Tokyo

                                              1 March                                         

1971           Dear Mr. G.,

"What is sati-sampajañña, clear comprehension? I am puzzled by this 

term." This was a question you asked me.

There are many degrees of comprehension. What would "clear 

comprehension" mean, theoretical knowledge or the knowledge through 

one's own experience? Which would be clearer? Does the sotåpanna have 

clear comprehension of nåmas and rúpas, of the world in the ariyan 

sense? Is the degree of clear comprehension of the arahat still 

higher? What is the way to develop clear comprehension, is it through 

thinking about realities or through awareness of them when they 

present themselves? Would awareness of realities not be the way that 

comprehension becomes clearer in different stages?

The term sati-sampajañña is composed of the word sati, mindfulness or 

awareness, and the word sampajañña which means discrimination or 

comprehension. The commentary to the Dialogues of the Buddha (Dígha 

Nikåya), the Sumaògalavilåsiní, explains that there is a fourfold 

sampajañña. These aspects make it clear that there are different 

levels of sati-sampajañña. They are the following kinds of 

sati-sampajañña:

1. såtthaka-sampajañña ¤       comprehension with                                           

regard to the purpose

2. sappåya-sampajañña  ¤       comprehension of what is                                     

suitable, fitting

3. gocara-sampajañña   ¤       comprehension of the                                         

object

4. asammoha-sampajañña         ¤       comprehension of non-                                  

delusion

Såtthaka-sampajañña, comprehension with regard to the purpose, 

pertains to our bodily health as well as to the growth of kusala and 

understanding. The Buddha was considerate of the monk's bodily and 

mental welfare. The monk was taught to have comprehension of the 

purpose with regard to the taking of almsfood and the use of the other 

requisites. There are rules for the monks with regard to the use of 

them. He should not use them with attachment. We read in the 

Visuddhimagga (I, 85) about the way he should use almsfood:

`Reflecting wisely, he uses almsfood neither for amusement nor for 

intoxication nor for smartening nor for embellishment, but only for 

the endurance and continuance of this body, for the ending of 

discomfort, and for assisting the life of purity: "Thus I shall put a 

stop to old feelings and shall not arouse new feelings, and I shall be 

healthy and blameless and live in comfort." '

The monk will use almsfood just as a sick man uses medicine. He will 

put a stop to the feeling of hunger and he will not indulge in 

immoderate eating.

The Buddha, on the day of his enlightenment, stopped fasting and he 

took the rice-gruel which was offered to him by Sujåtå. He had 

understood that the undertaking of severe ascetical practices was not 

the Middle Way.

Also laypeople can apply to a certain extent, in their own situation, 

some of the rules of training for the monks. When there is 

sati-sampajañña while we are eating, it knows the right purpose of the 

taking of food. We do not have to think all the time what the purpose 

is of what we are doing. When sati-sampajañña arises it knows the 

right purpose. When there is clear comprehension with regard to the 

purpose of the taking of food, there are conditions not to indulge in 

food, but to take it as a medicine for the body. One can find out what 

is right for one's health. One should not torture oneself by staying 

too long in one position of the body. Some people have desire for 

tranquillity and they are hoping to be able to develop it to a high 

degree by sitting for a long time. When there is clear comprehension 

with regard to the purpose one will not torture oneself, one will 

stretch at the right time or change one's posture. 

Sati-sampajañña with regard to the purpose is necessary for the 

development of kusala and right understanding. When we visit the good 

friend in Dhamma who explains the Dhamma in the right way, or when we 

visit the holy places in India it can be done with sati-sampajañña 

with regard to the purpose, namely the development of right 

understanding. 

We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Tens, Chapter XVIII, § 4) 

about aim and not-aim. The Buddha said to the monks:

`And what, monks, is not aim?

Taking life, taking what is not given, wrong conduct in sexual 

desires, falsehood, slander, bitter speech, idle babble, coveting, 

harmfulness and wrong view. This, monks, is called not-aim.' 

We then read that the abstaining from akusala kamma is aim. 

Sati-sampajañña with regard to the purpose sees the benefit of kusala 

and the disadvantage of akusala. When other people speak in a harsh 

way to us we think immediately of ourselves, of our own interest. What 

is really useful to ourselves? When sati-sampajañña arises it sees the 

benefit of patience and lovingkindness, it sees the benefit of all 

kinds of kusala. When other people are unkind they give us an 

opportunity to cultivate patience and endurance. We need 

sati-sampajañña with regard to the purpose in daily life. If one wants 

to develop calm (samatha) one needs sati-sampajañña which knows the 

benefit of kusala and which sees the disadvantage of attachment to the 

sense objects. When one has desire for tranquillity the citta is 

akusala, but one may not notice it. In order to develop calm which is 

wholesome there must be sati-sampajañña which realizes the 

disadvantage of desire. So long as there is desire one will not reach 

the goal. 

For the development of the Eightfold Path sati-sampajañña with regard 

to the aim is necessary. We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the 

Tens, Chapter XIV, § 4) that the Buddha said to the monks that the 

factors of the wrong path are not-aim. As regards aim, we read:

`And what, monks, is aim?

Right view, right thinking, right speech, right action, right effort, 

right mindfulness, right concentration, right knowledge and right 

release....' 

When one follows the wrong path there is no sati-sampajañña. When one 

develops the right path there is clear comprehension with regard to 

the aim. The goal is the eradication of wrong view and all the other 

defilements. If one develops the right path one will eventually reach 

the goal.

We believe that right understanding of nåma and rúpa is what we value 

most highly in life, but is this true? We should be sincere and get to 

know our own accumulations. Don't we find our work and our relaxation 

more important than the development of right understanding? If there 

is sati-sampajañña which sees the value of awareness of realities 

right understanding can develop during the time we are working and 

also during the time of relaxation. There are nåma and rúpa all the 

time, no-matter where we are. There can be a beginning of the study of 

them when they appear. We do not have to go to a quiet place and 

change our usual way of life in order to develop understanding. When 

there is desire for awareness it will hinder the development of 

understanding of our life, of our accumulations. We have accumulated 

attachment to pleasant things, we like to go to concerts or watch T.V. 

We should learn to see that in such situations there are only dhammas, 

realities, which arise because of their own conditions. If we do not 

get to know lobha as it is, as only a conditioned reality, 

enlightenment cannot be attained and defilements cannot be eradicated.

The second sampajañña, sappåya-sampajañña, is knowing what is 

suitable, fitting to oneself. This sampajañña appertains to our bodily 

health as well as to the development of kusala. We know that we should 

not neglect our bodily health and therefore we should know what is 

suitable for us in order to avoid sickness and to live in comfort. We 

should find out, for example, what is the right kind of food for us 

and what not. What is suitable for one person may not be suitable for 

another person. We need sappåya-sampajañña in order to know the right 

conditions for our bodily health. We also need sappåya-sampajañña in 

order to know the right conditions for the development of kusala. 

Those who have accumulations to develop samatha should know the 

particular conditions which have to be fulfilled in order to develop 

calm. Most important is right understanding which knows precisely when 

the citta is kusala and when akusala, otherwise calm cannot be 

developed. Sappåya-sampajañña is needed in order to know which of the 

meditation subjects is suitable to oneself so that calm can grow. The 

meditation on corpses, for example, is not suitable for everybody, for 

some people this subject conditions aversion or fear. If one has 

accumulations to develop calm to the degree of jhåna one has to live 

in a secluded place. One needs sappåya-sampajañña in order to find out 

which place is suitable to oneself.

For the development of vipassanå the conditions are different from the 

conditions for the development of calm. The conditions for the 

development of vipassanå are: association with the right friend who 

can explain the Dhamma, listening, considering and testing the meaning 

of what one has heard. In this way there can be the correct 

understanding of the Eightfold Path. If there is sappåya-sampajañña 

which knows what is suitable for the development of right 

understanding it will develop.

We read in the Kindred Sayings (IV, Kindred Sayings on Sense, 

Saîåyatana-vagga, Third Fifty, Chapter V, § 146, Helpful) about the 

"sappåya" which leads to that which should be valued most highly: the 

eradication of defilements. This "sappåya", this helpful condition, is 

the perception of impermanence. We read that the Buddha said to the 

monks:

`I will teach you, monks, a way that is helpful for Nibbåna.

Do you listen to it. And what, monks, is that way?

Herein, monks, a monk regards the eye as impermanent. He regards 

visible object, eye-consciousness, eye-contact, as impermanent. That 

pleasant or unpleasant or indifferent feeling which arises by 

eye-contact-that also he regards as impermanent.

He regards the ear¤the nose¤the tongue, savours, tongue-consciousness, 

tongue-contact as impermanent. That pleasant or unpleasant or 

indifferent feeling, which arises by tongue-contact-that also he 

regards as impermanent.

He regards the body...he regards the mind, mind-states, 

mind-consciousness, mind-contact as impermanent. The pleasant or 

unpleasant or indifferent feeling¤arising therefrom-he regards that 

also as impermanent.

