The fundamental Buddhist analysis of experience into nama-rupa (mind-matter) in the context of the seeing process

The Process (Vithi):
1. Cakkhu-pasada (eye-sensitivity) meets visible object
2. This contact triggers cakkhu-vinnana (eye-consciousness)
3. Along with cakkhu-vinnana, three other mental factors arise:
- Vedana (feeling)
- Sanna (perception)
- Cetana (volition)

The Five Aggregates (Panca Khandha) in this process:
1. Rupakkhandha (Material aggregate):
- Eye-sensitivity
- Visible object

2-5. Namakkhandha (Mental aggregates):
- Vinnana (consciousness)
- Vedana (feeling)
- Sanna (perception)
- Sankhara (represented here by cetana)

This process illustrates important Buddhist principles:
- Dependent Origination (Paticca-samuppada)
- Non-self nature (Anatta)
- Momentariness of consciousness

In AN3.61, the Buddha explains that consciousness arises dependent on conditions, comparing it to a fire that is named according to its fuel. Similarly, eye-consciousness arises dependent on eye-sensitivity and visible objects.
The Process Components:

1. Citta (Consciousness):
- The basic awareness of the visible object
- The "knowing" element

2. Cetasika (Mental States/Factors):
- Vedana: feeling/sensation
- Sañña: perception/recognition
- Cetana: volition/intention

3. Rupa (Material Elements):
- Eye-sensitivity (cakkhu-pasada)
- Visible object

This illustrates the fundamental teaching that every moment of experience consists of:
- The knowing consciousness (citta)
- Its accompanying mental factors (cetasika)
- Physical base and object (rupa)

This analysis is crucial for:
- Understanding the non-self nature (anatta)
- Seeing dependent origination (paticca-samuppada)
- Developing insight meditation (vipassana)

As stated in the Abhidhamma, citta never arises alone but always with cetasikas. This shows the interdependent nature of mental phenomena.In the Seeing Process:

1. Rupa (Material Phenomena):
- Eye-sensitivity (physical sense base)
- Visible object

2. Nama (Mental Phenomena):
- The consciousness that knows/is aware of the visible object

This nama-rupa analysis is crucial because:
- It's simpler than the detailed citta-cetasika-rupa analysis
- It's more practical for beginning vipassana practice
- It helps break down the illusion of a solid "self"

As the Buddha taught in MN28:
"Just as when two sheaves of reeds are standing leaning against each other, so too, with nama-rupa as condition, consciousness comes to be; with consciousness as condition, nama-rupa comes to be."

In Meditation Practice:
1. First note the basic distinction:
- Physical elements (rupa)
- Knowing/experiencing element (nama)

2. Observe how:
- They arise together
- They depend on each other
- Neither exists independently
Practical Application in Meditation:

1. Mindfulness of Seeing Process:
- When practicing, note the moment of seeing
- Observe how consciousness arises with feeling, perception, and volition
- Notice these are separate phenomena, not a "self" that sees

2. Development of Insight:
- Start recognizing the difference between:
* The physical base (eye and object)
* The mental experience (consciousness and mental factors)
- See how they work together yet are distinct

3. Breaking Down the Illusion of Self:
As stated in SN22.59 (Anatta-lakkhana Sutta):
"Form, feeling, perception, formations, consciousness are not-self. If they were self, they would not lead to affliction."

Practical Steps:
1. Begin with simple awareness of seeing
2. Notice the feeling tone (vedana) that arises
3. Observe how perception (sañña) labels the object
4. Watch how volition (cetana) responds
5. See how all these factors arise and pass away

This understanding leads to:
- Direct knowledge of impermanence (anicca)
- Understanding of unsatisfactoriness (dukkha)
- Realization of non-self (anatta)Sao DhammasamiAuthor
This teaching is commonly found in:
1. Abhidhamma texts
2. Vipassana meditation manuals
3. Commentarial literature on dependent origination

If you're looking for source material on this topic, I'd recommend:
- The sections on nama-rupa in the Visuddhimagga
- Teachings on dependent origination (paticca-samuppada)
- Meditation manuals by respected teachers

Dhamma Teaching

19th United Nations Day of Vesak

Attending the 19th United Nations Day of Vesak Celebrations as a presenter was an immensely enriching experience, both intellectually and personally. This year’s conference, themed "The Relevance of Buddhist Education for a Harmonious Society," provided a unique platform for scholars, practitioners, and educators from around the world to converge and share insights on integrating Buddhist teachings into modern educational programs. My presentation, titled "Integrating Buddha Teaching into Modern Learning Programs," was scheduled on the 18th May 2024 at the day of the conference. As I approached the lectern in the elegantly decorated conference hall, the atmosphere was charged with a sense of reverence and anticipation. The audience comprised an eclectic mix of monks, academics, students, and international delegates, each bringing their unique perspectives to the discussions.

"Three Types of Cetanā in Buddhist Practice" (စေတနာသုံးမျိုးနှင့် ဗုဒ္ဓဘာသာကျင့်စဉ်)

"In terms of conventional truth (sammuti-sacca) and consciousness, don't we designate the five aggregates as various beings - humans, devas, brahmas, animals, petas, asuras, and hell beings? This is conventional designation.

