Homework – Why?

Why?

When my homework assignment came and I was to respond to “why,” I immediately thought of the Matrix Reloaded movie in which the Keymaker, an Asian-looking program who was held hostage by the Merovingian, seems to spout off very direct information about the “whos and hows and whats and whens” of saving Zion. As it seems, only “the one” can do it, and only in a small window of time.

When Niobe asks; “How do you know all this?”
The Keymaker replies; “I know because I *must* know. It is my purpose. It is the reason I am here. The same reason we are *all* here.”

—

When I was a youngling I wanted to find death’s edge. The line between the living and the dead. I wanted to know because it was something just outside of my reach. I did many things, many dangerous and selfish things, in pursuit of this goal.

At 22 I achieved my goal. Accidentally. I was one of the fallen at the moment, those of use who push and push for noble goals, and then get lost in the fray of illusion or corruption. My vice were the chemicals I used to “open up my mind.” I had become addicted and my world was closing down and I had developed a habit. One day at a party (my whole life was spent going from party to party, trying to feel anything at all) I did what I always do and instantly I was fading out of my body and up. It felt like falling, but I watched myself rise up out of the vehicle I had been in, over the field where the party was happening. I watched the ground blur into landscape, I felt myself go through the cloud cover and into the atmosphere. Farther and farther until our globe disappeared into the blackness of space.

I floated in this for a while before I began to perceive that there was something out there. It felt like “they” were around me in a semi-circle. These HUGE, TOWERING things that I couldn’t see. But I could only see where they were not. That was the only way I could perceive them.
Anyway, they didn’t ask if I wanted to go back. They had no consul with me at all. They informed me that I was going back and I was going to do my Will. When I whined about “why me” they strongly stated; “Because you can. Because you will not break in doing these tasks they are your Will,” and I LAUGHED at them and told them that I was a junky and that this was all some sort of drug-induced hallucination. And they did something to me. They took 10 things, 10 things that were going to happen and they shot them down my spine. I don’t know how else to explain this, but they took 10 future experiences and they somehow injected them into my spine at the neck I experienced each one and it changed me. They told me; “That is how you will know that this is not an illusion. [I've deleted some additional information because its not pertinent here] Now go”

And with that I was back on a gurney being transferred from an ambulance to the ER table.
I was without vital signs when the ambulance hooked me up. I did not respond to Narcan. The ambulance ride was about 10 minutes and I had an EKG tape showing at least 7 minutes and 48 seconds of absolutely no vital activity occurring in my body. Who knows how long I was gone before the ambulance got to that desolate field in Kentucky. The ambulance attendants told my partners that I have been out so long that I probably wasn’t coming back, and if I did I would probably be in a vegetative state.

But I did come back. Lickity split. And when I came back I couldn’t figure out what in the peach pit had just happened. I knew I shot some drugs and passed out, I guessed I OD’d, but I couldn’t figure out why everyone was making such a big deal.

Then I realized that I didn’t really know any of the people around me, but I knew I should. I realized that I couldn’t figure out how they made their legs do the things needed to propel themselves forward, but I should. This amnesia was short acting and I think it had to do with the shift from “there” to “here.” But one of the first things that I did when I got home, beside shoot more dope, was write my experience down in detail, including the 10 things I received.
It was a good thing because I rapidly lost the memory of the details of the experience and instead I just know it happened. But that was when my death drive ended and my enchantment with life and the Force began.

—

I’ve always been Force sensitive. I’ve studied and practiced Magick and Martial Arts and I know I have skillful attributes. I also know that Chaos has been a source file for me and I’ve abused it and myself and my world in using it so generously. I need trained. I need honed. Which is why I seek others who would learn and teach and train and share along with me.

I believe that life is precious and that we all have innate abilities to wake up and wash the sand from our eyes and participate fully in our reality. I believe in doing that we can alter the fabric of reality. I believe that if we do wake up and begin to change things, that it is in our duty to be grateful for this ability to to help other achieve the same thing.

Why?

Because we must. It is our purpose. It is the reason we are here. It is the
same reason we all are here.