This, monks, is the way that is helpful for Nibbåna.' 

The impermanence of the realities which appear through the six doors 

cannot be realized immediately. First the rúpa which appears has to be 

realized as rúpa and the nåma which appears has to be realized as 

nåma. Their arising and falling away cannot be realized if one cannot 

clearly discern their different characteristics. This sutta reminds us 

to at least begin with awareness of realities such as visible object, 

seeing, feeling or attachment, of the realities which appear now. That 

is the condition which is helpful to gain more understanding. 

The third sampajañña is gocara-sampajañña. Gocara literally means 

place or domain. In this case it is not the place where one should 

stay but "where citta goes", the object, årammaùa, of the citta. When 

gocara-sampajañña arises there is comprehension of the object of 

mindfulness. All realities which appear now through the six doors are 

the gocara or "domain" of sati of the Eightfold Path. All of the nåmas 

and the rúpas are included in the four "satipaììhånas", the 

applications of mindfulness. They are: mindfulness of the body, of 

feeling, of citta and of dhammas. The object of sati is a paramattha 

dhamma which appears now, it is not a concept such as a body, a hand 

or a chair. Some people think that the postures of the body can be 

object of mindfulness. They think for example that the "sitting rúpa" 

should be object of mindfulness. Among the twenty-eight kinds of rúpa 

which are taught in the Abhidhamma there is no sitting rúpa. The body 

is composed of the four Great Elements and other rúpas which each have 

their own specific characteristic. The characteristic of hardness or 

heat may appear, no matter whether one is sitting, standing, walking 

or laying down. Sitting has no characteristic, it is a concept one has 

of the whole body which sits. In order to eradicate the idea of self 

who is sitting there should be awareness of one reality at a time, one 

nåma or rúpa. We have conditions to think of sitting and we do not 

have to avoid that, but we should know the difference between the 

moments we think of concepts such as the whole body and the moments 

there is awareness of a paramattha dhamma (absolute reality). 

Is there any object of awareness we do not like and of which we think 

that it ought not to be object of awareness? Do we "push it aside" and 

wait until there is another object? For instance, most of us do not 

like it to be in a hurry. Would we rather not be aware of nåma and 

rúpa at such moments? Or do we think that we can't? Is there not a 

secret tendency not to know objects we dislike? In that way right 

understanding of realities cannot develop. When we are feeling tired, 

or angry, or when we are discouraged about the development of 

satipaììhåna, can there be awareness even of such moments? They are 

only realities arising because of conditions, not self. We understand 

in theory that everything can be object of awareness, but do we apply 

this understanding? Wrong practice (sílabbata-paråmåså, translated as 

clinging to rules and ritual) is a kind of wrong view (diììhi). So 

long as we are not sotåpanna wrong view has not been eradicated and 

thus wrong practice can arise. We may think that when we are in the 

company of many people it is impossible to be aware. Do we try to 

ignore particular realities we do not think fit to be objects of 

awareness? We can find out that although we have intellectual 

understanding about wrong practice such tendencies can still arise. It 

is essential to be aware also of these moments. If they are not known 

wrong view cannot be eradicated. 

If one knows that whatever reality appears now can be object of 

awareness right understanding can develop. Should we not know seeing, 

hearing or thinking which appear now? When there are conditions 

awareness can arise in any situation, also when we are laughing or 

talking. We read for example in the "Khemaka Sutta" Kindred Sayings 

(III, Khandhå-vagga, Middle Fifty, Chapter IV, § 89) that the monk 

Khemaka attained arahatship while he explained Dhamma to others, and 

that sixty monks who listened attained arahatship as well. We read in 

the "Satipaììhåna Sutta" Middle Length Sayings (I, no.10) that the 

Buddha, while he was staying among the Kuru people in Kammåssadhamma, 

spoke to the monks about the "Four Applications of Mindfulness". We 

read in the section on Mindfulness of the Body, on the Four Kinds of 

Clear Comprehension, that the Buddha said:

`...And again, monks, a monk, when he is setting out or returning is 

one acting in a clearly conscious way; when he is looking in front or 

looking around...when he has bent in or stretched out (his arm)...when 

he is carrying his outer cloak, bowl and robe...when he is eating, 

drinking, chewing, tasting...when he is obeying the calls of 

nature...when he is walking, standing, sitting, asleep, awake, 

talking, silent, he is acting in a clearly conscious way...' 

A clearly conscious way is the translation of sati-sampajañña. Is 

there clear comprehension with regard to the object of right 

understanding while we are looking in front or looking around? Is 

there clear comprehension while we are bending or stretching, eating, 

drinking, walking, standing, sitting, lying down, while we are talking 

or keeping silent? We may have read this text many times, but do we 

really apply what the Buddha taught? We need to consider this text 

often, even if we think that we have understood it already. We can 

find out that considering the teachings is suitable, helpful, that it 

is a "sappåya" for the development of understanding. This sutta can 

remind us that there is no limitation to the "field of awareness". 

When we are, for example, looking for something in our handbag, or 

when the shoelace breaks while tying it up, there are only nåma and 

rúpa, but we are likely to be forgetful. Usually dosa (aversion) 

arises at such moments. However, sometimes there can be awareness and 

then different characteristics of realities can be known. Dosa has a 

characteristic which is different from hardness or motion which 

appears through touch. Even if there is only a short moment of 

awareness of a reality it is helpful because it is a condition that 

awareness can be accumulated. In that way the tendency to take 

realities for self will become less.

If gocara-sampajañña is well established, there can be the fourth 

sampajañña, asammoha-sampajañña. Asammoha means "non-delusion". When 

there is asammoha-sampajañña there is non-delusion about the object of 

awareness. One no longer doubts whether there can be awareness while 

one is busy or while one is in trying circumstances. When there is no 

delusion the realities appearing through the six doors can be known as 

they are, as not self. When there is awareness of visible object there 

is no delusion about visible object, it is realized as just a reality, 

not a person or a thing.

It is useful to know the different aspects of clear comprehension, 

sati-sampajañña: clear comprehension with regard to the purpose, with 

regard to what is suitable, with regard to the object of sati and 

clear comprehension of non-delusion. However, while right 

understanding is being developed we do not have to try to pinpoint 

which kind of sampajañña arises. It is sati-sampajañña, not self, 

which knows the purpose of the development of the Eightfold Path, the 

eradication of defilements. It is sati-sampajañña which knows the 

right conditions which are suitable for the development of right 

understanding. In the beginning one still doubts whether there can be 

awareness in any situation, one limits the field of sati, and thus 

there cannot yet be non-delusion about the object of awareness.

You think that there are particular factors which can hinder 

awareness, such as our working situation or the company of other 

people. The place where we are, the people we meet, noise, travelling, 

sickness, all these factors are not impediments for satipaììhåna. 

Wrong understanding of the path is a hindrance.

In the Visuddhimagga (III, 29) we read about the ten impediments. 

These are: dwelling, family, gain, class (students), building, travel, 

relatives, affliction (sickness), books and super-normal powers. As 

regards dwelling, for those who cultivate samatha the dwelling is only 

an impediment if it distracts one or if one has many belongings stored 

there. As regards family, this refers to relatives or a family of 

supporters who present food or other requisites to the monk. They can 

be distracting from the development of calm. As regards gain, this 

means here the four requisites of the monk. If he receives requisites 

from people all the time, he has to give them blessings and teach them 

Dhamma. In this way he will be engaged continuously. Class means 

students of suttas or students of Abhidhamma. If the monk has to teach 

students he has no opportunity for the development of samatha. 

Building means the construction of a building. This is always an 

impediment for samatha since one is engaged in seeing to the work. 

Travel is an impediment for samatha since one's thoughts are occupied 

with the journey. With the impediment of relatives is also meant the 

monk's teacher or pupil or others he is dwelling together with. If 

they are sick they are an impediment for samatha since they preoccupy 

him. Affliction is any kind of illness. It is an impediment when it 

causes suffering. As regards books, this is responsibility for the 

scriptures, or recitation of the scriptures. When he is engaged with 

these matters it will distract him from the development of samatha. It 

is said that nine of the ten impediments are hindrances only for 

samatha. They distract one from its cultivation. As regards the tenth 

impediment, which are the supernatural powers of the non-ariyan, this 

is not a hindrance for samatha. We read in the Visuddhimagga (III, 56) 

about the super-normal powers: 

`They are hard to maintain, like a prone infant or like a baby hare, 

and the slightest thing breaks them. But they are an impediment for 

insight, not for concentration, since they are obtainable through 

concentration. So the supernormal powers are an impediment that should 

be severed by one who seeks insight; the others are impediments to be 

severed by one who seeks concentration.'

