This is so wonderful, Bhante. Some of it is so clear and so obvious, yet so hard to remember right in that very moment when suddenly one is lost in the midst of akusala kamma, which clearly does not have to follow on the heels of akusala citta but all too often does. Or am I misunderstanding?
How can it be that vipākacitta is kusala or akusala? It seems to me that it is merely vipāka, an inevitable result, and at that point it's too late to worry about whether it's kusala or akusala. What am I missing?
Can we break the link between vipāka and kamma? Is that the point, that there really is no hard-and-fast link? Or am I missing some important understanding here? It seems like there's some volitional component between those two.