast, very elaborate, that it's only thinking about seeing, not understanding the actual moment of seeing. And if one is trying so hard, it's impossible because it's done by attachment and ignorance.
Until there is less and less ignorance and attachment, then reality can appear to the developed pañña by itself naturally, anatta. And that's the moment to understand the meaning of anatta.
Have you heard about the subtlety of the four noble truths? All of them. All four. But it seems like it's very easy. Just wanting to have and then one goes somewhere and thinks that one knows. But when it's known, only when time comes by conditions.
Mp3 audio file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1He9GRXQrE9aDJCRQgZb9m5sOcoCmc1j4
Dhammahome source audio: https://www.dhammahome.com/audio_en/download/a1f6b1cd/59/2