By these examples one sees that the method and aim of samatha is 

different from the method and aim of vipassanå. If one has 

accumulations to develop calm to a high degree one has to live a 

secluded life and the factors which are impediments to calm have to be 

severed. As regards insight, this has to be developed in one's daily 

life, one has to develop understanding of all realities which appear, 

one's defilements included. As we have seen, only super-normal powers 

are an impediment for insight since one cannot lead one's daily life 

if one wants to develop them. One has to live in seclusion and one has 

to develop calm to the degree of jhåna in order to be able to acquire 

the supernormal powers. The other factors which are impediments for 

samatha are not impediments for vipassanå. "Dwelling" is not a 

hindrance for the development of insight. We still have attachment to 

our house, we want to embellish it. So long as one is not an anågåmí 

(non-returner), attachment to sensuous objects has not been eradicated 

yet. Attachment to the place where we live and any other kind of 

attachment can be object of awareness when it appears and then it is 

not an impediment. If there is no right understanding of the object of 

satipaììhåna, everything hinders: the place where one lives, 

relatives, travelling or sickness. There always seems to be an excuse 

for not being aware right at this moment. First this work has to be 

finished, that letter has to be written, relatives need help and take 

up our time so that we believe that there is no opportunity for 

awareness. What is hindering us now? Are there not nåma and rúpa, 

right at this moment? There is impingement of hardness or softness on 

the bodysense, wherever we are. Hardness is a paramattha dhamma, an 

absolute reality, but when there is no awareness we do not know it as 

a reality. We may be thinking of hardness but that is not awareness. 

When sati-sampajañña arises the characteristic of hardness can be 

studied without there being the need to think about it. It can be 

known as a reality which is conditioned. It does not belong to anyone; 

we cannot change it, we cannot do anything about it.

One may think that awareness is too difficult, one may believe that 

one should first go to a quiet place. Why is that? Because one expects 

many moments of awareness and immediate clear comprehension. We should 

let go of expectations. If we have listened to the Dhamma and if we 

have understood the way to develop right understanding of nåma and 

rúpa, there are conditions for the arising of awareness. After a 

moment of awareness there are bound to be countless moments of 

unawareness since we accumulated ignorance for aeons. How could we get 

rid of it within a short time? If we think that awareness in daily 

life is too difficult we create a hindrance for the development of 

right understanding. If there is a beginning of the development of 

understanding now it can be accumulated. If that would be impossible 

there would be no ariyans who have realized the truth. They have 

proved that there are no impediments to the development of right 

understanding in daily life.

With mettå,

Nina van Gorkom

                                              Tokyo

                                              April 10                                                

1971           Dear Mr. G.,

You asked me about the way to know the difference between nåma and 

rúpa. You find it difficult to realize their different 

characteristics. I will first summarize the points that you have 

doubts about:

When feeling hot, there are both nåma and rúpa. What is the 

characteristic of body-consciousness (kaya-viññåùa)? What is the 

characteristic of bodily feeling which accompanies body-consciousness? 

What are the characteristics of other feelings besides bodily feeling 

which arise at other moments? What is the characteristic of the rúpa 

which is heat? 

These are questions which are bound to arise when we learn about 

different nåmas and rúpas and we begin to be aware of them. There are 

different levels of understanding of realities. First there should be 

theoretical understanding about nåma and rúpa, and then one can begin 

to be aware of their characteristics when they appear. Through 

awareness direct understanding of realities can be developed. 

Body-consciousness is the citta which experiences rúpas which impinge 

on the body-sense. These rúpas can be the following: 

the "Element of Earth" or solidity, to be experienced as hardness or 

softness;

the "Element of Fire", to be experienced as heat or cold;

the "Element of Wind", to be experienced as motion or pressure. 

These rúpas impinge on the bodysense all the time. The body-sense 

through which these rúpas can be experienced is also rúpa. The 

bodysense does not know anything, but it is a condition for the nåma 

which experiences tangible object. The bodysense is to be found all 

over the body, except in those parts which are insensitive, such as 

hair or nails. The bodysense is not only on the outside of the body, 

but also inside the body. The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 52) states that it 

is to be found everywhere, like a liquid that soaks a layer of cotton. 

Also in those parts of the body we call "kidney" or "liver" there is 

bodysense; pain can be felt in these parts. When we notice any bodily 

sensation, be it ever so slight, it shows that there is impact on the 

bodysense. When we remember this it can be a condition for awareness 

of different kinds of realities, also when the impact on the bodysense 

is very slight, or inside the body.

All day long rúpas impinge on the bodysense but we do not realize that 

they are only rúpas. We always think of a being, the body or a thing 

which is touched, but these do not impinge on the bodysense. The 

experience of tangible object through the body-sense is one moment, 

and the thinking of stories about that object is another moment. There 

are different realities appearing at different moments through 

different doorways. This is the truth and it can be proven by our own 

experience. 

Body-consciousness which experiences tangible object impinging on the 

bodysense is vipåka-citta, a citta which is the result of kamma. When 

it experiences a pleasant tangible object it is the result of kusala 

kamma and when it experiences an unpleasant object it is the result of 

akusala kamma. When the object which impinges on the bodysense is 

pleasant the body-consciousness is accompanied by pleasant (bodily) 

feeling, and when the object is unpleasant the body-consciousness is 

accompanied by painful (bodily) feeling. There cannot be indifferent 

bodily feeling. The object is unpleasant when the temperature which 

impinges on the bodysense is too cold or too hot, and it is pleasant 

when the temperature is just right.

The pleasant feeling or painful feeling which accompanies 

body-consciousness is nåma, it experiences something. It is different 

from rúpa which does not experience anything. Since body-consciousness 

is vipåka, the accompanying feeling is also vipåka.

Body-consciousness which experiences tangible object arises in a 

process of cittas which experience that object. Each citta in a 

process performs it own function while it experiences the object which 

is impinging. The body-consciousness which is vipåka-citta falls away 

immediately and it is succeeded by other cittas. There are cittas 

arising within the process which can be kusala citta or akusala citta 

and they experience the same object as the body-consciousness. When 

they are kusala cittas they can be accompanied by happy (mental) 

feeling or by indifferent feeling, and when they are akusala cittas, 

they can be accompanied by happy (mental) feeling, by indifferent 

feeling or by unhappy (mental) feeling. These feelings can be called 

"mental feeling" in order to differentiate them from the bodily 

feeling which accompanies body-consciousness. As we have seen, bodily 

feeling is not rúpa, it is nåma. It can be called bodily feeling since 

it accompanies body-consciousness.

Sometimes we have an idea that painful feeling and aversion which can 

arise shortly afterwards can hardly be separated. However, they are 

different realities arising because of different conditions. When we 

burn ourselves the heat, which is an unpleasant tangible object, 

impinges on the bodysense and it is experienced by body-consciousness 

which is accompanied by painful bodily feeling. At that moment there 

is no dislike, the body-consciousness which is vipåka-citta, the 

result of kamma, merely experiences the unpleasant object. The painful 

feeling which accompanies the body-consciousness is also vipåka. It 

merely feels, it does not dislike the object. The citta with aversion, 

the dosa-múla-citta, which is accompanied by mental unpleasant feeling 

arises later on. It experiences the object with aversion, it is 

akusala citta. When sati arises it can be mindful of one reality at a 

time, and thus gradually different characteristics of realities can be 

known. If we try to "catch" realities and if we have desire to know 

whether the reality which appears is citta, feeling, rúpa or any other 

phenomenon, there is thinking with attachment, not mindfulness.

You wrote that you find that attachment, lobha, and aversion, dosa, 

can be known more easily than seeing or hearing. Can we say that 

anything is easy? We may think that it is easy to know lobha and dosa 

but do we realize their characteristics when they appear? Or are we 

merely thinking about them? Do we know them as conditioned nåmas, not 

self or is there still "my lobha" and "my dosa"? We should realize 

lobha and dosa also when they are of a lesser degree. For example, 

when there is seeing there is bound to be clinging to what is seen or 

clinging to seeing, arising closely after the seeing. When we hear a 

sound which is loud there can be a slight aversion but we may not even 

notice it. When there is lobha or dosa there are nåma and rúpa, there 

are so many realities we are still ignorant of. Lobha and dosa 

condition rúpas. Don't we look different when we are angry or when we 

are glad? When we are afraid or when we dislike something we may 

notice bodily phenomena conditioned by citta. It is not easy to 

distinguish between the different characteristics of realities. We 

tend to join different realities into a "whole" of "my personality" 

and thus we will not know them as they are, only nåma and rúpa, devoid 

of self.

In your letter you gave examples of moments of awareness. You write 

that when walking you are aware of the feeling of pressing the ground. 

Is there not thinking of a concept of "pressing the ground"? Do you 

picture yourself as walking? That is a way of thinking. The object one 

thinks of at that moment is a concept or idea, not a reality. We may 

easily mislead ourselves and take thinking for awareness. When you 

touch hardness and you know that it is hard is there clear 

understanding of the true nature of the rúpa which is hardness? There 

may still be "something" hard there which seems to stay. Does the 

ground seem to stay? Even when one does not name it "ground" or "feet" 

there can still be wrong understanding of reality. The rúpa which is 

hardness can be experienced through the bodysense and it arises and 

falls away, it cannot stay. Hardness seems to stay so long as we have 

not understood the truth of impermanence. We cling to sati and we want 

to hold on to realities in order to know them. We should not expect 

there to be full understanding of nåma and rúpa which arise and fall 

away, but we can learn to be aware of one characteristic of reality at 

a time when it appears. When we remember that realities and also 

awareness cannot last we will be less inclined to try to be aware and 

to hold on to realities. When it is the right time for sati it arises 

and then it can be aware of any reality which appears. We cannot plan 

to be aware of such or such reality.

