The Natural Way of Development

Questioner: Among the forty kinds of meditation subjects of samatha, I prefer “Mindfulness of Breathing.” However, I understand that by means of this subject, I cannot eradicate defilements, that I cannot realize the noble Truths and reach nibbāna.

Sujin: Through samatha defilements cannot be eradicated, nor can the noble Truths be realized and nibbāna be attained.

Questioner: I think that people’s aim is eradicating defilements and attaining nibbāna. However, they do not understand what the cause of clinging is in daily life. They do not know when there is lobha. If someone just wishes to eradicate defilements without knowing them as they are, there is clinging to a result. Is it then possible for them to develop satipaṭṭhāna?

Sujin: No, it is impossible.

Questioner: Can we develop both samatha and vipassanā?

Sujin: People will know for themselves whether they are developing samatha or vipassanā. However, if there is no right understanding of these different ways of development, neither samatha nor vipassanā can be developed.

Questioner: Could you please give some directions for the development of vipassanā?

Sujin: Nobody can hasten the development of satipaṭṭhāna. The goal of satipaṭṭhāna is the eradication of defilements. However, a person who does not know his defilements is not motivated to follow the way leading to their eradication. If someone would line up children who are ignorant of their defilements and tell them to eradicate defilements by the development of satipaṭṭhāna, they would not want to eradicate defilements. How could they then develop satipaṭṭhāna?

All people, children and adults alike, have many defilements. If one would ask them whether they would wish to get rid of them, most of them would answer that they do not wish to. Therefore, one should not try to force others to develop satipaṭṭhāna.

Some people, when they hear about defilements, may not like to have them, but do they really know their defilements? Attachment, lobha, is a defilement. Do people want to have lobha? They may not like the idea of having lobha, but actually, people like lobha each and every moment. This shows that one does not understand the characteristic of the defilement of lobha. We can find out whether we really understand lobha as a defilement or not. Is the food delicious? Are our clothes and the things with which we beautify ourselves nice? Is this music pleasing, that odour fragrant, and is the chair soft and comfortable? Is what we touch agreeable? Although some people do not like the idea of having lobha and think that they should not have it, they can find out that citta needs lobha all the time.

The development of satipaṭṭhāna is the development of sati and paññā. It is not trying to have concentration, samādhi.

Question: What is attā-saññā, remembrance of self?

Sujin: Attā-saññā is remembrance (saññā) with clinging to the concept of self (attā), thus, wrong perception of self. We do not have doubts about attā-saññā because we all are familiar with it. When a person has realized the noble Truths at the attainment of the first stage of enlightenment, the stage of the stream-winner (sotāpanna), the wrong view is eradicated which takes realities for self, for beings or for people. However, there is bound to be attā-saññā if one has not developed satipaṭṭhāna. There is bound to be ignorance and wrong view if sati does not arise, if there is no awareness of the characteristics of realities as they naturally appear through one doorway at a time. Wrong view takes the realities that appear for a compound, a “whole,” for something that lasts, for attā, self. If people at this moment do not know realities as they are, there is bound to be attā-saññā, the remembrance or perception that it is “I” who is seeing, and that what is seen is a being, a person, a self.

When someone has only theoretical understanding of realities that is the result of listening to the Dhamma, he is not able to directly understand nāma and rūpa as they are. He does not realize that what he sees and conceives as people and beings, is in reality only that which appears through the eyes. Therefore, we should time and again investigate the Dhamma we hear and study, we should ponder over it in all details. Only in this way the meaning of the words that designate characteristics of realities can be fully understood.

The wording “that which appears through the eyes” describing the characteristic of visible object is altogether appropriate. It explains that visible object is only an element (dhātu) appearing through the eyes so that it can be seen. No matter what colour it is: red, green, blue, yellow or white, a bright or a dull colour, it must appear when it impinges on the rūpa that is eyesense. When someone, after having seen what appears through the eyesense, does not understand realities as they are, there is bound to be attā-saññā. He takes what was seen for people, beings or things. When people are absorbed in different colours, it causes them to think of a “whole”, of shape and form, and, thus, there is remembrance (saññā) of the outward appearance of persons and things. When it seems that one sees people, beings or things, there are in reality only different colours that are seen, such as black, white, the colour of skin, red or yellow.