Did the Buddha reject these conventions? Didn't he call Ananda 'younger brother', Rahula 'son', and address others as 'dear sons and daughters'? These are conventional terms. Aren't they true for communication? But are they ultimately real? These are just conventional designations.

The five aggregates exist both in conventional and ultimate sense. How do they exist? Isn't it worth examining? They exist as impermanent (anicca), suffering (dukkha), and non-self (anatta). Are these pleasant or unpleasant qualities? They are aspects of suffering, aren't they? Isn't this worth investigating?

When you gain this understanding, consider your acts of giving. Pure intention, right? Is the intention based on concepts of people, devas, or brahmas? Does the Buddha call intention (cetana) self-view (sakkāya)? Don't the wrong views about being human, deva, or brahma fall away?

When you understand intention as a mental factor, wrong view falls away. People say 'maintain good intention, don't let intention fade' - don't they? Is intention permanent or impermanent? It's impermanent. Can you command it not to cease? It's impermanent, understand? What's important is 'don't let faith (saddhā) fade' - the confidence.

Isn't intention taught as impermanent, suffering, and non-self? Yet people say 'don't let it fade' - wouldn't that make it self (atta)? When intention is seen as impermanent, do you see intention or its non-existence? When non-existence is seen as impermanent, isn't that knowledge called Path?

Does craving arise? Does clinging arise? Does kamma arise? This is maggo-nāma-cetanā (Path intention). Isn't this worth studying? Such understanding is needed. Who directs these acts of giving? Isn't it taught as mindfulness and wisdom? This is being accompanied by mindfulness and wisdom.

When accompanied by mindfulness and wisdom, do craving and clinging still arise? Think about it. Isn't intention a mental factor? Isn't the co-arising wind element physical? These are just mind and matter. Are they persons? Don't wrong view and doubt cease when seen this way?"

"Doesn't intention cease after giving? Think about it. To explain this clearly: Don't thoughts of wanting to give arise?

For instance, with meditation retreats, don't people take responsibility for meal offerings? That initial planning, isn't it taught as pubba-cetana (prior intention)? Is it taught as 'people' or as 'intention'? The first arising is intention - pubba-cetana. Isn't this worth examining?

From pubba-cetana, you plan how to buy, prepare, and make offerings. When these plans come to fruition, doesn't it exist? At this point, isn't it taught as muñca-cetana (present intention)? Think about it.

When it's accomplished - when the cooking is done, the purchasing complete - don't you personally offer it? Isn't this taught as pubba-muñca? This is muñca-cetana.

The first arising is pubba-cetana - is it a person or intention? The second arising - is it a person or muñca-cetana? This isn't just my teaching, it's the Buddha's teaching. When the offering is complete...

Thirdly, don't you feel joy and satisfaction thinking 'my offering is successful'? Is this a person or para-cetana (subsequent intention)? Pubba, muñca, para-cetana - see how there's no person involved? Isn't this worth contemplating?

Doesn't the first arising thought reach impermanence? After pubba-cetana reaches impermanence, muñca-cetana arises. Doesn't muñca-cetana cease? Doesn't para-cetana enter? And doesn't that joyful satisfaction also cease?

Isn't it taught that 'all formations are impermanent'? When impermanent, doesn't it reach its end? Understanding this, does craving for it still arise? Give and offer with this understanding.

So are we abandoning giving, or abandoning defilements? Are we abandoning virtue, or defilements? Are we abandoning concentration, or defilements? We're abandoning defilements.

That's why it's taught in texts as vivaṭṭa-dāna, vivaṭṭa-sīla, vivaṭṭa-samatha, isn't it? When mindfulness and wisdom lead, it becomes vivaṭṭa (turning away from saṃsāra). Isn't this worth studying? Think about it. Isn't this worth investigating?"

"Even in giving, we must discriminate. Puññābhisaṅkhāra (meritorious formations) leads to human and deva aggregates - but doesn't escape aging, sickness, and death. Āneñjābhisaṅkhāra (imperturbable formations) leads to brahma aggregates - but doesn't escape aging, sickness, and death. Apuññābhisaṅkhāra (demeritorious formations) leads to the four woeful realms.

How clear this is! This is its domain. One must transcend this world of formations. To transcend, one must understand the disadvantages of the aggregates..."

Inscription of Bhikkhuni Padumanika – Larger Than All Others

The Kuda Buddhist Caves, located in Raigad District, Maharashtra, are rock-cut caves constructed as monastic dwellings for Buddhist monks and nuns. There are 15 caves in total, believed to have been excavated beginning around 1000 BE (457 CE).

One of the most fascinating features of these caves is the abundance of inscriptions scattered throughout the walls. These inscriptions tell us who the patrons or sponsors of various parts of the caves were. Among the nearly 100 inscriptions, one particularly interesting inscription stands out—written in a combination of Prakrit and Sanskrit, using the Brāhmī script, dating to around 1000–1200 BE (457–657 CE).