You write that when eating you are aware of flavour. There is not only 

flavour, there is also the nåma which experiences flavour, otherwise 

flavour could not appear. Do we know already the difference between 

nåma and rúpa? There can be mindfulness of only one reality at a time, 

but it seems that flavour and the experience of it appear together. 

When understanding develops one reality can be known at a time, but 

now there is still confusion. You say that you can be aware of the 

movement of the jaws when eating. Again, is there not thinking of the 

idea of "my jaws" instead of being aware of one nåma or rúpa at a 

time? When we become more familiar with the characteristics of nåma 

and rúpa we will be less inclined to name them or to select a 

particular object of awareness.

Some people may be inclined to sit and wait for the appearing of 

hearing, sound, like or dislike. In that way realities will not be 

known. We can go on with all the things we usually do and we do not 

have to do anything special in order to have awareness. For instance, 

when one is writing, there may be sound, hearing, like, dislike or any 

other reality. When moving the hand hardness or motion may appear and 

these realities can be object of awareness. We should not mind what 

kind of reality presents itself. One may be trying to "catch" the 

difference between hearing and sound, seeing and visible object, but 

in that way realities will not be known. Sometimes there may be 

mindfulness of rúpa, sometimes of nåma, it all depends on the sati.

I am glad to hear that while you talk there can also be awareness. One 

may be inclined to think that it is impossible to be aware while 

talking, since one has to think of what one is going to say. Now you 

can prove to yourself that also at such moments there are nåmas and 

rúpas appearing. The thinking which occurs while one is talking is 

also a reality which can be object of awareness. If there never is 

awareness of thinking one cannot learn that thinking is anattå.

Our life consists of nåma and rúpa. When there is the development of 

awareness everything appears as usual, but before we did not know that 

what appears is a characteristic of reality. There is hearing, seeing 

or feeling all the time, but when there is no awareness we do not 

realize that they are only conditioned realities, nåmas. There is a 

reality at every moment but when we are forgetful we do not realize 

this. We should develop right understanding until we are familiar with 

the characteristics which appear, until there is no more doubt about 

them. When we are hungry or when we have a headache there are 

different kinds of nåma and rúpa. There is rúpa such as hardness, 

there are nåmas such as painful bodily feeling or unhappy mental 

feeling, there are many realities appearing. If there is no awareness 

when there is painful feeling we will think that pain can last for a 

while. When there is mindfulness we can find out that there are many 

other kinds of nåma and rúpa presenting themselves besides the pain 

caused by the impact on the bodysense. Pain does not stay, it falls 

away immediately, and then it arises again. 

We find our likes and dislikes very important. We let ourselves be 

carried away by like and dislike instead of being aware of different 

realities. We read in the Kindred Sayings ( IV, Saîåyatana-vagga, 

Kindred Sayings on Sense, Third Fifty, Chapter III, § 130, Håliddaka):

Once the venerable Kaccåna the Great was staying among the folk of 

Avanti, at Osprey's Haunt, on a sheer mountain crag.

Then the housefather Håliddakåni came to the venerable Kaccåna the 

Great. Seated at one side he said this:-

`It has been said by the Exalted One, sir, "Owing to diversity in 

elements arises diversity of contact. Owing to diversity of contact 

arises diversity of feeling". Pray, sir, how far is this so?'

`Herein, housefather, after having seen a pleasant object with the 

eye, a monk comes to know as such eye-consciousness that is a pleasant 

experience. Owing to contact that is pleasant to experience arises 

happy feeling.

After having seen with the eye an object that is unpleasant, a monk 

comes to know as such eye-consciousness that is an unpleasant 

experience. Owing to contact that is unpleasant to experience arises 

unhappy feeling.

After having seen with the eye an object that is of indifferent 

effect, a monk comes to know as such eye-consciousness that 

experiences an object which is of indifferent effect. Owing to contact 

that is indifferent to experience arises feeling that is indifferent.

So also, housefather, after having heard a sound with the ear, smelt a 

scent with the nose, tasted a flavour with the tongue, experienced 

tangible object with the body, cognized with the mind a mental object, 

that is pleasant¤Owing to contact that is pleasant to experience 

arises happy feeling. But after having cognized a mental object which 

is unpleasant¤owing to contact that is unpleasant to experience arises 

unhappy feeling. Again, after having cognized with the mind a mental 

object that is indifferent in effect, he comes to know as such 

mind-consciousness that experiences an object which is of indifferent 

effect. Owing to contact that is indifferent arises feeling that is 

indifferent.

Thus, housefather, owing to diversity in elements arises diversity of 

contact. Owing to diversity of contact arises diversity of feeling.' 

We do not come to know seeing, visible object, contact and feeling "as 

such" merely by just thinking about them. Paññå should realize the 

characteristic of seeing when it presents itself; it should realize 

seeing as nåma which arises because of conditions, not self. The nåma 

which sees is different from the rúpa which is visible object. When we 

learn to see realities as elements which arise because of conditions 

and which we cannot control, we will be less carried away by pleasant 

or unpleasant objects. We are attached to the feelings which arise on 

account of the objects which are experienced. Feeling accompanies each 

citta but we are mostly forgetful of feeling. Is there any 

understanding of the feeling which presents itself now? If there never 

is awareness of feeling there cannot be detachment from the idea of 

"my feeling".

There are realities appearing through the six doors, wherever we are. 

There is no need to go to a quiet place in order to know them. When we 

are in the company of many people, for example at a party, there are 

only realities appearing through the six doors and gradually we can 

learn to be aware of them. We see pleasant objects and on account of 

these we feel happy. However, we can remember that it is only feeling 

which feels, feeling which has arisen because of pleasant contact. We 

will see or hear unpleasant objects and owing to the unpleasant 

contact unhappy feeling is bound to arise. We will get tired when we 

have to stand for a long time while we listen to speeches and we may 

feel tense.There are only different realities appearing such as 

hardness or aversion. All the time there is diversity of elements, 

diversity of contact and owing to that contact diversity of feeling. 

We can consider the Dhamma wherever we are and if there is no clinging 

to sati there can be conditions for its arising. There cannot yet be 

the precise knowledge of realities but we can begin to learn.

With mettå,

Nina van Gorkom 

                                              Tokyo

                                              April 20                                                

1971           Dear Mr. G.,

I will repeat your question:

There is awareness, but not often of characteristics of nåma and rúpa. 

How can I get to know directly characteristics of realities?

Is there seeing now? It has a characteristic which can be directly 

experienced. It is a reality which can experience visible object 

through the eye-door. It is a type of nåma, not self.

Is there hearing now? That is another reality. It is a type of nåma 

which experiences sound through the ear-door. Hardness, softness, heat 

or cold appear time and again. They are different realities which each 

have their own characteristic. A characteristic of nåma or rúpa is not 

something besides that which can be experienced now, at this moment. 

All realities which appear have different characteristics and they can 

be experienced one at a time. Seeing is nåma, visible object is rúpa; 

they have different characteristics.

You wrote that you cannot distinguish the difference between seeing 

and thinking about what was seen, that they seem to occur at the same 

time. When we pay attention to the shape and form of something such as 

a chair there is thinking. However, are there not also moments of 

merely experiencing what appears through the eyesense, without there 

being thinking? There is not all the time thinking or defining of what 

something is. There are moments of seeing and seeing conditions 

thinking about what was seen, but they occur at different moments. One 

citta can have only one object at a time. We cannot expect to have 

precise understanding of realities, but we can begin to be aware of 

different realities. There are different degrees of knowing 

characteristics of nåma and rúpa and when paññå has been developed 

more, they will be known more clearly. They have to be known as nåma 

and as rúpa, not self.

The Buddha explained realities in different ways so that people would 

be able to know them as nåma elements and rúpa elements, as not self. 

We read in "An Exhortation from Nandaka" Middle Length Sayings (III, 

no.146) that the monk Nandaka had to preach to the nuns. Then the 

Buddha asked him to repeat to them exactly the same sermon. Why? Their 

"faculties", indriyas[1] , were developed and hearing the same sermon 

again would be the right condition for them to attain the degree of 

enlightenment for which they were ripe. How could that happen? Could 

it be just because they were listening and thinking about what they 

heard, or rather because there would be mindfulness while listening? 

While listening mindfulness can arise and it can be aware of seeing, 

hearing, thinking or feeling, of any reality appearing through one of 

the six doors. When I quote what Nandaka said, one may think, "Is that 

all?" However, when one listens, considers what one has heard and 

there can be mindfulness of realities one can come to know them as 

they are.