And so it continues…

Wait…isn’t that what happened??? (PACMAN Quote)

“Computer games don’t affect kids – I mean, if Pacman affected us as kids, we’d all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music.” – Kristian Wilson [Nintendo Executive 1989]

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thaniss…

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/atthakavagga.html

The Atthaka Vagga
(The Octet Chapter)
An Introduction
by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

The Atthaka Vagga1 is a set of sixteen poems on the theme of non-clinging. The poems cover all four types of clinging — clinging to sensuality, to views, to practices and precepts, and to doctrines of the self — with a special emphasis on the first two. They describe what constitutes the nature of the clinging in each particular case, the drawbacks of the clinging, the advantages of abandoning clinging, ways to abandon clinging, and the subtle paradoxes of what it means not to cling.

This last point is touched on in many discourses in the Pali Canon, as the Buddhist teachings on non-clinging all contain a central paradox: the objects of clinging that must ultimately be abandoned form part of the path to their abandoning. A certain amount of sensual pleasure is needed in the path to go beyond sensual pleasure; Right View is needed to overcome attachment to views; a regimen of precepts and practices is needed to overcome attachment to precepts and practices; a strong sense of self-responsibility is needed to overcome attachment to doctrines of the self.2 Other passages in the Pali Canon offer clear analogies to explain these paradoxes, often in terms of movement toward a goal — taking a raft across a river, walking to a park, taking a series of relay coaches from one city to another — in which the motive and means of transport are abandoned on reaching the goal. The Atthaka, however, sometimes presents these paradoxes in as mystifying a manner as possible. In fact, some of the paradoxes — particularly in the discussions of abandoning clinging to views — are stated in terms so stark that, on the surface, they are hard to reconcile with teachings in other Pali discourses or with other passages in the Atthaka itself. The question is thus whether these paradoxes should be taken at face value or further interpreted. Or, to put the question in terms used by the Buddha himself (AN II.25): Is their meaning, as stated, already fully drawn out or does it have to be inferred? Readers of the poems have offered arguments for both sides.

The argument for taking the paradoxes at face value is based on a major assumption: that the Atthaka is historically prior to the rest of the Pali Canon. From this assumption, the argument goes on to conclude that these poems contain the earliest recorded teachings of the Buddha, and that if they conflict with other passages in the Canon, that is simply because those other passages are less true to the Buddha’s original message. This argument, however, contains several weaknesses. To begin with, only two pieces of evidence are offered for the relative age of these poems: (1) the Atthaka Vagga, as a set, is mentioned at three other points in the Canon, at Ud V.6, Mv. V, and SN XXII.3;3 and (2) the language of the poems is more archaic than that of the other discourses. However, neither piece of evidence can carry the weight of what it’s supposed to prove. The first piece shows simply that an Atthaka Vagga predates the three passages in question, not necessarily that the Atthaka Vagga as we have it predates the entire remainder of the Canon. As for the archaic nature of the language, that is common to a great deal of the poetry throughout the Pali Canon. Just as Tennyson’s poetry contains more archaisms than Dryden’s prose, the fact that a Pali poem uses archaic language is no proof of its actual age.

The arguments for taking the Atthaka’s paradoxes at face value contain other weaknesses as well. They commonly state that the paradoxes teach a view of no views and a practice of no goals, yet the people who advance this argument are the first to admit that such doctrines are totally impractical. These doctrines are also inconsistent with other passages in the Atthaka itself, such as the clear-cut view explaining the sources of conflict, presented in Sn IV.11, and the frequent references to Unbinding (nibbana/nibbuti) as the goal of the practice. Thus even if the Atthaka is appreciably older than the other Pali discourses, we would have to assume gross inconsistencies in its message if we were to take its paradoxes at face value.

The argument that the meaning of the Atthaka’s paradoxes must be inferred — that they were intentionally stated in obscure terms — is based on firmer ground. To begin with, this is the interpretation that Buddhist tradition has advanced from its earliest centuries. An extended commentary, entitled the Mahaniddesa (Nd.I), reconciling the content of the poems with the teachings in the rest of the discourses, was compiled early enough to be included in the Canon itself. Although some of the explanations given in the Mahaniddesa may seem a little too pat and pedantic, they make clear the point that Buddhists near the time of the Buddha found many useful levels of meaning below the surface level of the poems.