If people did not interpret different colours or “translate” them into shape and form, they would not conceive them as beings, people or things. Therefore, when we see and we are then absorbed in the shape and form, in the outward appearance (nimitta) and the details of things, we should know that this occurs only because colour appears. When colours appear, we think about them, interpret them and “translate” them into shape and form of different things.

When sati arises and is mindful of realities and paññā begins to study and investigate their characteristics, one will begin to understand that the outward appearance and all the details of things, all the different colours, are only what appears through the eyes, nothing else. Then paññā begins to penetrate the characteristics of realities as not a self, not a being, not a person. If sati arises and is aware time and again, one will understand the meaning of the Buddha’s words explaining that, by the development of the understanding of the realities which naturally appear, one will not cling to the outward appearance and the details of things.

We read in the “Middle Length Sayings” (I, no. 27) in the “Lesser Discourse on the Simile of the Elephant’s Footprint” that the Buddha spoke to the Brahmin Jāṇussoṇi about the monk’s life. He spoke about the “restraint of the senses”:

“He, possessed of the ariyan body of moral habit, subjectively experiences unsullied well-being. Having seen visible object with the eye, he is not entranced by the general appearance, he is not entranced by the detail. If he dwells with this organ of sight uncontrolled, covetousness and dejection, evil unskilled states of mind might predominate. So he fares along controlling it; he guards the organ of sight, he comes to have control over the organ of sight...”

(The same is said with regard to the other doorways.)

This kind of restraint can be achieved through the development of paññā that understands the realities that appear as they are. One will begin to let go of attā-saññā with regard to what appears through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the bodysense and the mind-door, in accordance with the degree of paññā that has been reached.

We should remember that no matter which topic or which detail the teachings deal with, it all concerns the realities of daily life. Sati should be aware of the realities that appear so that paññā is able to clearly understand their characteristics. This leads to the complete eradication of defilements.

We should listen carefully to the Dhamma, we should study and investigate the dhammas that are already appearing, which are our ordinary daily life. We cannot yet immediately eradicate lobha, dosa, moha and the other defilements. People desire to eradicate defilements, but they should know that defilements can only be eradicated at the moment of enlightenment, when the magga-citta, path-consciousness, arises. First, “personality view”, sakkāya-diṭṭhi, is eradicated, which takes the dhammas appearing through the six doors for self, being or person. Personality view is eradicated at the first stage of enlightenment, the stage of the stream-winner, sotāpanna.

After that stage has been attained, paññā should be developed further so that the following stages of enlightenment can be attained and defilements can successively be eradicated. These stages are the stages of the once-returner, sakadāgāmī, the non-returner, anāgāmī, and the arahat. Thus, paññā can be developed only gradually. One should not try to hasten its development, one should not believe that it is sufficient just to practise for a day, a month or a year, without even understanding the right conditions for sati. Actually, sati which is sammā-sati (right mindfulness) of the Eightfold Path can only arise if one first studies and understands the characteristics of realities as they appear through the senses and through the mind-door. Then sammā-sati can arise and be aware, and paññā can begin to investigate realities that naturally appear in daily life, so that they can be seen as they really are.

The development of satipaṭṭhāna is a threefold training (sikkhā): training in higher morality, adhisīla sikkhā, training in higher consciousness, adhicitta sikkhā, training in higher wisdom, adhipaññā sikkhā.

When sati is aware of the realities that are appearing, there is higher sīla, sīla that is more refined. Sati is aware of the characteristics of citta, cetasika and rūpa. It is aware of kusala dhammas and akusala dhammas before actions through the body or through speech arise.

Satipaṭṭhāna is training in higher consciousness, which means concentration, samādhi or ekaggatā cetasika. When sammā-sati arises, there is concentration on the nāma or rūpa that appears, on the dhamma that arises and falls away very rapidly.

Satipaṭṭhāna is training in higher wisdom, because paññā investigates and studies in detail the characteristics of realities as they are appearing in daily life, so that they can be known as they are.