The conversation between Nandaka and the nuns reads:

"What do you think about this, sisters? Is the eye permanent or 

impermanent?"

"Impermanent, revered sir."

"But is what is impermanent anguish or happiness?"

"Anguish, revered sir."

"Is it right to regard that which is impermanent,anguish and liable to 

alteration as, `This is mine, this am I, this is myself '?"

"No, revered sir."

"What do you think about this, sisters? Is the ear¤the nose¤the 

tongue¤the bodysense¤the mind permanent or impermanent?¤Is it right to 

regard that which is impermanent, anguish and liable to alteration as, 

`This is mine, this am I, this is myself '?"

"No, revered sir. What is the reason for this? Already, revered sir, 

by means of perfect intuitive wisdom it has been well seen by us as it 

really is that,'These six internal sense-fields are impermanent' ". 

The six "internal sense-fields" (åyatanas) are the five senses and the 

mind. The same is said about the six "external sensefields": colours, 

sounds, smells, flavours, tangibles and mental objects. The same is 

said about the "six classes of consciousness" which experience these 

objects. Then Nandaka said:

"It is good, sisters, it is good. For it is thus, sisters, that by 

means of perfect intuitive wisdom this is seen by an ariyan disciple 

as it really is. It is, sisters, like the oil for lighting an oil-lamp 

which is impermanent and liable to alteration, and like the wick which 

is impermanent and liable to alteration, and like the flame which is 

impermanent and liable to alteration, and like the light which is 

impermanent and liable to alteration. If anyone, sisters, were to 

speak thus: `The oil for lighting this oil-lamp is impermanent and 

liable to alteration, and the wick¤and the flame is impermanent and 

liable to alteration, but that which is the light-that is permanent, 

lasting, eternal, not liable to alteration', speaking thus, sisters, 

would he be speaking rightly?"

"No, revered sir. What is the reason for this? It is, revered sir, 

that if the oil for lighting this oil-lamp be impermanent and liable 

to alteration, and if the wick¤and if the flame be impermanent and 

liable to alteration, all the more is the light impermanent and liable 

to alteration."

"Even so, sisters, if anyone should speak thus: `These six internal 

sense-fields are impermanent and liable to alteration, but whatever 

pleasure or pain or indifferent feeling I experience as a result of 

these six internal sense-fields, that is permanent, lasting, eternal, 

not liable to alteration.' speaking thus, sisters, would he be 

speaking rightly?"

"No, revered sir. What is the reason for this? As a result of this or 

that condition, revered sir, these or those feelings arise. From the 

stopping of this or that condition these or those feelings are 

stopped."

You wrote that awareness helps you to be less involved when unpleasant 

things happen. Sometimes there are conditions for sati and paññå, but 

when feelings are intense we tend to take them for self, we find it 

very difficult to see them as only conditioned realities, only nåma. 

Usually we are absorbed in what appears through eyes, ears, nose, 

tongue, bodysense and mind, and we are forgetful of realities. 

At times we have to experience unpleasant objects through the senses. 

The other day someone hit me, meaning it as a joke. Feeling the impact 

of it was akusala vipåka through the body-sense. Why did this have to 

happen to me? At such moments one may be upset and there is no 

awareness. Of course, I know why it happened: it was the result of 

akusala kamma, a deed committed in the past. Thus we see that 

everything we have to experience are only conditioned realities, and 

also our like or dislike of what happens and our feelings about it are 

only conditioned realities. Our attachment or our dislike are not 

vipåka, they arise with akusala citta which is conditioned by our 

accumulated defilements. We had attachment and aversion in the past 

and therefore there are conditions for their arising today. There are 

different types of conditions which play their part in our life.

Now I shall continue with the sutta. Further on we read that Nandaka 

said:

"It is good, sisters, it is good. For it is thus, sisters, that by 

means of perfect intuitive wisdom this is seen by an ariyan disciple 

as it really is. It is, sisters, as if a clever cattle-butcher or a 

cattle-butcher's apprentice, having killed a cow, should dissect the 

cow with a butcher's sharp knife without spoiling the flesh within, 

without spoiling the outer hide, and with the butcher's sharp knife 

should cut, should cut around, should cut all around whatever tendons, 

sinews and ligaments there are within; and having cut, cut around, cut 

all around and removed the outer hide and, having clothed that cow in 

that self-same hide again, should then speak thus: `This cow is 

conjoined with this hide as before.' Speaking thus, sisters, would he 

be speaking rightly?"

"No, revered sir. What is the reason for this? Although, revered sir, 

that clever cattle-butcher or cattle-butcher's apprentice, having 

killed a cow¤having clothed that cow in that self-same hide again, 

might then speak thus:'This cow is conjoined with this hide as 

before,' yet that cow is not conjoined with that hide."

"I have made this simile for you, sisters, so as to illustrate the 

meaning. This is the meaning here: `the flesh within' sisters, is a 

synonym for the six internal sense-fields.`The outer hide', sisters, 

is a synonym for the six external sense-fields.`The tendons, sinews 

and ligaments within', sisters, is a synonym for delight and 

attachment. `The butcher's sharp knife', sisters, is a synonym for the 

ariyan intuitive wisdom, the ariyan intuitive wisdom by which one 

cuts, cuts around, cuts all around the inner defilements, the inner 

fetters and the inner bonds."

After Nandaka had finished his sermon and the nuns had departed, the 

Buddha said to the monks: "...although these nuns were delighted with 

Nandaka's teaching on Dhamma, their aspirations were not fulfilled." 

We then read:

Then the Lord addressed the venerable Nandaka, saying:

"Well then, Nandaka, you may exhort these nuns with this same 

exhortation again tomorrow." 

We read that after Nandaka had given the same sermon to the nuns for 

the second time the Buddha said:

"¤these nuns were delighted with Nandaka's teaching on Dhamma and 

their aspirations were fulfilled. She who is the last nun[2] of these 

five hundred nuns is a stream-winner (sotåpanna), not liable to the 

Downfall; she is assured, bound for self-awakening."

You might think that the nuns had understood the impermanence of 

conditioned realities already the first time, but there are many 

degrees of realizing the truth. The hearing of Nandaka's sermon for 

the second time was a condition for those who had not attained 

enlightenment to become sotåpanna, and for others who were already 

ariyans to attain higher stages of enlightenment.

Thus we can see that listening to the teachings or reading the 

scriptures are conditions for mindfulness and the development of 

paññå, and even for attaining enlightenment.

This sutta illustrates that the Buddha taught about all realities 

which can be experienced through the six doors. They appear all the 

time in daily life. Right understanding should be developed of these 

realities, there is no other way. Some people think that one should 

select particular objects of awareness, they believe that one should 

not be aware of all objects which appear. This is not the development 

of the Eightfold Path. If one is, for example, never aware of visible 

object which appears through the eyes one will continue to believe 

that people can be experienced through the eyesense. In reality only 

the rúpa which is visible object can be seen, but one is unable to 

eliminate the idea of "being"from the visible object. One should check 

whether paññå can eliminate doubt and ignorance about the 

characteristics of nåma and rúpa or not yet. It is not sufficient to 

be aware of what appears through one door only.

When the nuns listened to Nandaka's sermon they were considering and 

studying with awareness the characteristics of nåma and rúpa which 

appeared in order to understand them thoroughly. One should not merely 

repeat for oneself what one has heard about nåma and rúpa or merely 

follow what one's teacher said. One should develop understanding 

oneself of whatever appears through one of the six doors. One may 

believe that seeing and hearing are very clear, but this may be only 

thinking, not direct understanding of these realities. There should be 

the development of right understanding which knows nåma as nåma and 

rúpa as rúpa. Usually one is so absorbed in the object which appears 

that one forgets to be aware of the nåma which experiences the object. 

When visible object appears it is evident that there is also a reality 

which experiences it, a type of nåma. If there were no nåma which 

experiences visible object how could visible object appear? It is 

seeing which sees, no self who sees. There can be awareness of one 

reality at a time, a nåma or a rúpa and then one can learn their 

different characteristics.

In the above quoted sutta we read about the dissecting of a cow. When 

it has been dissected there is no longer the idea of a whole cow. When 

we join realities together into a "whole" there is the idea of a 

thing, a person, a self. When paññå directly realizes visible object 

as rúpa, not self, hardness as rúpa, not self, hearing as nåma, not 

self, and the other realities appearing one at a time as not self, the 

concept of a whole will disappear.

After I had typed the text about dissecting the cow, my husband and I 

were having dinner. While we were eating I was still busy "dissecting 

the cow". I liked the food and I remembered the words of the sutta 

that we are bound by delight and attachment. We are bound by these 

"tendons", but wisdom can cut them away. The scriptures can be a 

condition to consider different nåmas and rúpas which appear in daily 

life.

We are bound by attachment and delight with regard to what is 

experienced through the six doors. We like savours and tasting, we 

want to go on tasting. We like visible object and seeing, we want to 

go on seeing. We like sound and hearing, we want to go on hearing. We 

like thoughts and thinking, we want to go on thinking. Thus there are 

conditions to go on in the cycle of birth and death. It is because of 

clinging that we must be reborn. There will be the arising of nåma and 

rúpa in other existences, again and again.

