"Let's sit in meditation. When you sit, doesn't your bottom touch the floor? Isn't it taught as 'contact-awareness'? When you're mindful, do you find the floor or hardness? Do you find buttocks or body-sensitivity (kāya-pasāda)?
It's because of sensitivity that you can know the contact. When two things meet, doesn't awareness arise? Do you know it as floor, as hardness, as buttocks, or as body-sensitivity? Isn't that mental phenomena (nāma)? Isn't hardness physical phenomena (rūpa)? These are the two elements: mind and matter. When expanded, they become the five aggregates. This is what we find when sitting. Isn't this worth investigating? There's still more to discover here. Isn't this worth contemplating?
Now, do you find the floor, or do you find mind and matter? You only find mind and matter, right? Is the floor non-existent because it's there or because it isn't? Don't mind and matter prove its non-existence? How sufficient is this evidence? Isn't this worth analyzing? These are the essential points.
When sitting, remember what the teacher taught about the body: stiffness, numbness, aching, tightness, heat, cold, cramping, itching - aren't these taught? You'll encounter some of these while sitting. They don't all occur simultaneously, but you'll find some of them. Think about it.
When sitting long, don't you get stiff? Numb? Sometimes painful? Sometimes cramped? Sometimes itchy? Think about it - stiffness, numbness, aching, tightness, heat, cold, itching, these sensations.
When examining the ultimate realities, is it stiffness or change? Is it numbness or change? Is it pain or change? Is it heat or change? Is it cold or change? Is it cramping or change?
Look - besides knowing the nature of change, what else is there? This is what we find when sitting. Isn't this worth contemplating? Isn't the knowing mental phenomena? Isn't the changing physical phenomena? These are mind and matter. This is what we find when sitting. When expanded, they become the five aggregates. Isn't this worth contemplating?
When sitting time is up after an hour, the bell rings. Don't you need to go back to your dwelling? Then, doesn't the mind want to stand up, want to rise? Are these self or mental phenomena? Is standing up and rising self or physical phenomena? These are mind and matter.
Are legs and arms self, or mind and matter? Now you're standing. When standing, doesn't the mind want to move? Is this self or mental phenomena? Is the movement self or physical phenomena? These are mind and matter."
"Doesn't the mind want to step? Is this self or mental phenomena? Is the stepping self or physical phenomena? These are mind and matter.
Doesn't the mind want to place the foot down? Is this self or mental phenomena? Is placing the foot down self or physical phenomena? These are mind and matter.
When going and coming like this, you reach your destination. When you arrive, doesn't the mind want to stop? Is this self or mental phenomena? Is stopping self or physical phenomena? These are mind and matter.
From the stopping mind, doesn't the mind want to sit? Is this self or mental phenomena? Is sitting self or physical phenomena? These are mind and matter.
Doesn't the mind want to lie down? Is this self or mental phenomena? Is lying down self or physical phenomena? These are mind and matter.
In meditation, this is all you'll find. Is there anything else to find? Based on mind and matter, don't we need to say 'going to the dwelling, coming back'? We need to speak like this.
So there's stepping, placing, lifting. In reality, are these legs and arms, or mind and matter? Are these self or mind and matter? We only find mind and matter.
These are the realities you'll find in meditation. Isn't this worth analyzing? Do you still find the legs and arms you used to perceive? If you don't find legs and arms, do you find humans? If you don't find humans, do you find devas? Do you find brahmas? Why don't you find them? (Because they don't exist, Venerable Sir). They don't exist!
In this body, in conventional truth, in this world, aren't various beings designated as humans, devas, brahmas, animals, petas, and asuras? Aren't they called such?
When people marry and have children, two or three of them, don't they give them names? Now too, the 31 planes of existence are just designations.
Isn't it true just for naming? Isn't it true just for calling? But does it exist as an object of meditation? Isn't this worth studying? We don't reject the conventional names. Isn't it worth examining what exactly we're rejecting?"
Doesn't the mind want to place the foot down? Is this self or mental phenomena? Is placing the foot down self or physical phenomena? These are mind and matter.
When going and coming like this, you reach your destination. When you arrive, doesn't the mind want to stop? Is this self or mental phenomena? Is stopping self or physical phenomena? These are mind and matter.
From the stopping mind, doesn't the mind want to sit? Is this self or mental phenomena? Is sitting self or physical phenomena? These are mind and matter.
