Vipassanā

Questioner: In the development of vipassanā, insight, we learn to see things as they are. Seeing things as they are means: seeing nāma and rūpa as they are. Thus, we should distinguish nāma and rūpa from each other more clearly.Rūpa is that which does not experience anything. Can we say that nāma is that which experiences and rūpa is that which is experienced?

Nina: You say that rūpa is that which is experienced. Your words imply that nāma cannot be experienced. Nāma experiences not only rūpa but it experiences nāma as well. Can you not notice it when there is a happy feeling, when there is aversion, when there is thinking? It is not “self” who notices this, but nāma. Nāma knows nāma at those moments.

Question: In vipassanā we develop awareness. Awareness is always awareness of something. I am not sure that I understand what awareness is.

Nina: The Pāli term “sati” is translated into English as “mindfulness” or “awareness”. These words might create confusion. When we say in conventional language that we are aware of something it might mean that we know or experience something, but this does not necessarily mean that there is sati. It is, however, not important which word we use to name the reality which is sati, but it is essential to understand its characteristic.

Sati is a “beautiful” mental factor, sobhana cetasika, which arises only with sobhana cittas(44). Each kusala citta is accompanied by sati which is non-forgetful, heedful, of what is wholesome and prevents one from unwholesomeness. There are many degrees and levels of sati. There is sati with dāna, generosity. When we are generous it is sati which is non-forgetful of generosity. There is sati with sīla, morality. When we abstain from killing it is sati which is heedful, which prevents us from killing. There is sati in samatha, the development of calm. When we for example ponder over the virtues of the Buddha there are moments of calm; it is sati which is mindful of the object which conditions calm. When we develop vipassanā there is sati accompanying the kusala citta, and it is mindful of whatever nāma or rūpa appears now, at this moment, through one of the six doors. Through mindfulness of nāma and rūpa we will learn to see things as they really are. Thus, no matter whether we perform dāna, observe sīla, develop samatha or vipassanā, there is sati with the kusala citta, but the quality of sati is different at these different moments.

Question: How do I know when there is sati of vipassanā?

Nina: In order to know when there is sati of vipassanā we should understand what the object of sati is: a reality, a nāma or rūpa which appears now. Nāmas and rūpas appear one at a time through the six doors. They are realities which can be directly experienced. We are ignorant of realities and we do not know the difference between realities and concepts or ideas. We can think of concepts and ideas but they are not realities which can be directly experienced through one of the six doors. We believe that there are people and things which stay and we do not see that what we take for permanent or self are in reality only different phenomena which are impermanent and not self.

We cling to the concept of a person or thing which exists, but what is there in reality? What can be directly experienced through one of the six doors? Not a person, not a thing which exists, only different elements which present themselves one at a time through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense or mind, through these six doorways.

When we, for example, take a loaf of bread, there is usually no development of insight, but we cling to the concept of a bread which stays, at least for some time. Bread is a concept or idea, it is not a reality which can be directly experienced. What are the realities which can be directly experienced? Through the eyes that which is visible, visible object, can be experienced. We do not see a loaf of bread, but we can think of bread because of remembrance of past experiences. The seeing of visible object conditions the thinking of the concept of bread. Through the eyes appears only visible object. Seeing sees visible object. Visible object and seeing are realities which can be known by paññā , right understanding. When we touch the loaf of bread, tangible object can be experienced through the bodysense, namely: hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion or pressure. These are realities, rūpas, which can be known by paññā . The nāma which experiences these rūpas is also real and it can be known by paññā . Through the nose odour can be experienced. The rūpa which is odour and the nāma which experiences odour are realities which can be known by paññā . Through the tongue flavour can be experienced. The rūpa which is flavour and the nāma which experiences flavour are realities which can be known. Thus we see that there are many different nāmas and rūpas which can be known one at a time. We still think: “I see, I hear, I experience”, but through the development of insight we will learn that there are only nāma and rūpa, no self. The nāma which is seeing sees, not self. Seeing arises because of conditions and falls away immediately, although we do not realize this. The nāma which is hearing hears, not self. There are many different types of nāmas which experience different objects.