Why did the nuns have to hear the same sermon again? Hearing it only 

once was not enough. We also would need to hear it again and again, 

many more times. We still cling to the internal sense-fields and the 

external sense-fields. That is why it is necessary to be aware of 

seeing, visible object, hearing, sound, of all realities which appear 

through the six doors, over and over again, without preference for a 

particular reality, without excluding any reality. Thus we have to be 

busy, "dissecting the cow " .

You asked me how we can realize the conditions for nåma and rúpa 

through being aware of them, and whether that is different from 

thinking about conditions.

There are different degrees of understanding conditions. We can have 

theoretical understanding of the fact that eyesense is a condition for 

seeing. Without eyesense there cannot be seeing. Seeing sees visible 

object or colour. Visible object is a condition for seeing by being 

its object. Seeing is vipåka-citta, it is produced by kamma. 

Kamma-condition is another type of condition. There are different 

types of conditions for the realities which arise.

Theoretical understanding of conditions is not the same as paññå which 

directly knows conditions for the nåma and rúpa which appear. This is 

a stage of insight which cannot arise before the beginning stage of 

insight which is the stage that paññå clearly distinguishes the 

difference between the characteristic of nåma and the characteristic 

of rúpa. Seeing is a reality which experiences visible object, it is 

not self but nåma. There is no need to think about this. Can the 

characteristic of seeing not be known when it appears? Seeing is 

different from visible object. Visible object is rúpa, it does not 

know anything. Hearing is a reality which experiences sound. It is 

different from sound which is rúpa, a reality which does not know 

anything. Through awareness of nåma and rúpa which appear one at a 

time paññå can come to realize that nåma is different from rúpa. When 

the first stage of insight arises there is no idea of a "whole", there 

are only different elements appearing one at a time. There is no idea 

of self who realizes nåma as nåma and rúpa as rúpa, but it is paññå 

which realizes this. How could paññå directly know conditions for nåma 

and rúpa when the difference between these realities has not been 

discerned yet? This would be impossible. Do seeing and visible object 

not seem to appear at the same time? Do hearing and sound not seem to 

appear at the same time? Do seeing and hearing not seem to appear at 

the same time? Is there an idea of the whole body? Don't we join all 

realities together into a "whole"? Is there not the whole of the 

world, the whole of a being, the whole of our personality? Is there an 

idea of self who is aware? We still have to study, to be aware of 

different realities, to discern their different characteristics. We 

have to learn such a great deal before the first stage of insight can 

arise. We don't even know whether it can arise during this life, that 

depends on understanding which has been accumulated, also in past 

lives.

It is after the first stage of insight that paññå can come to know 

directly nåma and rúpa as conditioned realities. This does not mean 

that there has to be thinking about all the different conditions for 

each reality. This stage of insight is different from our intellectual 

understanding at this moment of the different conditions for nåma and 

rúpa.

Some people think that knowing the conditions for aversion, dosa, 

would help to eliminate it. They think that knowing the conditions 

means thinking about the circumstances, the "story". However, that is 

not paññå which realizes conditions, it is thinking of concepts. Is 

there not an idea of "my dosa" about which one thinks? The way to 

eliminate dosa is the development of right understanding of all 

realities which appear. Only when one has attained the third stage of 

enlightenment dosa can be eradicated. It cannot be eradicated so long 

as the wrong view of self has not been eradicated. When dosa appears 

its characteristic can be studied so that it can be realized as only a 

conditioned reality, not "my dosa". The real cause of dosa is not the 

circumstances, not the other people. Our accumulations of dosa 

condition its arising. There were countless moments of dosa in the 

past and thus it can arise today. There is ignorance accompanying each 

moment of dosa, thus ignorance is a condition for it. There is no 

attachment, lobha, at the same time as dosa, but lobha is also a 

condition for dosa. We like pleasant objects and when the object is 

unpleasant there is aversion, we dislike it when we don't get what we 

want. Thus we see that there are several conditioning factors for 

realities, some of which arise at the same time and some of which do 

not arise at the same time. When we think about the "story", about the 

circumstances of dosa we do not come to know more about the reality of 

dosa. We have accumulations to think a great deal. When there is 

thinking it can be realized as just nåma, not self.

Ignorance about realities can never be eradicated by thinking. The 

Buddha explained about the realities appearing through the six doors 

in order to remind us to be aware of them over and over again. Only in 

that way ignorance and wrong view of realities can be eradicated. 

We read in the Kindred Sayings (IV, Saîåyatana-vagga, Second Fifty, 

Chapter I, § 53, Ignorance):

`Then a certain monk came to the Exalted One, and on coming to him 

saluted him and sat down at one side. So seated that monk said this:

"By how knowing, lord, by how seeing does ignorance vanish and 

knowledge arise?"

"In him who knows and sees the eye as impermanent, monk, ignorance 

vanishes and knowledge arises. In him who knows and sees visible 

objects...seeing-consciousness...the 

ear¤sounds...hearing-consciousness...the 

tongue...flavours¤tasting-consciousness...the 

nose...smells¤smelling-consciousness...the 

body...touches...body-consciousness...the 

mind...mind-states...mind-consciousness...as impermanent, ignorance 

vanishes and knowledge arises." '

With mettå, 

Nina van Gorkom 

                                              Tokyo

                                              May 10                                                  

1971           Dear Mr. G.,

You wrote to me about concentration on breathing and since many people 

are interested in this subject I will quote from your letter:

I find that while I concentrate on breathing sensations and thoughts 

are blotted out and in this way I become more relaxed and I have less 

aversion. I find that after this exercise mindfulness becomes more 

acute and frequent. Seeing and hearing seem so clear, and all six 

doors are wide open, registering with clarity and intensity 

everything. The situation is like a spider in a web, ready to catch, 

but without tension. I find that by means of concentration on 

breathing, I can create favourable conditions for wisdom of the 

Eightfold Path. I believe that I can be mindful more often when I am 

relaxed. 

Your letter raises many questions with regard to samatha and 

vipassanå. Some people have accumulations to develop both samatha and 

vipassanå; others develop only samatha and others again only 

vipassanå. Both for the development of samatha and for the development 

of vipassanå, it is essential to have right understanding of the way 

of development. It is felt by some that for samatha it is not 

necessary to know about realities, to know one's different types of 

citta, since one should, as they believe, just concentrate until 

sense-impressions are "blotted out". However, this is not the right 

way of development. If one starts to concentrate for example on 

breathing, without understanding when the citta is kusala citta and 

when akusala citta, one will take attachment to breathing for the calm 

which accompanies kusala citta. One does not know the difference 

between samatha and what is not samatha but merely a 

breathing-exercise. When one has a sensation of sense-impressions 

being blotted out one mistakenly believes that one has attained jhåna 

(absorption). We should understand which cause brings which effect. If 

one wants to apply oneself to mindfulness of breathing one should note 

that just concentration on one's breathing is not samatha. People 

concentrate on their breathing for various reasons: for example 

because it is good for one's health and it makes one feel more 

relaxed. 

Mindfulness of breathing is among the meditation subjects of samatha 

and as such it is quite different from any other kind of concentration 

on breathing. The aim of samatha is to be less attached to 

sense-impressions, and, in order to reach this aim, it is essential 

that there is right understanding of the way to develop true calm. 

True calm is wholesome, at that moment there are no lobha, dosa or 

moha. We read about people in the Buddha's time who could develop calm 

to the degree of jhåna. When jhåna is attained defilements are 

temporarily eliminated, but they are not eradicated. There are many 

misunderstandings about the development of samatha and if it is not 

developed in the right way one develops wrong concentration, 

micchå-samådhi, instead of calm. 

I have heard people say that they want to become less restless and to 

have more calm, and that they therefore want to apply themselves to 

samatha. However, do they know the real meaning of restlessness and 

calm?

"Restlessness", in Påli uddhacca, is akusala. It is a cetasika which 

arises with each akusala citta: with lobha-múla-citta (citta rooted in 

attachment), with dosa-múla-citta (citta rooted in aversion) and with 

moha-múla-citta (citta rooted in ignorance). It prevents the citta 

from wholesomeness. Uddhacca is different from what one in 

conventional language calls "restlessness". When we use the word 

"restlessness" in conventional language we usually think of aversion 

and unpleasant feeling. People dislike unpleasant feeling and they 

like pleasant feeling or indifferent feeling. However, pleasant 

feeling and indifferent feeling can accompany both kusala citta and 

akusala citta. If one pays attention only to feeling and one does not 

know when the citta is kusala citta and when akusala citta one's life 

is very confused. For instance, when one is in quiet surroundings, one 

may be attached to quietness and thus there are at that moment 

lobha-múla-cittas which can be accompanied by pleasant feeling or by 

indifferent feeling. Since lobha-múla-citta is akusala citta it is 

accompanied by restlessness. Or, there may be moha-múla-cittas which 

are accompanied by indifferent feeling. Moha-múla-citta is also 

accompanied by restlessness. Thus, when the feeling is pleasant or 

indifferent, the citta may be akusala citta and in that case it is 

inevitably accompanied by restlessness. Although one believes that one 

is calm at that moment, one still has restlessness. Do we realize it 

whether the pleasant feeling or indifferent feeling which arises is 

kusala or akusala? We have theoretical knowledge of kusala and 

akusala, but in order to develop what is wholesome we must know 

whether the citta at this moment is kusala or akusala. Attachment to 

calm may be very subtle, one may not notice it. Lobha can lure us all 

the time. Only paññå can know whether the citta which arises is kusala 

or akusala.