Doesn't the mind want to lie down? Is this self or mental phenomena? Is lying down self or physical phenomena? These are mind and matter.
In meditation, this is all you'll find. Is there anything else to find? Based on mind and matter, don't we need to say 'going to the dwelling, coming back'? We need to speak like this.
So there's stepping, placing, lifting. In reality, are these legs and arms, or mind and matter? Are these self or mind and matter? We only find mind and matter.
These are the realities you'll find in meditation. Isn't this worth analyzing? Do you still find the legs and arms you used to perceive? If you don't find legs and arms, do you find humans? If you don't find humans, do you find devas? Do you find brahmas? Why don't you find them? (Because they don't exist, Venerable Sir). They don't exist!
In this body, in conventional truth, in this world, aren't various beings designated as humans, devas, brahmas, animals, petas, and asuras? Aren't they called such?
When people marry and have children, two or three of them, don't they give them names? Now too, the 31 planes of existence are just designations.
Isn't it true just for naming? Isn't it true just for calling? But does it exist as an object of meditation? Isn't this worth studying? We don't reject the conventional names. Isn't it worth examining what exactly we're rejecting?"
"Don't you perceive it as a person? Don't you assume they exist? When you think it's a person and try to smell them, do you find a person or just an odor? You only find the odor, right? Isn't this worth contemplating? Is the nose-consciousness that knows the smell self or just consciousness?
Can smell-knowing arise with consciousness alone? Doesn't it include associated feeling, perception, and volition? Is the experiencing of smell self or feeling (vedanā)? Is the recognition of smell self or perception (saññā)? Is that which motivates the experience and recognition self or volition (cetanā)? When feeling, perception, and volition combine, don't they complete the four mental aggregates? Only when these four are complete does smell-consciousness arise.
Is it a person or four mental aggregates? Is the sensitive matter of the nose a person? Is the smell a person? When we analyze the aggregates, don't we find physical aggregate? Combined with the four mental aggregates (Five aggregates, Venerable Sir). We only find aggregates, right? When we investigate through the nose, we only find aggregates. Do we find people? Do we find sons and daughters? Isn't this worth analyzing?
Based on what we find, we conventionally designate it as a person, son, or daughter. Now, between what we perceive and what we find - we find five aggregates but perceive a person. Do we still find what we perceived? This is what we mean by abandoning.
The phenomena we find are of the nature of impermanence, suffering, and non-self. All five are impermanent. Is there any essence? There isn't. When there is no essence, because of this essencelessness, isn't it taught that understanding it as suffering is Right View?
Does craving still arise? If craving doesn't arise, how can clinging arise? If clinging doesn't arise, will physical, verbal, and mental kamma arise? Doesn't the cycle of aggregates end? This is the Truth of Cessation (Nirodha Sacca). This is what needs to be studied. Only with understanding can we abandon. Without understanding, how can we abandon? Strive to understand..."
Can smell-knowing arise with consciousness alone? Doesn't it include associated feeling, perception, and volition? Is the experiencing of smell self or feeling (vedanā)? Is the recognition of smell self or perception (saññā)? Is that which motivates the experience and recognition self or volition (cetanā)? When feeling, perception, and volition combine, don't they complete the four mental aggregates? Only when these four are complete does smell-consciousness arise.
Is it a person or four mental aggregates? Is the sensitive matter of the nose a person? Is the smell a person? When we analyze the aggregates, don't we find physical aggregate? Combined with the four mental aggregates (Five aggregates, Venerable Sir). We only find aggregates, right? When we investigate through the nose, we only find aggregates. Do we find people? Do we find sons and daughters? Isn't this worth analyzing?
Based on what we find, we conventionally designate it as a person, son, or daughter. Now, between what we perceive and what we find - we find five aggregates but perceive a person. Do we still find what we perceived? This is what we mean by abandoning.
The phenomena we find are of the nature of impermanence, suffering, and non-self. All five are impermanent. Is there any essence? There isn't. When there is no essence, because of this essencelessness, isn't it taught that understanding it as suffering is Right View?
Does craving still arise? If craving doesn't arise, how can clinging arise? If clinging doesn't arise, will physical, verbal, and mental kamma arise? Doesn't the cycle of aggregates end? This is the Truth of Cessation (Nirodha Sacca). This is what needs to be studied. Only with understanding can we abandon. Without understanding, how can we abandon? Strive to understand..."
Posts