Even if we disregard arguments from tradition, there are other good reasons for maintaining that the meaning of the Atthaka’s paradoxes was designed to be inferred. To begin with there is the question, already mentioned, of the internal consistency of the poems themselves: they make better sense, when taken as a whole, if the paradoxes are explored for meanings not obvious on the surface. A prime example is the passage toward the beginning of Sn IV.9, in which the Buddha seems to be saying that an awakened person would regard purity as being found neither by means of views, precepts and practices, etc., nor through lack of views, precepts and practices, etc. Magandiya, the Buddha’s listener, states understandably that such a teaching is confused. Readers who have acquired a taste for Mahayana non-dualities, and who would take the Buddha’s statement at face value, might scoff at Magandiya’s narrow-mindedness. But, if the words are taken at face value, Magandiya would be right, for there are many passages in the Atthaka that recommend views, precepts, and practices as part of the path to purity. However, if we take the Buddha’s statements as puns on the instrumental case — which can be interpreted not only as “through” or “by means of,” but also as “in terms of” or “in connection with,” the Buddha’s statements to Magandiya make sense in and of themselves, and fit with the rest of the Atthaka: an awakened person would not define purity in terms of views, precepts and practices, etc., but would also realize that purity cannot be attained through a lack of these things.

A second reason for regarding the paradoxes as requiring interpretation is that, in their use of puns and grammatical word-play, they follow an ancient Indian genre — the philosophical enigma — that by its very nature called for extensive interpretation. Evidence in the Rig Veda shows that ancient Vedic ritual included contests in which elder brahmans used puns and other word-play to express philosophical teachings as riddles that contestants were then challenged to solve.4 The purpose of these contests was to teach the contestants — usually students studying to become ritual experts — to use their powers of ingenuity in thinking “outside the box,” in the justified belief that the process of searching for inspiration and being illuminated by the answer would transform the mind in a much deeper way than would be achieved simply by absorbing information. 5

Although the Atthaka poems advise against engaging in intellectual contests, they imitate the Vedic enigmas in the way they use language to challenge the reader. Individual words — sometimes whole lines and stanzas — in the poems can be interpreted in a variety of ways, and it’s up to the reader to explore and consider all the various meanings to decide which ones are most helpful. Although our culture associates word-play with jokes, the Atthaka stands at the head of a long line of Buddhist texts — both Theravada and not — that use word-play with a serious purpose: to teach the reader to think independently, to see through the uncertainties of language and so to help loosen any clinging to the structures that language imposes on the mind.6 This type of rhetoric also rewards anyone who takes the text seriously enough to re-read and re-think what it has to say.

Thus, the obscurity of some of the Atthaka’s language can be regarded as a function, not of the poems’ age, but of the genre to which they belong. The proper reading of a text like this requires that you question your assumptions about its message and clarify the intention behind your efforts at reaching an understanding. In this way, the act of reading is meant not only to inform but to transform. The more you give to it, the more it opens up new possibilities in the mind.
Translating word-play of this sort presents enormous challenges; even when those challenges are surmounted, the act of reading such word games in translation can never be quite the same as reading them in the original language and cultural setting. Fortunately, aside from the more controversial passages, much of the Atthaka is perfectly straightforward — although Ven. Maha Kaccana’s commentary on one of the simpler verses in IV.9 should serve as warning that even the straightforward passages can contain hidden meanings. In passages where I have detected multiple meanings, I’ve included all the detected meanings in the translation — although I’m sure that there are instances of double meanings that I haven’t detected. Wherever the Pali seems ambiguous, I’ve tried to use English equivalents that convey the same ambiguity. Wherever this has proven beyond my abilities, I’ve resorted to explanatory notes. I have also used the notes to cite interpretations from the Mahaniddesa and other passages from earlier parts of the Canon that help explain paradoxes and other obscure points — both as an aid to the serious reader and as a way of showing that the gulf assumed to separate the Atthaka from the rest of the discourse collection is more imagined than real.

Two final notes on reading the Atthaka:

1. Although these poems were originally composed for an audience of wandering, homeless monks, they offer valuable lessons for lay people as well. Even the passages referring directly to the homeless life can be read as symbolic of a state of mind. Ven. Maha Kaccana’s commentary, mentioned above, shows that this has been done ever since canonical times. Addressing a lay person, and commenting on a verse describing the behavior of a sage who has abandoned home and society, he interprets “home” as the khandhas and “society” as sense impressions. Thus in his hands the verse develops an internal meaning that lay people can apply to their lives without necessarily leaving their external home and society. Other verses in the poems can be interpreted in similar ways.