One nāma or rūpa at a time can be object of mindfulness, not concepts or ideas such as a person, a cup or a loaf of bread. We use names in daily life which denote concepts and ideas, but we must know the difference between concepts and ideas and characteristics of nāma and rūpa which can be directly experienced without the need to name them. Nāma and rūpa are ultimate or absolute realities (paramattha dhammas) which each have their own characteristic. Seeing, for example has its own characteristic; we can use different names in different languages to denote seeing, but its characteristic is unchangeable. Seeing is always seeing, no matter how we name it; it is a nāma which experiences visible object and it can be known when it appears. Is there no seeing now? Hardness is always hardness, no matter how we name it; it is a rūpa which can be experienced through the bodysense. Is there no hardness now? Thus, we can use different names for a nāma or a rūpa, but their characteristics cannot be changed. When they appear through one of the six doors they can be directly experienced. We can think of concepts and ideas, but they are not ultimate realities. When we think of them the thinking itself is a reality which arises, a type of nāma; it arises because of conditions.

Sati in vipassanā is mindful, non-forgetful, of ultimate realities, of the nāmas and rūpas which appear. It is completely different from what we mean by “mindfulness” or “awareness” in conventional language. Every citta experiences an object, it is “aware” or conscious of an object, but not every citta is accompanied by sati. Hardness, for example, can be experienced by different types of citta, but there is not sati with every type of citta. When there is sati which is mindful of the characteristic of hardness, only that characteristic appears and there is at that moment no thought of a thing which is hard or of a hand which touches something hard. A thing which is hard or a hand which touches something hard are concepts we may think of, but at such moments there is no mindfulness of the characteristic of hardness. At the moment sati is mindful of hardness which appears, paññā can investigate that characteristic in order to know it as it is: only a rūpa, not a thing which stays, not a “self”.

In the beginning there cannot yet be a clear understanding of nāma and rūpa, but through mindfulness of the characteristics of nāma and rūpa which appear one at a time, paññā can gradually develop.

It is important to know the difference between the moments when there is sati and those when there is no sati. There is often forgetfulness of realities, but sometimes sati can arise. We will learn the difference from experience. After there has been forgetfulness of realities for a long time sati may arise which is mindful of one characteristic of nāma or rūpa at a time. It is not self who is mindful, it is sati. We cannot force sati to arise because it is a type of nāma and not self. It can arise only when there are conditions for its arising.

Question: We cannot be aware of nāma and rūpa at the same time, but I would like to know how nāma and rūpa are related to each other. When there is hearing there is also sound which is rūpa. When there is seeing there is also visible object which is rūpa.

Nina: Do you want to have theoretical knowledge of all nāmas and rūpas or do you want to develop the wisdom which knows from direct experience the characteristics of the phenomena appearing through the five senses and through the mind-door? There are different levels of wisdom and we should find out what kind of wisdom we are developing.

There are several kinds of rūpa, some of which are conditioned by kamma, some by citta, some by temperature and some by nutrition. There are many kinds of nāma. Nāma can condition rūpa and rūpa can condition nāma in many different ways.

Question: Why do you use the word “condition”? Is condition the same as cause?

Nina: When we speak about cause we usually think of one cause which brings about one effect. There are, however, different kinds of conditions for each nāma and for each rūpa. For example, when there is seeing, the rūpa which is visible object conditions the seeing by way of object. But seeing does not only have visible object as its condition. Eye-sense, which is another kind of rūpa, conditions the seeing too. In studying the teachings we will know more about the different conditions and we will see how complex the way is in which they operate each time we experience an object. When we know that there are various factors which condition the arising of phenomena such as seeing or hearing, we will better understand, at least in theory, that seeing or hearing are only conditioned phenomena and that they do not belong to a self.

We should know, however, what kind of wisdom we want to develop; do we want to develop only theoretical understanding of the truth, acquired by thinking about it, or do we also want to develop the wisdom which knows the truth through direct experience?

Question: I do not understand the difference between thinking about the truth and the direct experience of the truth. How can we directly experience the truth?

Nina: The truth can be known from direct experience; however, it is not “self” who knows it, but paññā . Paññā can directly know different characteristics of nāma and rūpa when they appear. When we, for example, are feeling hot, and sati is mindful of the characteristic of heat, it can be realized by paññā as a kind of rūpa. It is not necessary to think about it. At the moment we think about it or we call it “rūpa”, the characteristic of heat cannot be known. Only what appears at the present moment can be directly known. Knowledge acquired from the direct experience of realities is deeper than knowledge acquired from thinking.