In conventional language we use the word "calm". We should know which 

kind of reality calm is. Calm, in Påli passaddhi, is a cetasika. In 

fact, there are two cetasikas: kåya-passaddhi, tranquillity of body, 

and citta-passaddhi, tranquillity of mind. By kåya, body, is meant 

here the "mental body", which are the cetasikas (the three 

nåma-kkhandhas which are vedåna-kkhandha, feeling, saññå-kkhandha, 

perception, and saòkhåra-kkhandha, the "formations") as distinct from 

citta (Visuddhimagga XIV, 144). Thus, there is calm of cetasikas and 

calm of citta. 

We read in the Visuddhimagga (XIV, 144):

` ...But both tranquillity of that body and of consciousness have, 

together, the characteristic of quieting disturbance of that body and 

of consciousness. Their function is to crush disturbance of the 

(mental) body and of consciousness. They are manifested as inactivity 

and coolness of the (mental) body and of consciousness...' 

The two cetasikas which are calm of "body" and calm of citta arise 

with each kusala citta, no matter whether one is performing dåna 

(generosity), observing síla (morality), developing samatha or 

vipassanå. Thus, also while we are generous or abstain from lying 

there is calm: at such moments there are no lobha, dosa or moha 

accompanying the citta. When there are moments of mettå, 

lovingkindness, towards someone we meet, there is true calm. Mettå is 

a subject of samatha, but it can and should be developed in daily 

life, when we are in the company of other people. We should not 

confuse mettå with selfish affection, we should know that when there 

is pure lovingkindness we do not expect anything in return, we do not 

want anything for ourselves. When we hear the word samatha we may 

think that one has to develop it in quiet surroundings until jhåna is 

attained. However, there can be moments of calm, samatha, in daily 

life if there is right understanding, paññå, which knows when the 

citta is kusala citta and when akusala citta. We should not believe 

that this is easy. Those who have accumulations for jhåna can develop 

calm to the degree of jhåna, but only very few people are able to. We 

do not know whether there are at the present time people who are able 

to attain jhåna. When jhåna is attained defilements are temporarily 

eliminated.

There is calm when one develops vipassanå. When one is aware of a 

characteristic of nåma or rúpa there is kusala citta which is 

accompanied by calm. Moreover, vipassanå leads to the eradication of 

wrong view and the other defilements. The arahat has eradicated all 

latent tendencies of defilements and thus he has the highest degree of 

calm.

When the citta is not intent on dåna, síla or bhåvåna, mental 

development, there is no calm, passaddhi. Concentration on breathing 

with the aim to become relaxed is not a way of kusala kamma, it is not 

samatha. There is then no passaddhi with the citta, even if one thinks 

that one is feeling calm. At such a moment there may not be dosa, but 

lobha and moha are bound to arise.

Right understanding of what is kusala and what is akusala will prevent 

us from taking for samatha what is not samatha. If one believes that 

one can develop calm to the degree of jhåna, one should know about the 

many conditions which have to be fulfilled in order to attain it. If 

one understands how difficult it is to attain jhåna one will not 

mislead oneself and believe that one has attained it when there is a 

sensation of sense-impressions being blotted out or other unusual 

experiences. The person who wants to develop samatha to the degree of 

jhåna should lead a secluded life and he should not spend his time 

with various entertainments such as one enjoys while leading a worldly 

life. One should really see the disadvantages of sense-pleasures and 

one should have the intention to cultivate the conditions for being 

away from them. If the right conditions are not fulfilled there cannot 

even be access-concentration (upacåra-samadhi)[3] nor can there be the 

attainment of jhåna.

The Visuddhimagga (XII, 8) explains how difficult even the preliminary 

work is, and how difficult access-concentration and jhåna are. We read 

about each stage:"One in a hundred or thousand can do it." If one 

leads a worldly life and is busy with one's daily tasks there are no 

favourable conditions for jhåna. One cannot expect to attain jhåna if 

one just for a little while every day concentrates on breathing. 

Moreover, it is not concentration which should be stressed but right 

understanding, paññå. There must be right understanding of breath 

which is rúpa, conditioned by citta. It appears at the nose-tip or 

upper-lip, but it is very subtle. We should remember that mindfulness 

of breathing is one of the most difficult subjects of meditation. 

We read in the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 211):

`¤But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to 

develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, Pacceka Buddhas, 

and Buddhas' sons are at home. It is no trivial matter, nor can it be 

cultivated by trivial persons¤`

Buddhas' sons were the great disciples who had accumulated excellent 

qualities and skill for jhåna. Who can pretend to be among them?

Mindfulness of breathing is a meditation subject of samatha and it is 

also included in one of the Four Applications of Mindfulness, 

Satipaììhåna, under the section of Mindfulness of the Body. Thus, it 

can be applied in samatha and in vipassanå. We have to study this 

subject very carefully in order to avoid misunderstandings. The 

Visuddhimagga (Chapter VIII, 145-146) quotes the sutta about 

mindfulness of breathing in the Kindred Sayings (V, Mahå-vagga, Book 

X, Chapter I, § I). This sutta also occurs in other parts of the 

Tipiìaka[4]. I will quote the sutta text and then refer to the word 

commentary of the Visuddhimagga, in order that this sutta will be more 

clearly understood. We should note that there is a division into four 

sections of four clauses each in this sutta which, in the Visuddhimagga

, are marked from I-XVI. The sutta states:

It has been described by the Blessed One as having sixteen bases thus: 

`And how developed, bhikkhus, how practised much is concentration 

through mindfulness of breathing both peaceful and sublime, an 

unadulterated blissful abiding, banishing at once and stilling evil 

unprofitable thoughts as soon as they arise?

Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest or to the root of a tree 

or to an empty place, sits down; having folded his legs crosswise, set 

his body erect, established mindfulness in front of him, ever mindful 

he breathes in, mindful he breathes out.

(I) Breathing in long, he knows "I breathe in long"; or breathing out 

long, he knows "I breathe out long".

(II) Breathing in short, he knows "I breathe in short"; or breathing 

out short, he knows "I breathe out short". (III) He trains thus "I 

shall breathe in experiencing the whole body"; he trains thus "I shall 

breathe out experiencing the whole body". (IV) He trains thus "I shall 

breathe in tranquillizing the bodily activity"; he trains thus "I 

shall breathe out tranquillizing the bodily activity".

(V) He trains thus "I shall breathe in experiencing happiness"; he 

trains thus "I shall breathe out experiencing happiness". (VI) He 

trains thus "I shall breathe in experiencing bliss"; he trains thus "I 

shall breathe out experiencing bliss". (VII) He trains thus "I shall 

breathe in experiencing the mental formation"; he trains thus "I shall 

breathe out experiencing the mental formation". (VIII) He trains thus 

"I shall breathe in tranquillizing the mental formation"; he trains 

thus "I shall breathe out tranquillizing the mental formation".

(IX) He trains thus "I shall breathe in experiencing the (manner of) 

consciousness"; he trains thus "I shall breathe out experiencing the 

(manner of) consciousness". (X) He trains thus "I shall breathe in 

gladdening the (manner of) consciousness"; he trains thus "I shall 

breathe out gladdening the (manner of) consciousness". (XI) He trains 

thus "I shall breathe in concentrating the (manner of) consciousness"; 

he trains thus "I shall breathe out concentrating the (manner of) 

consciousness". (XII) He trains thus "I shall breathe in liberating 

the (manner of) consciousness"; he trains thus "I shall breathe out 

liberating the (manner of) consciousness".

(XIII) He trains thus "I shall breathe in contemplating impermanence"; 

he trains thus "I shall breathe out contemplating impermanence". (XIV) 

He trains thus "I shall breathe in contemplating fading away"; he 

trains thus "I shall breathe out contemplating fading away". (XV) He 

trains thus "I shall breathe in contemplating cessation"; he trains 

thus "I shall breathe out contemplating cessation". (XVI) He trains 

thus "I shall breathe in contemplating relinquishment"; he trains thus 

"I shall breathe out contemplating relinquishment". 