2. The poems center on descriptions of sages (muni) and enlightened people (dhira), but these words don’t have fixed meanings from verse to verse. In some contexts, they denote arahants; in others, nothing more than intelligent run-of-the-mill people. So be alert to context when reading descriptions about sages and enlightened people, to see whether they’re describing people following the path or those who have already reached the goal.
Notes
1. The name of the Atthaka (Octets) derives from the fact that the first four poems in the set — three of which contain the word atthaka in their titles — are composed of eight verses. From this fact, some scholars have argued that these four poems constitute the original collection, and that the other poems are later additions, but this is not necessarily the case. Many of the vaggas (chapters) in the discourse and Vinaya collections are named after the first few members of the chapter, even though the remaining members may contain material that differs radically from what would be suggested by the title of the chapter. Thus there is no way of knowing the relative ages of the different poems in the collection.
2. For a discussion of the four types of clinging, see The Mind Like Fire Unbound, chapter 3.
3. Ven. Maha Kaccana — praised by the Buddha as foremost among his disciples in his ability to draw out the meaning of concise statements — is mentioned in connection with the Atthaka in all three locations. As a well-educated brahman, he would have been trained in detecting and resolving philosophical enigmas. His personal reputation indicates that he enjoyed doing so.
4. On this point, see Willard Johnson’s book, Poetry and Speculation of the Rig Veda, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980.
5. By the Buddha’s time, these contests had left the ritual arena and had become public philosophical debates much closer to our current notion of a formal debate. However, they were driven by an assumption — derived from the belief in the spiritual transformation that accompanied the correct solution of the philosophical enigma — that holding a winning view was, in and of itself, the measure of a person’s high spiritual attainment. The paradoxes in the Atthaka attack this assumption by — paradoxically — making use of the genre of philosophical enigma from which it ultimately derived.
6. Other examples of such word-play in the Pali Canon include SN I.1 and Dhp 97. For more modern examples of Buddhist texts using word play with a serious purpose, see A Heart Released and The Ballad of Liberation from the Khandhas, both by Phra Ajaan Mun Bhuridatto.
See also: “Parayana Vagga (The Chapter on the Way to the Far Shore): An Introduction,” by the same author.

Kama Sutta
Sensual Pleasure
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

If one, longing for sensual pleasure,
achieves it, yes,
he’s enraptured at heart.
The mortal gets what he wants.
But if for that person
— longing, desiring —
the pleasures diminish,
he’s shattered,
as if shot with an arrow.

Whoever avoids sensual desires
— as he would, with his foot,
the head of a snake —
goes beyond, mindful,
this attachment in the world.

A man who is greedy
for fields, land, gold,
cattle, horses,
servants, employees,
women, relatives,
many sensual pleasures,
is overpowered with weakness
and trampled by trouble,
for pain invades him
as water, a cracked boat.

So one, always mindful,
should avoid sensual desires.
Letting them go,
he’d cross over the flood
like one who, having bailed out the boat,
has reached the far shore.

Sn IV.2
Guhatthaka Sutta
The Cave of the Body
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

Staying attached to the cave,
covered heavily over,1
a person sunk in confusion
is far from seclusion —
for sensual pleasures
sensual desires2
in the world
are not lightly let go.

Those chained by desire,
bound by becoming’s allure,
aren’t easily released
for there’s no liberation by others.
Intent, in front or behind,3
on hunger for sensual pleasures
here or before —
greedy
for sensual pleasures,
busy, deluded, ungenerous,
entrenched in the out-of-tune way,4
they — impelled into pain — lament:
“What will we be
when we pass on from here?”

So a person should train
right here & now.
Whatever you know
as out-of-tune in the world,
don’t, for its sake, act out-of-tune,
for that life, the enlightened say,
is short.

I see them,
in the world, floundering around,
people immersed in craving
for states of becoming.
Base people moan in the mouth of death,
their craving, for states of becoming & not-,5
unallayed.

See them,
floundering in their sense of mine,
like fish in the puddles
of a dried-up stream —
and, seeing this,
live with no mine,
not forming attachment
for states of becoming.
Subdue desire
for both sides,6
comprehending7 sensory contact,
with no greed.

Doing nothing for which
he himself
would rebuke himself,
the enlightened person doesn’t adhere
to what’s seen,
to what’s heard.
Comprehending perception,
he’d cross over the flood —
the sage not stuck
on possessions.
Then, with arrow removed,
living heedfully, he longs for neither —
this world,
the next.