Questioner: Everything you have explained is very beneficial for me at this moment. But, although I have some understanding of what I heard, my understanding is not yet sufficient. When I practise satipaṭṭhāna, I immediately cling to a concept of self who is making use of sati. I am only a beginner and, as far as I know myself, I have not even attained the first stage of insight that knows the difference between the characteristic of nāma and of rūpa, nāma-rūpa-pariccheda-ñāṇa. What should I do to have more understanding?

Sujin: If someone tries to do something special with the aim to develop insight, his life will be very complicated. How can he act in the right way if there is still a concept of self who will do particular things? If people wish to do particular things in order to have more understanding, they are clinging. They cling to the understanding of nāma and rūpa that have arisen already. Satipaṭṭhāna is the dhamma which is aware of whatever reality appears through one of the six doors, such as the dhamma appearing through the eyes, visible object, when there is seeing at this moment. Gradually satipaṭṭhāna can be aware naturally and paññā can begin to study and investigate the true nature of nāma and rūpa.

Question: How should we develop satipaṭṭhāna when we are seeing?

Sujin: When there is seeing, you can be aware and realize that what appears to seeing is a type of reality which only appears through the eyes. When we see hairs, a table, a chair, a pillar or a hall, we should know that what is seen is in reality only that which appears through the eyes. It does not appear through the ears, the nose, the tongue or the bodysense. When paññā has not been developed to the degree of knowing the difference between the characteristics of nāma and rūpa, this stage of insight cannot arise.

Questioner: When I receive a Dhamma book about the practice in daily life, I read it many times, because I want to be able to practise. However, all the time there is a concept of self, there is self who sees when there is seeing. I cannot realize that colour is rūpa, seeing is nāma. I keep on thinking about all that has been explained, but I cannot be aware of nāma and rūpa in the right way. Please, could you explain to me how to be aware?

Sujin: When there is seeing which experiences an object through the eyes, can you at that moment investigate the characteristic of the dhamma that naturally appears? It is essential to know how understanding should be developed, so that later on paññā can become accomplished to the degree of the first stage of insight, knowledge of the difference between nāma and rūpa. First of all, sati can be aware and study the different characteristics of nāma and rūpa which are naturally appearing through any doorway. Awareness is different from thinking about nāma and rūpa, from theoretical understanding that stems from listening to the Dhamma. Awareness of realities is not developed when you, while seeing, think about it with agitation, worry and nervousness. It is not developed if you think with agitation that what appears is rūpa and that seeing is nāma. At such a moment, there is no investigation, no study of a characteristic of rūpa or a characteristic of nāma. It is necessary to have first correct understanding of the characteristics of nāma and rūpa so that satipaṭṭhāna can arise and be directly aware of them. You should understand that the nāma that sees is a reality that experiences something, that it has no shape or form and that it is non-self. It is not necessary to assume a particular posture in order to know realities. It is not necessary to stand first and then see, or to sit or lie down first and then see, so that you would know seeing as it is.

Satipaṭṭhāna investigates precisely the characteristic of seeing as a type of reality that experiences something, not “I” or self, not a being or a person. When satipaṭṭhāna arises and it is aware of the characteristic of rūpa appearing through the eyes, that characteristic can be investigated. In this way it can be known as only a type of reality, not self, not a being or a person.

Questioner: The practice should be steadfast, not agitated, as you just said. Therefore, is it possible to use the method of satipaṭṭhāna of breathing (ānāpāna satipaṭṭhāna)? The subjects of satipaṭṭhāna are body, feeling, citta and dhamma, but we can combine these with ānāpāna sati, mindfulness of breathing. I myself have given the name of “ānāpāna satipaṭṭhāna” to this way of practice.

Sujin: It is mostly the desire for result that causes a person to look for a combination of several methods. He may not know how to develop understanding and tries therefore to use one method in combination with another one so that understanding (sampajañña) would become more accomplished. He believes that there is in that way no forgetfulness and that he can focus for a long time on one object. However, is that not clinging? People may well wish to focus citta for a long time on a particular object, but they cannot be mindful in the right way, they cannot be mindful, of what appears, for example, through the eyes or through the other doorways. When people try to make citta concentrate on one object they are actually combining several methods of development because of clinging to result. It is not the development of paññā.

