Jump to content

- - - - -

June 4 2013 Kaeng Krajaan 1

transcripts meditation centers

  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 RobertK



  • Root Admin
  • 1,325 posts

Posted 26 October 2013 - 09:01 AM

see http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/audio for more audio







Kaeng Krajaan:
4 June, morning



A.Sujin: You have many friends who can answer your questions. *laughs*


Someone: ….


A.Sujin: yesterday and he was talking about, we were talking about metta or friendliness, and in the meditations centre she was talking about how the metta or love and kindness for oneself, .. so what it actually is attachment for oneself, already where one expects attachment for oneself, but I think it is a common way of thinking or teaching and even I think, like if we go to see some counselors, or advisor, in Australia, they would all also say that you need to have more respect or more love for oneself. Which you like to have more understanding?


Woman 1: yes, I suppose. I am trying to understand, the idea about the respect,  so worth, um, because,  because, I feel at the moment that, I have struggles with accepting who I am and myself worth, and wondering how that fix in with the idea of non self and, um, because I, when you talk about the attachment to oneself and there is already enough love for oneself, I think you, I don’t really understand, how I am attached to myself when I don’t feel like that.


A.Sujin: Is there attachment to oneself now.


Woman 1: I think there is.


A.Sujin: Just think its not enough, it must be very precise to really understand any word we are talking about. Like self or oneself, is there a I or self at this moment? Or not at all?


Woman 1: I, I think there is..


A.Sujin: Just think. So its not precise?


Woman 1: Umm


A.Sujin: Whats the I at this moment? see


Woman 1: yes there is.


A.Sujin: so is it just the I there, and just thinking about everything like we used to think like this and that. But actually there can be more understanding about whatever appears now. Not just think about it. Are you friendly now? See. Now think about friendliness. But now, are you friendly? *laughs*


Woman 1: I don’t know that. *laughs*


A.Sujin: yes I know. So people talk about friendliness. Having more and more friendliness. But what is it? See. Without understanding, that we are talking about its impossible to know more, further more about that. So what is the self now? If you think that you are not clinging to yourself. Now. Or are you.


Woman 1: Yes I think.


A.Sujin: *laughs* to what? What is this self that you are clinging to?


Woman 1: Umm, having to be in certain way?


A.Sujin: Like now? No you or you? *laughs*


Woman 1: I don’t know.


A.Sujin: This is the beginning of understanding whatever appears, otherwise there is no purpose of going somewhere and try to have a very good time, splendid time, very rewarding. No understanding. Even just what appears now, or whats the self now, or is there self now? Or is there no self now? So, we are talking about friendliness, its not just the word that anyone can think about, be friendly, that’s not enough, but what is it. See.


Woman 1: Is it, .. but I want to try, because I would like to feel love. That’s what..


A.Sujin: that’s natural.


Woman 1: or accept the value


A.Sujin: for everyone it’s the same feeling. But what is the understanding because Buddha taught the truth of whatever appears as it is. That is meant the enlightenment. Understanding thoroughly, deeply, as it is, but as we guess, but as we used to think about. Even the self, see, its not clear. When its not clear, it seems like, there is not self, but actually, there is, so much that it is not clear to talk about it. So you went to the meditation centre to have less attachment and more understanding? Or still clinging to get something without understanding? Even clinging is not clear, because without right understanding, who can thought of the difference between clinging and being friendly. And that is the self who does not know, when there is understanding, understanding is not anyone. It’s a reality, which can understand that which hasn’t been understood before. That’s why we learn, listen and think over it. Study, developing understanding. So the … or it is usually transmitted through meditation, what does it mean?


Woman 1: I don’t know *laughs*


A.Sujin: so it begins with no understanding, so it has more and more, no understanding and ignorance.


Woman 2: … your reasons for going on the retreat was because it seems to take an effort to always be with people, friendly and cheerful, so it was a way to withdraw, and she took it like a silence, because it has to be smile, and be associated with people.