Notes
1. Nd.I: “Covered heavily over” with defilements and unskillful mental qualities.
2. “Sensual desires/sensual pleasures”: two possible meanings of kama. According to Nd.I, both meanings are intended here.
3. Nd.I: “In front” means experienced in the past (as does “before” two lines down); “behind” means to-be-experienced in the future.
4. Nd.I: “The out-of-tune way” means the ten types of unskillful action (see AN X.176).
5. States of not-becoming are oblivious states of becoming that people can get themselves into through a desire for annihilation, either after death or as a goal of their religious striving (see Iti 49). As with all states of becoming, these states are impermanent and stressful.
6. According to Nd.I, “both sides” here has several possible meanings: sensory contact and the origination of sensory contact; past and future; name and form; internal and external sense media; self-identity and the origination of self-identity. It also might mean states of becoming and not-becoming, mentioned in the previous verse and below, in Sn IV.5.
7. Nd.I: Comprehending sensory contact has three aspects: being able to identify and distinguish types of sensory contact; contemplating the true nature of sensory contact (e.g., inconstant, stressful, and not-self); and abandoning attachment to sensory contact. The same three aspects would apply to comprehending perception, as mentioned in the following verse.
See also: AN IV.184.

Sn IV.3
Dutthatthaka Sutta
Corrupted
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

There are some who dispute
corrupted at heart,
and those who dispute
their hearts set on truth,
but a sage doesn’t enter
a dispute that’s arisen,
which is why he is
nowhere constrained.

Now, how would one
led on by desire,
entrenched in his likes,
forming his own conclusions,
overcome his own views?
He’d dispute in line
with the way that he knows.

Whoever boasts to others, unasked,
of his practices, precepts,
is, say the skilled,
ignoble by nature —
he who speaks of himself
of his own accord.

But a monk at peace,
fully unbound in himself,
who doesn’t boast of his precepts
— “That’s how I am” —
he, say the skilled,
is noble by nature —
he with no vanity
with regard to the world.

One whose doctrines aren’t clean —
fabricated, formed, given preference
when he sees it to his own advantage —
relies on a peace
dependent
on what can be shaken.

Because entrenchments1 in views
aren’t easily overcome
when considering what’s grasped
among doctrines,
that’s why
a person embraces or rejects a doctrine —
in light of these very
entrenchments.

Now, one who is cleansed2
has no preconceived view
about states of becoming
or not-
anywhere in the world.
Having abandoned conceit3 & illusion,
by what means would he go?4
He isn’t involved.

For one who’s involved
gets into disputes
over doctrines,
but how — in connection with what — 5
would you argue
with one uninvolved?
He has nothing
embraced or rejected,
has sloughed off every view
right here — every one.
Notes
1. Entrenchments: a rendering of the Pali term, nivesana, which can also be rendered as abode, situation, home, or establishment.
2. Nd.I: Cleansed through discernment.
3. Nd.I explains a variety of ways of understanding the word “conceit,” the most comprehensive being a list of nine kinds of conceit: viewing people better than oneself as worse than oneself, on a par with oneself, or better than oneself; viewing people on a par with oneself as worse than oneself, on a par with oneself, or better than oneself; viewing people worse than oneself as worse than oneself, on a par with oneself, or better than oneself. In other words, the truth of the view is not the issue here; the issue is the tendency to compare oneself with others.
4. Nd.I: “By what means would he go” to any destination in any state of becoming.
5. In connection with what: a rendering of the instrumental case that attempts to cover several of its meanings, in particular “by what means” and “in terms of what.” For a discussion of the use of the instrumental case in the Atthaka Vagga, see note 1 to Sn IV.9.

Sn IV.4
Suddhatthaka Sutta
On Purity
Translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
Alternate translation:
Ireland
Thanissaro