Question: When there is seeing, the seeing is conditioned by the rūpa which is visible object and by the rūpa which is eyesense. Could I experience the rūpas which condition the seeing?

Nina: It is important to remember that we can experience only the nāma or the rūpa which appears at the present moment; not the nāma or rūpa which does not appear. It depends on one’s accumulations and on the development of wisdom which types of nāma and rūpa can be directly understood. It is impossible to regulate which nāmas and rūpas we should be aware of and in which order.

Question: Is it right that we should not name realities when we are aware of them, since they have fallen away by the time we name them?

Nina: Is thinking of the name a reality? Does it appear?

Question: Yes, it appears, it is a kind of nāma. We cannot help it that this kind of nāma appears.

Nina: That is right, it arises because of its own conditions. Do you not think that this reality can be known as well? When there is seeing, the characteristic of seeing can be known. When there is thinking about seeing, there is a kind of nāma which is different from seeing. If we try to regulate awareness and think that there should or should not be awareness of particular realities, we do not realize that awareness is anattā, non-self. Nāma and rūpa arise because of their own conditions, they are beyond control. If we try to control sati we will not know realities as they are.

Question: I still think that it is better not to think of the names of phenomena. Am I right?

Nina: There is no need to think of their names; the characteristics of nāma and rūpa can be directly experienced. But if the nāma arises which thinks of a name, we cannot prevent it; thinking is a reality which has its own characteristic and it can be known too.

Question: I have heard that the four Applications of Mindfulness or “satipaṭṭhāna” are: mindfulness of the body, mindfulness of feelings, mindfulness of cittas and mindfulness of dhammas. How can I be aware in accordance with the four Applications of Mindfulness?

Nina: There is no need to think of the four Applications of Mindfulness when we are aware of nāma and rūpa. We can develop understanding only of the reality which appears at the present moment. The Buddha taught the four Applications of Mindfulness in order to show people that all nāmas and rūpas can be object of mindfulness. This does not mean that we should think of those four Applications when we are aware. We cannot control which nāma or rūpa will appear; they are anattā, non-self.

Question: Can what we call the “ego” be the object of mindfulness? In which Application of Mindfulness is it included?

Nina: Where is your “ego” and what is its characteristic? How do you experience it and through which door? Do you experience it through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense or mind-door?

Question: I can only think of the self but I cannot directly experience its characteristic.

Nina: We can think of many different things, but the reality of that moment is only thinking. In the development of insight we learn that what we take for self are only nāma and rūpa which arise and fall away. In reality there is nothing else besides nāma and rūpa. Since there is no “ego” it is not included in any of the four Applications of Mindfulness.

Question: What about realities outside ourselves, can we have wrong view about them?

Nina: Can you give an example of realities outside ourselves?

Question: I mean things such as a bottle, a table or a chair.

Nina: Things such as a bottle, a table or a chair are not ultimate realities, they are concepts we can think of. Because of ignorance and wrong view we take them for lasting things which are real. It is important to know the difference between ultimate realities, nāma and rūpa, which have each their own characteristic, and concepts. What we take for a bottle, a table or a chair are in reality different kinds of rūpas which arise and fall away. Rūpas which fall away are replaced by new ones so long as there are conditions for them.

The wrong understanding of reality can only be eliminated if the characteristics of nāma and rūpa are known when they appear one at a time through the different doorways.

Question: I heard of people who concentrate on the movement of the abdomen. They say that sometimes there is awareness of the arising and falling of rūpa and sometimes there is awareness of the knowing of the arising and falling of rūpa. Is this the right way of developing awareness?

Nina: What we call abdomen is in reality many different kinds of rūpa. Sati can be aware of only one characteristic of rūpa at a time. For example, through the bodysense we can experience the characteristics of hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion and pressure, but we can experience only one of these characteristics at a time.

Question: When we experience the rūpa which is motion do we not experience the arising and falling away of rūpa?