For the person who develops satipaṭṭhāna naturally, the aim is to understand realities and thereby to become detached from them. However, if one has no understanding yet, one cannot become detached. Can you, while you try to make citta concentrate on one object, let go of desire? If you try to concentrate, you do not develop paññā with the aim of understanding realities and becoming detached. If people try to do something other than developing satipaṭṭhāna naturally, they will not know as they are the characteristics of realities that are appearing at this moment. Hearing is real, it appears naturally and so it is with thinking, happy feeling or unhappy feeling; they all appear naturally, they are all dhammas, realities. If sati does not arise and is not aware of realities, there is not the development of satipaṭṭhāna. What is the use of combining different methods of practice if there is no understanding of nāma and rūpa as they appear already through the six doors?

Questioner: When I combine different methods, I acquire more understanding of the three characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattā. They are explained in the textbooks I have read. I also have read about mindfulness of breathing and this helps me not to be distracted by other matters. If I have a problem that I cannot solve, I apply myself to mindfulness of breathing. But if I try to think, “seeing through the eyes is nāma, it is non-self,” or, “hearing is non-self,” I feel confused. There is still self all the time, self who is acting, who is thinking. I feel confused and worried about that.

Sujin: If you combine different ways of practice, you are bound to become worried, because there is no paññā which investigates and studies the characteristics of realities as they naturally appear. You said that the benefit derived from your way of practice is knowing the three general characteristics of realities: impermanence, dukkha and anattā. However, that is only textbook knowledge of the three characteristics. If you do not know nāma and rūpa as they appear, how can you know the three general characteristics of nāma and rūpa? They must be characteristics of the nāma and rūpa that appear, one at a time.

It is through insight knowledge, vipassanā ñāṇa, that the three general characteristics are penetrated. There cannot be vipassanā ñāṇa if one does not know the different characteristics of the nāmas and rūpas as they appear one at a time. If one does not know the difference between the characteristic of nāma and the characteristic of rūpa, the three general characteristics of realities cannot be penetrated.

Questioner: How should one be aware? I know that sati is aware, but how? Should there be profound consideration or a more superficial consideration of the three general characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattā? Or should there be awareness only of softness and hardness? I have understood what you taught about the practice, I listened for two or three years. However, I cannot practise. I learnt about nāma and rūpa, but what are they? How should I be aware of them? I feel confused about awareness of dhammas at the present moment. There must be a special method for this. A special method is important. Should there be profound awareness or awareness which is more superficial, awareness for a long time or for a short time? But I take everything for self.

Sujin: This way of acting leads to confusion. You may try to regulate sati, to have profound awareness or a more superficial awareness, to have a great deal of it or only a little, but, as regards the development of paññā, there is no special method or technique. The development of paññā begins with listening to the Dhamma, and studying the realities sati can be aware of, so that understanding can grow. These are conditions for the arising of sati that is directly aware of the characteristics of nāma and rūpa as they naturally appear. Since the nāma and rūpa that appear are real, paññā can come to know their true nature.

You should not try to regulate sati and try to make it strong or to make it decrease so that it is weak, or to make it superficial. If one acts in that way, one clings to the concept of self and does not investigate and study the characteristics of the dhammas that appear. What are the realities that appear? Someone who is not forgetful considers realities and he can be naturally aware of their characteristics. He begins to know very gradually the characteristics of nāma dhammas and rūpa dhammas. He does not try to make sati focus on an object so that it could consider that object more deeply, over and over again. Sati arises and falls away, and then there may be again forgetfulness, or sati may be aware again of another object. Thus, we can see that satipaṭṭhāna is anattā. People who understand that all realities, including satipaṭṭhāna, are anattā, will not be confused. If someone clings to the concept of self, he is inclined to regulate and direct sati, but he does not know the right way. If one’s practice is not natural, it is complicated and creates confusion. If awareness is natural, if the characteristics of realities that appear are considered and investigated, there will be understanding, no confusion.

Questioner: I do not know yet the characteristic of satipaṭṭhāna. When I listen intently to your lecture, I understand the subject matter, the theory. There is also awareness while I have theoretical understanding, but I do not consider nāma and rūpa at this moment. I am not sure whether that is satipaṭṭhāna or not.