A.Sujin: when you think of a funny thing, you smile or laugh alone. Right? Anywhere.


Woman 1: yeah.


A.Sujin: even there is a silence, but its already so funny. So it can condition laughing. Pleasant moment. And what about being friendly, in such, or what about now? Um, no more. *laugh* or it can be anywhere, and anytime. Yes, to anyone. That is the development of metta. And what do you do, in order to have more metta? There, I mean retreat to have more metta in what you do. Not like now? Or what? *laughs*


Woman 1: I don’t know.


A.Sujin: see, not understanding anything, that can be understood, anywhere, anytime too. 


Man 1: what Sarah just meant that, if we find that, being among people, is a condition for us, …. aversion so that … so it does not … to be among other people,…


A.Sujin: who wants that? *laughs*


Man 1: I am just explaining. And that can be the reason to go to retreat, for some people. Because then they don’t have to interact.


A.Sujin: if one hasn’t talked about one has lobha.


Man 1: for everyone its either attachment or aversion, when we talk about people, not wholesome, very little wholesomeness if there was metta, … that would be wholesome, because its, its not attachment, its not aversion, its friendliness. Um, so it doesn’t really matter whether, for people there is attachment or aversion, but if you escape from that, somewhere else where there are no people to develop a wholesome quality.


A.Sujin: anyways, from understanding can anyone know whether its attachment or metta?


Man 1: so … a reason of company of other people, and enjoy that situation, for them, its cheesy because of the attachment, its natural.


Woman 2: and she was saying that, when we talk about, self love, or attachment for oneself, that it doesn’t seem to hurt that there is much attachment to herself, because she needs more unhappiness or difficulty, when we are discussing how there is unhappiness or sorrow, actually its because of the clinging to oneself.


Woman 1: is that clinging because you want to cling to the idea of a certain way or


Woman 2: wanting to be a certain way, wanting what is seen to be a certain way, what is heard to be a certain way, what is seen much to be a certain way. Thinking of what one would like, how long they would like it to be. And unhappy when its not like that or when one is attached to a dozen lost. So therefore that is why there is clinging to self. Even if I think, thinking of clinging, is that clinging is,  it doesn’t necessarily means that it is a positive thing, but clinging is wanting more self love. I don’t know.


A.Sujin: you think that you can be friendly to those around you, in their …. When they all come out, there still have such feeling of being friendly to all of them, not at the meditation centre, but anywhere.

#2 RobertK



  • Root Admin
  • 1,325 posts

Posted 26 October 2013 - 09:03 AM

And its there where you can have such feeling or to be friendly with them. Like you, see. In the meditation center you are friendly, right? And after that are you still friendly? After retreat?


Woman 3: actually in the meditation center, so can aversions arise.


A.Sujin: Anything, like seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, here and there or anywhere, seeing is seeing.


Woman 3: but it is like going to a centre, its like going to school to learn to write, to read.


A.Sujin: if there is understanding right now, is this place a meditation centre? No or yes?


Woman 3: Yes


A.Sujin: No. *laughs* no. very natural. See. No time to [schedule] such friendliness, or schedule to study. See. We can talk about whatever appears anywhere, on the train, in the bus, or here. Lets say, seeing itself can it be in the train, under the …, up in the sky, seeing is seeing. So there can be the understanding, that at moment its seeing, there must that which condition it arises. Or its arising, to be seen. Not other moment at all. Is that self? Which sees, no, seeing, is itself, so what is it? This is the way to learn to have less attachments. To what we used to take for, I or think, because of ignorance.  Otherwise there is no way to get rid of the idea of self, to this or that place. Without understanding, ignorance is there. So when the people have, different sessions, ordinary life and meditation life, by self, as long there is no understanding of whatever appears now as it is, there is the idea of something. Self, people, things. close your eyes. What do you see? No one. Right? But there is the idea of I am sitting here, with many people, but actually, it appears to seeing the visible object has to be the object of seeing. Seeing cannot see sound, it cannot see other than that which appears at the moment of seeing. Just that. And after that there is the idea of something because of memory. Of the marks, signs, shapes, and forms. And one keeps that idea all the time, but actually its gone completely. So one lives in the world of ignorance not knowing whats what in a moment. Because seeing is not thinking. There can be thinking about that which is not seen without seeing it. Like in the dream, no seeing, but there is thinking about many things. And they seemed like they appeared. But actually, only memory of what is experienced. Did you have your dream last night?


