Page 2 of 2

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket: quotes

Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2018 4:06 pm
by robertk
Dhamma talk at Foundation, Nov 24. no 1.translated by nina van gorkom

sujin: Just to understand that all realities are dhamma is not enough, it has to be now.
Khanda: past, present, future . Khanda is what arises and falls away. The Buddha often spoke about upadana-khandha, khanda of grasping.
Q: does this make it harder to understand?
Acharn: No, it makes it clearer. Knowing what is the object of clinging, otherwise one does not know to what one clings. It is a reminder that one clings to what just arises and falls away. Even upadana is not self but it is there, right now, any time when there is no right understanding.
Who knows that there is attachment to seeing right now? If the Buddha had not told us we would not know. So long as there not direct experience of what arises and falls away there are ignorance and attachment. Is it easy to understand seeing as not self? We need patience to listen and consider. Wrong understanding can be eliminated very, very little.
What is intention? We need to understand one word at a time. We have to continue to listen until pañña is so firm that is sacca ñana (understanding the truth, the level of pariyatti. It precedes kicca ñana, direct awareness).
Sati: what is it, we need to know its object. Is there sati now? It arises just with wholesome moments.


Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket: quotes

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 5:11 pm
by robertk
From nina van gorkom
Dhamma at the Foundation, Dec 1 ’18, No 2.

Acharn:If there is not enough foundation knowledge one may take pañña of the level of pariyatti for right awareness, for vipassana. After being told that seeing is nama and visible object is rupa and then practise vipassana, that is impossible. There is “I” and not the understanding which understands the nature of anattaness.
Q: There must be a point when patipatti starts.
Acharn: By conditions. That is firm confidence in pariyatti. Without it there is no condition for samma-sati of satipatthana which arises as anatta. There is no preparation.
Q: What is the clear distinction (between pariyatti and patipatti).
Acharn: Firm confidence that realities are not self. The truth is when samma-sati arises. It indicates that pariyatti is sufficient to condition that. Without pariyatti you take it for “I”.
Q: Quite subtle.
Acharn: very, very subtle. At the moment of samma-sati pañña knows : that is sati, not “I”, not “I know, I touch, I think.”
There is the letting go of the very firm idea of self from the moment of hearing the truth to the moment of direct understanding.
Patipatti is the moment when samma-sati arises by conditions. There is no idea to have it arise in the room, in darkness, anywhere at all. Just like hearing now, seeing now. It understands what appears by conditions, no one can direct it.
There is no need to measure it, that is “I” who tries. Even the beginning of right thinking is still pariyatti. Samma-sati is the proof of the firm understanding at the level of pariyatti. No need for anyone to tell that that is samma-sati