Sujin: If we do not know that our life is only nāma and rūpa, we are bound to take realities for self. We are full of the concept of self and this can only be eradicated completely by satipaṭṭhāna. Sati can be aware and begin to investigate the characteristics of nāma and rūpa that appear. In the beginning, when sati is aware, there cannot yet be clear understanding of the realities that appear as nāma and as rūpa. The understanding may be so weak that it is hardly noticeable. Understanding develops only gradually, it can eliminate ignorance stage by stage; ignorance cannot be immediately eradicated. It is just as in the case of the knife-handle someone holds each day and which wears off only a little at a time.

We read in the “Kindred Sayings” (III, Middle Fifty, Ch V, § 101, Adze-handle) that the Buddha, while he was in Sāvatthī, said to the monks that defilements can be eradicated by realizing the arising and falling away of the five khandhas. This cannot be achieved “by not knowing, by not seeing.” If someone would just wish for the eradication of defilements and he would be neglectful of the development of understanding, defilements cannot be eradicated. Only by the development of understanding, defilements can gradually be eliminated. We read:

“Just as if, monks, when a carpenter or carpenter’s apprentice looks upon his adze-handle and sees thereon his thumb-mark and his finger-marks he does not thereby know: ‘Thus and thus much of my adze-handle has been worn away today, thus much yesterday, thus much at other times.’ But he knows the wearing away of it just by its wearing away. Even so, monks, the monk who dwells attentive to self-training has not this knowledge: ‘Thus much and thus much of the āsavas has been worn away today, thus much yesterday, and thus much at other times.’ But he knows the wearing away of them just by their wearing away.”

Understanding has to be developed for an endlessly long time. Some people dislike it that sati and paññā develop only very gradually, but there is no other way. If someone is impatient and tries to combine different ways of practice in order to hasten the development of paññā, he makes his life very complicated.

Questioner: What is the difference between the practice that is natural and the practice that is unnatural?

Sujin: At this moment, you are sitting in a natural way and you may be aware of realities which appear, such as softness or hardness, presenting themselves through the bodysense, or visible object appearing through the eyesense. All these dhammas appear naturally. However, someone’s practice is unnatural if he believes, while he develops satipaṭṭhāna, that he should sit cross-legged, in the lotus position, and that he should concentrate on specific realities. There is desire when a person selects realities that have not arisen yet as objects of awareness. He neglects to be aware of realities that appear already, such as seeing, hearing, visible object, sound, odour, flavour, cold, heat, softness or hardness. Even if there is only a slight amount of wrong understanding, it conditions clinging and this hides the truth. In that case, paññā cannot arise and know the dhammas appearing at that moment.

People who develop satipaṭṭhāna should know precisely the difference between the moment of forgetfulness, when there is no sati, and the moment when there is sati. Otherwise, satipaṭṭhāna cannot be developed. If one is usually forgetful, one is bound to be forgetful again. Someone may wish to select an object in order to concentrate on it, but this is not the way to develop satipaṭṭhāna. We should have right understanding of the moment when there is forgetfulness, no sati, that is, when we do not know the characteristics of realities appearing in daily life, such as seeing or hearing. When there is sati, one can consider, study and understand the dhammas appearing through the six doors. When someone selects a particular object in order to focus on it, he will not know that sati is non-self. When sati arises, it can be aware of realities that naturally appear. When odour appears, there can be awareness of odour that presents itself through the nose. It can be known as only a type of reality that arises, that appears and then disappears. Or the nāma which experiences odour can be understood as only a type of reality that presents itself. After it has experienced odour, it falls away. It is not a being, a person or self.

Questioner: Is it true that the sotāpanna, the person who has attained the first stage of enlightenment, does not recognize his father or mother?

Sujin: The sotāpanna clearly realizes the dhamma that sees as a type of nāma. After seeing he knows what it is that was perceived, namely a person, a being or a thing he can think of. Thinking is another type of nāma that arises and then falls away. Is there anybody who sees and then does not know the meaning of what was seen? If that is the case, the Buddha would not have recognized Ānanda or Moggallāna, or anything at all. Then there would be only the nāma that sees and no other types of nāma that recognize what was seen. However, dhammas take their own natural course, they are what they are. Apart from the nāma that sees there is, after the seeing, also the nāma that knows the meaning of what was seen.