Woman 1: yes


A.Sujin: *laughs* yes? Is it as real?


Woman 1: no.


A.Sujin: Why?


Woman 1: because, um, here now, the dream is, when I am dreaming I feel like, I am at real.


A.Sujin: but whats the difference between the two?


Woman 1: um, is it consciousness? Or is it thinking? Or the other is living it alive?

A.Sujin: can anyone see in a dream? Can there be seeing in a dream?


Woman 1: it feels like I am seeing but it is just thinking.


A.Sujin: see the difference between dreaming and dreaming, like right now, because, the visible object appears to see, before thinking, but in a dream, there is no seeing, no visible object appears right now. Its only pure thinking. The whole story about this and that. This right now, when there is no seeing a visible object, its like dreaming. Exactly the same. So the difference is that, when its not a dream, it’s a moment of seeing a visible object, that all.


Woman 1: so its like, when I am awake with my eyes closed, the object is thinking?


A.Sujin: Or hearing, or smelling. Anything can be an object. But not in a dream. So its not you, there are only different realities, conditioned to arise, it can be object of understanding. When, right understanding develops more and more. But  errors cannot experience that, because it cannot understand anything, even its appearance right now. Though we understand the difference between ignorance and right understanding. So what would have to be living, for quite a long long time when there is no understanding?


Woman 1: ignorance.


A.Sujin: ignorance. And the teachings of the Buddha can condition right understanding about whatever appears now, because it’s the truth. The truth of words. No body can change because its all about reality right now. So, one lesson to the teachings or to someone else, see. Have you heard the words …. …. ….


Woman 1: no.


A.Sujin: then why do you call to meditation centre? What for? When you don’t know anything about Buddha, dhamma and sanka. You just believe in someone, leading you to someone, unknown, without understanding. So first of all we should know what does understanding understand? At times we just talk about understanding, but what does it understand? Not at all. So its not understanding. So we talked about different kinds of realities, such as seeing a visible objects, seeing which experiences object, no self involved, invisible object which is seen, hearing, sound, different kinds of realities, at this moment, understanding of what is real at this very moment, the question I discussed with you, is that enough by study that whole .. just to understand what is real now, such as a visible object. Is that correct?


Woman 3: … bring back to the, those experiences, through one of the six senses, so is that necessary to study all the….


A.Sujin: just all about, daily life, seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, clinging, aversion, like this life, everything. In a day. Its taught. Otherwise, who knows, right now, is there clinging now? Attachment now? Who knows? Is seeing not me? Who knows? So, each word, should be studied carefully, because, it will lead to more and more understanding to the whole … but if there is no understanding, it is impossible to understand more at all. That’s a way to understand. Not just listen, but to really understand. What that word represents. Like seeing, it doesnt represent anyone at all. Just a reality which is conditioned to see, without abyss. Can it arise? Can whatever appears, appear? So, its just in a moment. Seeing is conditioned. By not just the abyss, but also, that which can be seen, which impinged on the abyss. To condition the seeing to arise, and see it, that all. Just that. Its gone. Seeing right now is not seeing the moment at all, different conditions. Different visible objects, which arises and falls away in split seconds. Just consider, whether its true, this moment, like, we just talked about, no one there is gone completely, like sound and hearing. They are all gone. So its not I who hear, and what is heard is no ones fault, its only that which can be heard. This is a way to have less and less attachment to what we take for self, from birth, everything is self, or something permanent.