The Visuddhimagga (VIII, 186) describes the procedure of someone who 

wants to develop mindfulness of breathing until he has attained the 

fourth jhåna, and who then develops insight and through insight based 

on the fourth jhåna attains arahatship. We should not misunderstand 

the words "insight based on the fourth jhåna". It does not mean that 

he can forego the different stages of insight-knowledge, starting with 

the "defining of materiality-mentality" (nåma-rúpa pariccheda-ñåùa), 

which is knowing the difference between the characteristic of nåma and 

the characteristic of rúpa. For example, when there is hearing there 

is sound as well, but their characteristics are different and they can 

only be known one at a time. Right understanding of the reality 

appearing at the present moment should be developed until there is no 

longer confusion as to the difference between the characteristics of 

nåma and rúpa. So long as this stage of insight has not been reached 

yet we are not sure whether the reality which appears at the present 

moment is nåma or rúpa. 

Someone said that if one continues to concentrate on breathing the day 

will come when one realizes that this body is supported by mere 

breathing and that it perishes when breathing ceases. He said that in 

that way one fully realizes impermanence. However, the impermanence of 

conditioned realities will not be realized if the right cause has not 

been cultivated: awareness and understanding of different kinds of 

nåma and rúpa as they present themselves one at a time through the six 

doors. 

Those who develop both jhåna and vipassanå should, after the 

jhånacitta has fallen away, be aware of nåma and rúpa, clearly know 

their different characteristics and develop all stages of insight (

Visuddhimagga VIII, 223 and following). It depends on the accumulated 

wisdom whether the different stages of insight can be realized within 

a short time or whether they are developed very gradually during a 

long period of time.

In the word commentary to the above quoted sutta the Visuddhimagga 

(VIII, 223-226) mentions with regard to the first tetrad (group of 

four clauses, marked I-IV) of the sutta the different stages of 

insight-knowledge which are developed after emerging from jhåna. We 

read:

`After he has thus reached the four noble paths in due succession and 

has become established in the fruition of arahatship, he at last 

attains to the nineteen kinds of "Reviewing Knowledge", and he becomes 

fit to receive the highest gifts from the world with its deities.' 

It is evident that only those who had accumulated great wisdom could 

attain jhåna with "mindfulness of breathing" as meditation subject, 

and then attain arahatship. This is beyond the capacity of ordinary 

people.

As regards the second tetrad (marked V-VIII), the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 

226) comments:

`(V) He trains thus "I shall breathe in¤shall breathe out experiencing 

happiness", that is, making happiness (píti, also translated as 

rapture) known, making it plain. Herein, the happiness is experienced 

in two ways: (a) with the object, and (b) with non-confusion.'

As regards "happiness experienced with the object", the Visuddhimagga 

(VIII, 227) explains:

`How is happiness experienced with the object? He attains the two 

jhånas in which happiness (píti) is present.[5] At the time when he has 

actually entered upon them the happiness is experienced with the 

object owing to the obtaining of the jhåna, because of the 

experiencing of the object.'

After the jhånacitta has fallen away paññå realizes the characteristic 

of píti as it is: only a kind of nåma, which is impermanent and not 

self. We read:

`¤How with non-confusion? When, after entering upon and emerging from 

one of the two jhånas accompanied by píti, he comprehends with insight 

that happiness associated with the jhåna as liable to destruction and 

fall, then at the actual time of insight the happiness is experienced 

with non-confusion owing to the penetration of its characteristics (of 

impermanence, and so on). '

In a similar way the words of the second tetrad are explained: "(VI) I 

shall breathe in¤breathe out experiencing bliss (sukha)¤" 

Sukha occurs in three stages of jhåna (of the fourfold system); it 

does not arise in the highest stage of jhåna where there is equanimity 

instead of sukha. Sukha accompanies the jhånacitta of the three stages 

of jhåna and is, after the jhånacitta has fallen away, realized by 

paññå as impermanent.

As regards the words in the third tetrad: "(X) I shall breathe 

in...breathe out gladdening the (manner of) consciousness", the 

Visuddhimagga (VIII, 231) states that there is gladdening in two ways, 

namely through concentration and through insight. We read:

`How through concentration? He attains the two jhånas in which 

happiness is present. At the time when he has actually entered upon 

them he inspires the mind with gladness, instils gladness into it, by 

means of the happiness associated with the jhåna. How through insight? 

After entering upon and emerging from one of the two jhånas 

accompanied by happiness he comprehends with insight that happiness 

associated with the jhåna as liable to destruction and to fall, thus 

at the actual time of insight he inspires the mind with gladness, 

instils gladness into it by making the happiness associated with jhåna 

the object.'

As regards the clause: "(XII) I shall breathe in¤breathe out 

liberating the (manner of) consciousness", the Visuddhimagga explains 

that this also must be understood as pertaining to jhåna as well as to 

insight. In the first jhåna one is liberated from the "hindrances", 

although they are not eradicated, and in each subsequent stage of 

jhåna one is liberated from the jhåna-factors, specific cetasikas 

which are developed in order to eliminate the hindrances. The 

jhåna-factors are subsequently abandoned when one is no longer 

dependent on them and one is able to attain a higher and more subtle 

stage of jhåna. After emerging from jhåna the jhånacitta is 

comprehended with insight. 

We read (Visuddhimagga VIII, 233): 

`¤at the actual time of insight he delivers, liberates the mind from 

the perception of permanence by means of the contemplation of 

impermanence, from the perception of pleasure by means of the 

contemplation of dukkha (suffering), from the perception of self by 

means of the contemplation of not self...'

As regards the words of the fourth tetrad, "(XIII) I shall breathe 

in¤breathe out contemplating impermanence", the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 

234) states:

` ¤Impermanence is the rise and fall and change in those same 

khandhas, or it is their non-existence after having been; the meaning 

is, it is the break-up of produced khandhas through their momentary 

dissolution since they do not remain in the same mode. Contemplation 

of impermanence is contemplation of materiality, etc., as 

"impermanent" in virtue of that impermanence...' 

Further on the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 237) states about the fourth 

tetrad,

`This tetrad deals only with pure insight while the previous three 

deal with serenity and insight.'

As regards the clause: "(XIV) I shall breathe in¤breathe out 

contemplating fading away", the Visuddhimagga states that there are 

two kinds of fading away, namely: "fading away as destruction" which 

is the "momentary dissolution of formations" (conditioned realities) 

and "absolute fading away" which is nibbåna. The text (Visuddhimagga 

VIII, 235) states:

`¤Contemplation of fading away is insight and it is the path, which 

occur as the seeing of these two. It is when he possesses this twofold 

contemplation that it can be understood of him "He trains thus, I 

shall breathe in¤shall breathe out contemplating fading away." '

The same method of explanation is applied to the clause "contemplating 

cessation". And with regard to the clause (XVI) "contemplating 

relinquishment", the Visuddhimagga states: 

"relinquishment is of two kinds too, that is to say, relinquishment as 

giving up, and relinquishment as entering into."

"Giving up" is the giving up of defilements, and "entering into" is 

the entering into nibbåna, the Visuddhimagga explains. Also this 

clause pertains to insight alone. 

It is extremely difficult to develop jhåna and we should not think 

that it will be easier to develop insight if one tries to develop 

jhåna first. In the following sutta we read about "canker-destruction" 

depending on jhåna. It is clearly explained in what sense we should 

understand this. We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Nines, 

Chapter VI, § 5, Musing):

`Verily, monks, I say canker-destruction depends on the first jhåna 

("musing")¤And wherefore is this said?

Consider the monk who, aloof from sense-desires¤enters and abides in 

the first jhåna: whatever occurs there of rúpa, feeling, perception, 

activities (saùkhåra) or consciousness, he sees wholly as impermanent 

phenomena, as ill, as a disease, a boil, a sting, a hurt, an 

affliction, as something alien, gimcrack, empty, not the self. He 

turns his mind away from such phenomena and, having done so, brings 

the mind towards the deathless element with the thought: 

"This is the peace, this the summit, just this: the stilling of all 

mind-activity, the renouncing of all (rebirth) basis, the destroying 

of craving, passionlessness, ending, the cool." And steadfast therein 

he wins to canker-destruction; if not¤just by reason of that Dhamma 

zest, that Dhamma sweetness, he snaps the five lower fetters and is 

born spontaneously and, being not subject to return from that world, 

becomes completely cool there.' 

The same is said with regard to the other stages of jhåna. There can 

be no "canker-destruction", even for those who develop jhåna, unless 

the five khandhas, the conditioned nåmas and rúpas, are known as they 

are. Are there not five khandhas now, no matter what kind of citta 

arises, be it kusala citta or akusala citta? When something hard 

impinges on the bodysense, are there not five khandhas? Do we know 

already the difference between hardness and the nåma which experiences 

hardness? Hardness could not appear if there were no nåma which 

experiences it. It is not self who experiences it. Do we know the 

characteristic of painful feeling when it appears and the 

characteristic of aversion towards the pain? Different realities 

appear one at a time and when there is mindfulness they can be known 

as they are. Later on they can be realized as impermanent and not 

self. We should not forget that each moment of right understanding now 

eventually leads to "the destroying of craving, passionlessness, 

ending, the cool." It leads to "canker-destruction".

With mettå

Nina van Gorkom