Nina: In the development of vipassanā there are several stages of insight-knowledge (vipassanā-ñaṇa). The first stage is knowing through direct experience the difference between the characteristic of nāma and the characteristic of rūpa (in Pāli: nāma-rūpa-pariccheda-ñāṇa). At the attainment of this stage there is no doubt about the difference between the characteristic of nāma and the characteristic of rūpa which appear at that moment. The development of vipassanā, however, has to continue in order to have a clearer understanding of nāma and rūpa. Only at a later stage can the arising and falling away of nāma and rūpa be known. This stage cannot be attained unless the previous stages have been realized. How could there be direct understanding of the arising and falling away of a nāma or a rūpa if the difference between the characteristics of nāma and rūpa is not clearly discerned first?

Question: Is the arising and falling away of rūpa faster than the movement of the abdomen?

Nina: Nāmas and rūpas arise and fall away extremely rapidly. For example, it seems that there can be seeing and hearing at the same time. In reality this is not so. Hearing can arise very closely after seeing, but when there is hearing, the seeing has fallen away already since there can be only one citta at a time. From this example we see that cittas arise and fall away very rapidly, succeeding one another. Although we know that realities arise and fall away, we do not have yet direct understanding of this truth. The understanding of the different characteristics of nāma and rūpa has to become keener and keener. Only when insight is highly developed can there be direct understanding of the arising and falling away of nāma and rūpa.

Question: How can understanding become keener?

Nina: Only by being aware of nāmas and rūpas when they appear, one at a time. Is there not seeing now, or hearing now? If one tries to concentrate on particular nāmas and rūpas there is only thinking, not the direct knowledge of whatever reality appears at the present moment. Realities such as seeing, hearing, hardness or thinking arise because of their own conditions, we cannot regulate their arising. Should we not know their characteristics? Or should we continue to remain ignorant of them? If we try to concentrate on one nāma or rūpa we are clinging and this will not lead to detachment from the concept of self.

Question: It seems that we have to be aware of so many different nāmas and rūpas.

Nina: We have to be aware of nāma and rūpa over and over again in order to become detached from the notion of self. It is not sufficient to be aware of only one kind of nāma or rūpa. There should be awareness of whatever reality appears. If there is right awareness, without the concept of self who has awareness, this will be a condition for paññā to gradually know more nāmas and rūpas. There is no self who can control anything.

Question: I can see that it is useful to know in theory about the difference between nāma and rūpa. But when we are aware of nāma and rūpa I am inclined to think that it is not necessary to distinguish between them; I doubt whether that will help us to become detached from the concept of self.

Nina: How can there be a precise knowledge of realities if we cannot realize the difference between nāma, the reality which experiences something, feels or remembers, and rūpa, the reality which does not experience anything? If we do not realize the difference between nāma and rūpa we confuse, for example, hearing, which is nāma, and sound, which is rūpa. When there is hearing there is also sound, but sati can be mindful of only one characteristic at a time. Sometimes there may be mindfulness of hearing, sometimes of sound. If we do not know which characteristic appears, hearing or sound, it is clear that we are still ignorant of the reality appearing at the present moment.

Question: The reality of the present moment falls away so quickly, how can we ever catch it?

Nina: If we try to “catch” a reality, we do not have the right understanding and thus the truth will not be known. Realities are experienced through six doorways, but if insight has not been developed we cannot clearly know which reality is experienced through which doorway. So long as there is no precise knowledge of the characteristics of realities, there can be no detachment from the concept of self. When insight is more developed, paññā will know which reality is experienced through which doorway.

Question: Is it difficult to know that a reality is nāma or that it is rūpa? It does not seem very difficult.

Nina: You may think that it is very simple to know that seeing is a kind of nāma, different from visible object which is rūpa, but are you sure as to what appears at the present moment, whether it is nāma or rūpa? Is there sati and of what is it mindful?

Question: I am not sure about the reality appearing at the present moment. It seems as if seeing and visible object appear at the same time.

Nina: Awareness can be aware of only one reality at a time. When it seems to us that seeing and visible object “appear” at the same time, then there is no sati, there is only thinking about phenomena. When one has not yet developed precise understanding of realities, they are not known as they appear one at a time. One may know in theory that nāma is different from rūpa, but that is not the paññā which leads to detachment from the concept of self.

The difference between the nāma and rūpa which appear should be known, but we should not try to “catch” the reality of the present moment. When we have just started to develop insight, there cannot yet be a clear understanding of realities. When there has been mindfulness time and again of characteristics of realities, paññā will develop until it is so keen that we do not take realities for self anymore.