Woman 1: so when you talk about clinging to self, how much clinging arise actually, of course there is no self so its just clinging to an idea we have, of oneself. So really its clinging to what? To what seeing, to what smell, and to this idea we have that follow us, is oneself. So is it actually clinging to a fantasy, like in a dream.


A.Sujin: this, um, seeing right now, can there be the idea of I see it? I am seeing it. See, but seeing just arises and it sees. But ignorance, takes it for, my seeing, I see it. But really it does not arise, who sees. When this thinking is like I see, but actually thinking is conditioned. We think differently, all the time, by conditions, with right understanding, without right understanding, with attachment or with aversion all day. Just in a moment. From moment to moment. And we are talking about the truth, of whatever appears now. Taught by the Buddha himself, was enlightened long long time ago, but the teaching there is now is reality, so it can be understood anytime. When anyone hears.


Woman 2: when we had a discussion yesterday when you think a little about Sati, awareness or mind from this, and, um, was saying that, you think that there can be awareness of the mind, of the arising and falling away of mind fullness and when I asked about what is mind full of, I think you said it’s the present moment, would you like to say moment.


Woman 3: every moment, bring backs to the moment’s experience of one of the six senses, so its about practicing now, meditation of the mind fullness, which is mind full of whether it in the present moment, with the..


A.Sujin: *laughs* its too soon or too early to talk about Sati. See, what do you said.


Woman 3: understand to know what, arises at present moment with.. objects,….


A.Sujin: can it arise without conditions:


Woman 3: no it cannot arise.


A.Sujin:  without the understanding of reality now, can sati arise?


Woman 3: I think sati can arise, even with the object of concept or with the object of

#3 RobertK



  • Root Admin
  • 1,325 posts

Posted 26 October 2013 - 09:05 AM

A.Sujin: usually there is ignorance and not sati. Until the right understanding and intellectual understanding is firm of the conditions for the sati to arise. Because sati is uncontrollable, like seeing and hearing. But when someone is thinking about someone, they like to have it real. Or do anything to get it without understanding. But without the … intellectual understanding, theres no right conditions for sati to arise. That’s why we learn to understand. Step by step. Later by later. And don’t mind what is sati because even right now, there is no understanding of which that appears, which is sati. And at moment of understanding, works of the teachings. It’s the sati with the understanding. See. So here are many levels of sati, to be talked about. Intellectual level or direct understanding, or the penetration of the reality, of the right understanding develops with sati, not just by itself. Without right understanding, no condition for sati to arise. We just want to have it, try to have it, without any understanding of if its conditioned, and the teachings of the Buddha is all about understanding. Because whenever there is ignorance, there is detachment. Whenever there is attachment, there is ignorance. So there can detachment only when there is understanding. Not ignorance. Ignorance cannot detach from anything because it doesn’t know anything at all. Seeing sees. Ignorance cannot understand that. That’s just some moment of reality and element which is conditioned to arise and see. Just that, not other things. Not other moments. Only seeing. Then its gone completely. Never come back at all. Without these primary understanding, no condition for sati to arise. Because sati has to arise with right understanding, when we talk about, there is sati which can understand whatever appears, it needs to have intellectual understanding. There are many people who do not know anything and they go to the meditation centre, wishing to get whatever they want. Without understanding at all.


Woman 3: does sati, mind fullness, experiences the hotness or the softness.


A.Sujin: There is hotness and there is experience of hotness. Is there sati? Is there? At this moment of holding the microphone?


Woman 3: Yes.


A.Sujin: No. *laughs* ordinary experiences,… the body consciousness, experiences hotness without any understanding, without sati. Like anyone in the world, who, does not have any understanding of reality, can you say that, that person has sati at the moment of holding the microphone.


Woman 3: Its just something without understanding?