The Inscription (translated line by line):

Siddhaṁ therānaṁ bhadanta Patimitana bhadanta

Agimitana ca bhāgineyī pāva-

yitikāya (pabbajitāya) Nāganikāya duhitarya pāva-

yitikāya (pabbajitāya) Padumanikāya deyya dhammaṁ

leṇaṁ pothi ca sahā antevāsiniyā Bodhiyā

saha ca antevāsiniyā Asālhamitāya

Translation:

"Success! This meritorious gift—this cave and a water cistern—belongs to the renunciant (bhikkhunī) named Padumanikā, daughter of the female monastic Nāganikā, and niece of the venerable teachers Bhadanta Patimita and Bhadanta Agimita (or Agnimitra). She was accompanied by her female disciples (antevāsikā) named Bodhi and Asālhamitā."

Summary:

The patron who commissioned the carving of this cave was Bhikkhuni Padumanikā, daughter of Nāganikā, a fellow renunciant. She was also the niece of two revered monks, Venerable Patimita and Venerable Agimita/Agnimitra. She did not carry out this meritorious act alone, but was accompanied by her two female disciples: Bodhi and Asālhamitā.

Points to Note:

The term “Bhikkhunī” is not explicitly used in this inscription—similar to other inscriptions from this period. Instead, the term “pabbajitāya” is used, which means “renunciant” or one who has gone forth into the monastic life.

Interestingly, this inscription uses the honorific “Bhadanta” (a respectful title for senior monks) instead of the variant “Bhayanta”, which appears in some other inscriptions. This suggests an established and formal recognition of monastic hierarchy and respect.

Why Is This Inscription Larger Than Others?

What makes this inscription especially intriguing is the unusually large size of the script—each letter measures approximately 3 inches high, significantly larger than those in other inscriptions in the cave complex. The letters are bold and clearly visible, prompting the question:

Why is this inscription larger than all others?

There are two possible explanations:

The wall surface of the cave where this was inscribed may have been particularly large and smooth, allowing the artisan to carve larger letters.

It could have been the explicit wish of Bhikkhuni Padumanikā herself to have large, prominent letters engraved—perhaps to ensure her offering would be remembered and easily seen by all visitors.

The Contribution of Bhikkhuni Sapila (Inscription of Bhikkhuni Sapila)

The Contribution of Bhikkhuni Sapila
(Inscription of Bhikkhuni Sapila)

Kuda Buddhist Caves, located in Raigad District in the state of Maharashtra, India, are Buddhist rock-cut cave sanctuaries. These caves were excavated from the mountain to serve as monastic dwellings and meditation spaces for Buddhist monks. There are a total of 15 caves, believed to have been created from around 1000 BE (457 CE) onwards.

What is especially fascinating about these caves is the presence of numerous inscriptions carved into the cave walls. These inscriptions reveal who the patrons and donors of various cave constructions were. Among nearly 100 inscriptions found at the site, one in particular stands out and deserves attention. This inscription is written in a mix of Prakrit and Sanskrit, using the Brāhmī script, and dates from around 1000–1200 BE (457–657 CE).

The inscription reads as follows:

1. Siddhaṁ therānaṁ bhayanta (bhadanta)

2. Vijayānaṁ antevāsiniyā

3. Pavaittikāya (pabbajitāya) Sapilāya

4. Deyyadhammaṁ leṇaṁ saha sā-

5. Lohitāhi Venhuyāhi saha ca

6. antevāsiniyā Bodhiyā

Translation:

"Success! This religious gift of a cave was made by the Bhikkhuni named Sapila, a disciple of the venerable elder Vijayā, together with her blood relatives Lohitā and Venhuyā, and her own female disciple Bodhi."

In summary, the sponsor of this cave excavation was Bhikkhuni Sapila, who was a devoted disciple of the revered elder Venerable Vijaya. She did not undertake this meritorious act alone; she included her relatives—Lohita and Venhuya—as well as her own disciple, a woman named Bodhi.

Noteworthy Observations:

One striking feature of this inscription is the terminology used. Unlike inscriptions from the Maurya or Shunga periods, which directly use the word “Bhikkhunī”, this inscription instead uses the term “pavajita” or “pabbajitā”, meaning “renunciant” or “one who has gone forth.” This suggests that although ordained women were present and active, the terminology may have evolved or become less formal in inscriptions of that period.

It is also important to note that none of the individuals mentioned—Sapila, Lohita, Venhuya, or Bodhi—appear in any canonical Buddhist texts such as the Tipiṭaka, commentaries, or treatises. Fortunately, due to their patronage in constructing this cave, their names and contributions were inscribed and have survived to the present day, giving us rare historical insight into the role of female monastics.

Without these inscriptions at the cave entrances, we might never have known who was responsible for these sacred constructions. The caves were abandoned and neglected for nearly a thousand years. Thanks to these inscriptions, we now know that Bhikkhunis were still actively involved in the creation of religious spaces, even during later periods of Indian Buddhism.

Integrating Buddha's Teachings Methodology in Modern Learning

Siri Lanka

Our Photo Room

Video