When standing up, is it a person or the air element? It's mind-produced air element, isn't it? Isn't this worth contemplating? The desire to stand appears - that's the mind, and the standing is mind-produced air element. These are the two aspects: nama and rupa.
When standing, doesn't the mind want to lift? Is it self or mental phenomena? Is it beings or mental phenomena? Is lifting a person or air element? Is it a deva or air element? Is it a brahma or air element? These are nama-rupa, the two aspects.
Doesn't the mind want to step? Is it self or mental phenomena? Is stepping self or physical phenomena? These are nama-rupa.
Doesn't the mind want to place the foot down? Is it self or mental phenomena? Is placing down self or physical phenomena? These are nama-rupa. Isn't this worth analyzing?
When reaching your dwelling place, is it beings or nama-rupa? Just nama-rupa.
Doesn't the mind want to stop? Is it self or mental phenomena? Is stopping self or physical phenomena? These are nama-rupa.
After stopping, doesn't the mind want to sit? Is it self or mental phenomena? Is sitting self or physical phenomena? These are nama-rupa.
After sitting, doesn't the mind want to lie down? Is it self or mental phenomena? Is lying down self or physical phenomena? These are nama-rupa.
Isn't this worth contemplating? Shouldn't we study this thoroughly?
Therefore, wanting to go is nama, going is rupa - two aspects working together. Going isn't self, it's just nama-rupa.
While we think it's self, what we actually find is nama-rupa.
Wanting to stop is nama, stopping is rupa. Two aspects working together in stopping. Stopping isn't self, it's just nama-rupa.
Wanting to lie down is nama, lying down is rupa. Two aspects working together in lying down. Lying down isn't self, it's just nama-rupa.
Wanting to sit is nama, sitting is rupa. Two aspects working together in sitting. Sitting isn't self, it's just nama-rupa.
While we think it's self, what we find is nama-rupa. When analyzed, it's five aggregates; when condensed, it's nama-rupa. This is Knowledge of the Known (Ñāta-pariññā) - distinguishing between beings and nama-rupa, between beings and the five aggregates.
When expanded, it's five aggregates; when condensed, it's nama-rupa. Is it beings or nama-rupa? This is Ñāta-pariññā. Don't we need to distinguish between what appears to be and what actually is? These are the essential points.
Sitting is impermanent, sitting is suffering, there is no self in sitting - this is vipassana. Impermanence is anicca, suffering is dukkha, no-self is anatta. Isn't this what's taught? Consider anicca, dukkha, anatta.
Don't we need to distinguish nama-rupa with impermanence? With suffering? With non-self? This is Investigation Knowledge (Tīraṇa-pariññā) - knowing through development.
First knowing nama-rupa is Ñāta-pariññā - removing through understanding. Now we remove through development. We still need to remove through abandoning. Isn't true knowing taught?
We still need to truly know the real facts. Isn't it taught that the Four Noble Truths are realized simultaneously through the Path? We need to know in one instance. Isn't this worth contemplating?
When we combine impermanence, suffering, and non-self, isn't it taught as arising and passing away? Which Noble Truth is this? (Dukkha Sacca, Venerable Sir). Is it happiness or suffering?
We need to truly know that it's suffering. When we truly know it's suffering, do we still want this kind of aggregates? Would someone who truly understands engage in actions that lead to getting aggregates?
Isn't it taught that we shouldn't cling to the present aggregates? The present aggregates are suffering. When we truly understand this, do we still cling? When we don't cling, will we still desire future aggregates? No, we won't."
"During the time of Kassapa Buddha, there was a lay follower who performed meritorious deeds - both dana (giving) and sila (morality). After death, due to these wholesome actions, he was reborn as a deva in one of the six deva realms. The lifespan of devas is much longer than human life, isn't it?Consider the deva lifespans: one day in Tavatimsa heaven equals one hundred human years. Think about it - even now, after 2500 years of the Buddha's parinibbana, in deva time, it hasn't even been a month since the Buddha passed away! While in human time it seems very long, isn't this worth contemplating?
This lay devotee-turned-deva met the Buddha and Venerable Sariputta, foremost in wisdom. He asked, 'Venerable Sir, may I ask a question?' When granted permission, what did he ask? He requested clarification about just two things - sukha (happiness) and dukkha (suffering).
Wasn't he given the answer that 'future existence means suffering, and no future existence means happiness'? We suffer because we get the aggregates. Without aggregates, would there be aging, sickness, or death? We age because we have aggregates, we get sick because we have aggregates, we die because we have aggregates. Isn't this worth examining? The answer was: 'Future existence is suffering, no future existence is happiness.'
So when we don't cling to the present aggregates, we truly understand. There are two aspects to consider: theoretical knowledge (pariyatti) and practical application (patipatti) - what we're experiencing now through seeing and hearing. These are the two points.
To understand the resultant aggregates (vipaka-vatta), we need to include both. The third is kilesa-vatta (defilements), which is samudaya (origin of suffering). Isn't this worth contemplating? The first is also samudaya.
The second and fourth are the resultant aggregates. Currently, we focus on the second aspect - what we're seeing and hearing now. Isn't this worth analyzing? Isn't this taught as 'the result' and 'the Noble Truth of Suffering'?
When we comprehend the Noble Truth of Suffering, does avijja (ignorance) remain or cease? When we know it as suffering, can we still wrongly perceive human, deva, or brahma happiness? No, we can't.
When we truly know it as suffering, the light appears. Doesn't the darkness of perceiving happiness in human, deva, or brahma existence disappear?
Knowing the Truth of Suffering is light; thinking there's happiness in human, deva, or brahma existence is darkness. When light appears, doesn't darkness vanish?
Can the second still lead to the third? Kilesa-vatta ceases, kamma-vatta ceases, doesn't the cycle of aggregates end? Isn't this taught as the Noble Truth of Cessation (Nirodha Sacca)? Strive to reach this state. Contemplate this. Study it thoroughly..."