A.Sujin: When its dana, sila, but when one is listening to the teachings, at moments of understanding, there is sati. Just that level, intellectual understanding, not the direct understanding of a reality, which one heard about. So don’t rush to anything without understanding, because it’s the self. Wishing, trying, to get something, so the self is there, having more self. Without understanding. If anyone can have sati without intellectual understanding, its not according to the teachings of Buddha. Pariyatti, patti patti, and … they cannot be pariyatti and patti patti after. Because the meaning of patti patti is, patti is particular, and patti is to approach with understanding. Like seeing is seeing, hearing is hearing, thinking is thinking, attachment is attachment. This is said but what is the moment of, direct understanding of just one reality at a time? Right now, seeing and hearing, they seem to arise together, but acts at different moments, far apart. The conditions for seeing is far from the conditions from that of hearing. They are not as close as you think. And when one wants, to have sati, there is not clinging, but when one is impossible to have direct awareness, without the firm foundation of the intellectual understanding, because now we know, seeing is not permanent. Its not permanent. This is very very very weak understanding. Because its gone, arising and falling away. All the time. And we just heard that, seeing is not permanent. Arising and falling away, and its not hearing, its not thinking. This is what we learn. Consider but not direct understanding, but when seeing arises and see, at that moment of the, clear comprehension of that person, or other thing at all. Just one at a time, as it is. No wish to have such experience. It is, …, in the right conditions, no one cannot stop its arising. But when there is no conditions, no one can have it to arise at all. Just try for it to arise, but that is not the direct understanding with detachment, but its attachment, try so hard. So instead of, it has more and more idea of self. Its right not to understand, but to get something, and think that its understanding. But its not. Like right now, when panna develops, so great, it can experience, with detachment, according to the, panna, level of panna. What the intellectual understanding cannot know, just that moment as it is, because there are many things, in succession, so fast, rapidly. That is thinking about seeing, not understanding the actual moment of seeing. And if one is trying so hard, its impossible to understand by attachment and ignorance, and then there is less and less ignorance. And attachment, then reality can appear to the developed panna. By itself, naturally. … and that’s the moment to understand. The meaning of … have you heard about the certainty of the nobel truth? All of them? All four? But it seems like its very easy, just one to have and one go to somewhere, to think one knows. But its only known when the time comes. By conditions.


Woman 3: anyone to ask about, what do you mean by, by conditions.


A.Sujin: yes. Can you see it arise, without the eyebase, without the visible object. Like the blind. See. Its conditioned. Each moment. Hearing, it makes another conditions not the eyebase, but the earbase. And not the visible object, but the sound, to impitch on the earbase. And when the time comes, as a result to experience, there is that of dhamma, the cause which is in them. It conditions, hearing at a time. Properly. No one can change time and the object. For hearing to heari. By conditions. And when one learn to understand the anotherness, one knows its true. That’s why all realities are another. Not anyone is other.


Woman 1: anattaness, or non self, it means… so one can either be awareness of rising and falling away at this moment.


Woman 3: its just something like awareness, anything,… possibly present, in this, experience touching or seeing or hearing.


A,Sujin: okay, if she knows it at the moment of touching. At this moment of touching, is there any understanding of that which is touched and the touching? There is touching many many times a day. But is there any understanding or just learn to know that, what is touched is soft, or hard, heat or cold, just learn. But not the direct moment which it appears, to see the, its just that nothing is there, even sound is not there, I is not there, its only a moment of experiencing through body. That’s all. And that is, the touching right now, it can be any moment. So the difference between no understanding and understanding develops. Its quite different. Little by little. Stage by stage.


Woman 3: in the past when touching can, can, my phone touching on the table, but now after reading, and experience that touching, the, object that is hardness or softness, hot or cold.

#4 RobertK



  • Root Admin
  • 1,325 posts

Posted 26 October 2013 - 09:05 AM

A.Sujin: how can there be such an understanding?


Woman 3: Once I already read


A.Sujin: Just read? or understand little by little, its true , whenever there is touching, its just touch and no other thing at that moment at all, that even touching is not self. And the object which is touched is also not self. Learn from different times, when there is condition to understand. But when there is no condition to understand, its like ordinary life, before, hearing anything about the truth, at moment of touching.


Woman 3: Its like, touching experience the hardness or softness,and then the idea of table or other things, and at that moment it reminds of that this is not table or hand.


A.Sujin: so what is it?


Woman 3: So, different moments,


A.Sujin: At moment of touching?


Woman 3: Hardness.


A.Sujin: What is touched?


Woman 3: Just touching.


A.Sujin: What is touched? What is the object of touching? What does touching experiences? What does it experience at moment of touching?


Woman 3: Its hardness.


A.Sujin: When you say hard, does it mean the table? Or the microphone.


Woman 3: Its just a moment


A.Sujin: But there is metta, how can there be an understanding, that there is no self, who touch?


Woman 3: With instructions by


A.Sujin: Only through hearing. Not direct understanding which is Satitpattana, so don’t mind at all about sati or satitpatana, just develop  understanding. And then right understanding can understand. Whether its direct understanding or just thinking over it.


Woman 3: sometime it can be, it might be, that tinkling that its softness and this is hardness.


A.Sujin: its an idea you take it for. Something like sati, but its only the idea of sati. Not the moment which realizes the sati itself. Its conditioned. No matter how much you try to have it. Its not just conditions for sati to arise. But when there is more understanding about what is taught, then it can condition a moment of sati and then panna can see the difference between the moments with sati and moments without sati, otherwise there is no panna, only there is an assumption that it is there. But its not. Much different between without sati and touching with sati. When touching is sati, there must be the understanding that sati is not I. its conditioned. Those are time place and object of the moment. Like now. See. There is touching. Is there any understanding? Is there conditions who understand it? Theres no self? Or not yet? Because, there must the understanding of anotherness, of all realities. Before there can be a moment of understanding as just a moment of experiencing, no one there. Can anyone go to their meditation centre to gain understanding, without any intellectual understanding at all? But they go. Because of what is there. It is taught that that’s the way. But its not. Because its not in the teachings at all. To have such level of understanding. Without intellectual understanding. What is seen now, it is seeing. So what is seeing? What object? *laughs* what object?


Woman 3: multiple objects?


A.Sujin: something?


Woman 3: tree?


A.Sujin: trees? Can they be seen?


Woman 3: yes. Or is it hardness?


A.Sujin: hardness cannot be seen. So is sati there without understanding to develop more understanding from hearing by considering. Even what is considered is not known as it is. Can there be thinking without seeing?


Woman 3: yes?


A.Sujin: and can there be thinking after seeing?


Woman 3: yes.


A.Sujin: so whats the difference between the two?


Woman 3: one is visible and the other is thinking.


A.Sujin: because thinking is thinking and seeing is seeing. They arise and falls away very closely. Which seems like together, but actually, a tree cannot be seen, only visible, only reality can be seen. We don’t have to call it anything, but whenever there is seeing, its there. That which can be seen. And after that there is thinking. Then there is more and more understanding. Sati begins to arise very weakly. Very later. To understand right now what is seen, its just that which can be seen. A reality. No one can condition its arising at all. And it arises and falls away. Who knows. So it can be true. Truth, which is very suttle. The path is subtle. Because it is along the way of no attachments. But when there is attachment to gain or to not gain. Its not the path, because there would be more and more attachment. And the teachings of the Buddha, is against attachment. And ignorance. Otherwise nothing can eradicate ignorance and attachment at all. Without right understanding little by little. Hearing and considering, not waiting, not doing, not wanting, not doing anything to have the direct understanding of any reality now to appear, because it means it has its own conditions which are there. It helps in understanding better and deeper. Like what is seen now. If there is no, beginning to understand, its only when there is seeing but without seeing, that which appear cannot appear, so it cannot be a tree, it cannot be anything at all. Its that which can be seen. And where is it? Where is visible object? Without hardness, softness, the primary rupas, heat and cold, conditions, can there be that which can be seen? Because actually, even there are the four primary rupas, hardness, softness, heat and cold. Motion and pressure. And cohesion. There are also, other realities, arising together, one is that which can be seen. And its impinched on the eyebase, and only seeing arises, its there, if I take these away, the mahatar rupa, it’s the way with it. The visible object, so visible object is there, with the…. Here, hearing. And not just the visible object, also smell. Some might not be able to smell. But when its keen. A reality can smell it, when its strong enough to be smelled. And the taste is there too. Taste it. And then, its just the taste which can be object of tasting, consciousness. A moment of tasting, otherwise the taste even if its there, cannot be tasted, like the taste here, the taste there. Everywhere, and another thing is nutrition we need it. Without this how can there be less attachment to what we take for something permanent? Never arising and falling away it seems like … always here, but actually only panna, right understanding develops from hearing considering to know that its true, and it can be proven. It can be understood directly. When right understanding develops. Not just when I want it to arise, to be mind full and this and that. But that’s not a way to experience the truth of reality. Only panna, right understanding develops. So panna is opposite of attachment. And ignorance. Can anyone have less attachment? With ignorance? See. Can anyone have less attachment with ignorance? Impossible. Attachment arises with ignorance. So. Without right understanding, ignorance is there and ignorance cannot have the attachment  become less. Because its there. Together. Do you have attachment from morning uptil now? Or only few moments? Or what? Can you see. After seeing, there is ignorance about seeing? After hearing there is ignorance. Ignorance and attachment follows. Moments of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching are knowingly because its not as wrong as, when one does a good deed, pure deed, by then on realizes it is unwholesome, but unwholesome is there, at moment when whatever appears, when that object hasn’t fallen away yet. It can condition ignorance and attachment easily. By accumulation, when the time comes to appear, it appears. When time comes to arise, it arises. No one can stop. After seeing there is ignorance, but when there is understanding, it begins to develop and you don’t have to call it sati or anything, but its different reality from ignorance. Buddha taught for 45 years and nobody knows what did he teach about, but he taught about everything. Not just long long time ago but even now, its true. When seeing is seeing, tomorrow seeing is still seeing not hearing. Ignorance is there.


Man  1: just to clearify incase, any probability to…, would you say that after seeing and hearing, there is ignorance,  of what is seen and heard, you don’t mean we don’t know what we see or hear, would mean ignorance?


A.Sujin: it depends upon whether it is ignorance, attachment or aversion, it can arise at the seeing. Or it can be wholesomeness, or it can be right understanding, of all the accumulations, like at that time Buddha, those who had accumulated lots of understanding, after seeing, there can be a moment of wholesomeness or … for …


Man 1: for us we know what is seen or heard, the ignorance is reality.


A.Sujin: that’s what Buddha taught us in details about one moment of seeing is followed by what type of chitta what function of chitta is there. And there can be, … with … or … before the rupa, or the object which is experienced would fall away. But its unknown, because of ignorance. So one can understand by oneself, how much understanding one has. No need to ask anyone who know better than you. So what is the teacher, who is the teacher, the person who have you to understand or the one who tell you to do anything without understanding? The Buddha didn’t tell anyone to do, but he taught. For the others the listeners to understand, to have a understanding. Not follow anyone. If, someone is asked to go to the meditated centre or retreat, should the person ask what for? To do or to understand. If its not for understanding, its useless to go.


Woman 1: someone on the discussion list, suggested that, or some people are in rather desperate circumstances or having a very difficult time even though, theres not going to be any development of understanding, but it maybe useful for them to go to retreat or go to the temple or spend more time with the monks, not necessarily for understanding, but just to have a break or to get out or danger or as many suggested, just to have some quite time, or change of circumstances.


A.Sujin: no need to have buddhas words to refuse. Because the people, anyone, can tell you about how, like when you are thirsty, have this, but you would be this again and again, and listening. So whats the use, no need to have Buddha, then when there is no understanding. This is the difference between someone who believes in Buddha or others, or the other teachers. And who is a great teacher? Who can help the other to have the understanding? Not to be told, no understanding at all.

Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: transcripts, meditation centers