“‘Here I see one who is pure, entirely free of sickness. By seeing him a man may attain to purity!’
“Convinced of that and thinking it ‘the highest,’ he believes it to be knowledge when he contemplates ‘the pure one.’1 But if by sights man can gain purification or if through such knowledge he could leave suffering behind, then, one who still has attachments could be purified by another.2 However, this is merely the opinion of those who so assert.
“The (true) brahmana3 has said one is not purified by another, nor by what is seen, heard or perceived (by the other senses), nor, by the performance of ritual observances. He (the true brahmana) is not defiled by merit or demerit. Having given up what he had (previously) grasped at, he no longer engages in producing (any kamma). Having left a former (object) they attach themselves to another, dominated by craving they do not go beyond attachment. They reject and seize, like a monkey letting go of a branch to take hold of another.
“A person having undertaken a ritual act goes this way and that, fettered by his senses. But one with a wide wisdom, having understood and gone into the Dhamma with his experience, does not go this way and that. For a person indifferent towards all conditions, whatever is seen, heard or cognized, he is one who sees it as it really is and lives with clarity (of mind). With what could he be identified in the world?
“They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion), they do not claim perfect purity. Loosening the knot (of clinging) with which they are bound, they do not have longing anywhere in the world. The (true) brahmana who has gone beyond limitations, having understood and seen there is no longer any assumption for him, he is neither disturbed by lust nor agitated by revulsion. For him there is nothing upheld as ‘the highest.’”
Notes
1. This refers to the old Indian belief in “auspicious sights” (dittha-mangala), the belief that by merely beholding something or someone regarded as a holy object or person, purity, or whatever else is desired, may be gained.
2. By another method, other than that of the Noble Eightfold Path (Comy.); but it could also mean, “by the sight of another person.”
3. I.e., the Buddha.

Sn IV.5
Paramatthaka Sutta
On Views
Translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
Alternate translation:
Ireland
Thanissaro

“A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others). In what is seen, heard, cognized and in ritual observances performed, he sees a profit for himself. Just by laying hold of that view he regards every other view as worthless. Those skilled (in judgment)1 say that (a view becomes) a bond if, relying on it, one regards everything else as inferior. Therefore a bhikkhu should not depend on what is seen, heard or cognized, nor upon ritual observances. He should not present himself as equal to, nor imagine himself to be inferior, nor better than, another. Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. Among those who dispute he is certainly not one to take sides. He does not [have] recourse to a view at all. In whom there is no inclination to either extreme, for becoming or non-becoming, here or in another existence, for him there does not exist a fixed viewpoint on investigating the doctrines assumed (by others). Concerning the seen, the heard and the cognized he does not form the least notion. That brahmana2 who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world?
“They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views.”
Notes
1. I.e., the Buddhas and their disciples who have realized the goal.
2. I.e., a perfected one.

Sn IV.6
Jara Sutta
On Decay
Translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
Alternate translation:
Ireland
Thanissaro

“Short indeed is this life, this side of a hundred years one dies; whoever lives long even he dies from old age. People grieve for things they are attached to, yet there exist no permanent possessions but just a state of (constant) separation. Seeing this one should no longer live the household life. That which a man imagines to be his will disappear at death. Knowing this a wise man will have no attachment (to anything).
“As a man awakened from sleep no longer sees what happened in his dream, similarly one does not see a loved one who is dead. Those people who were seen and heard and called by their names as such and such, only their names remain when they have passed away. Those greedy for objects of attachment do not abandon sorrow, grief and avarice, but sages having got rid of possessions, live perceiving security. For a bhikkhu with a detached mind, living in a secluded dwelling, it is right, they say, that he no longer shows himself in the abodes (of existence).1
“A sage who is completely independent does not make close friends or enemies. In him sorrow and selfishness do not stay, like water on a lotus leaf. As a lotus is not wetted by water, so a sage is not affected by what is seen or heard, nor by what is perceived by the other senses. A wise man is not deluded by what is perceived by the senses. He does not expect purity by any other way.2 He is neither pleased nor is he repelled (by the six sense-objects).”
Notes
1. There is a play on words here: “bhavana,” besides meaning “an abode of existence” also means “a house.” So as well as saying, he is not reborn into any realm of existence, the passage also indicates he lives secluded and does not associate with people in the village.
2. By any way other than the Noble Eightfold Path (Comy).

Sn IV.7
Tissa Metteyya Sutta
Tissa Metteyya
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Tell the danger, dear sir,
for one given over
to sexual intercourse.
Having heard your teaching,
we’ll train in seclusion.”
The Buddha:
“In one given over
to sexual intercourse,
the teaching’s confused
and he practices wrongly:
this is ignoble
in him.
Whoever once went alone,
but then resorts
to sexual intercourse
— like a carriage out of control —
is called vile in the world,
a person run-of-the-mill.
His earlier honor & dignity:
lost.
Seeing this,
he should train himself
to abandon sexual intercourse.

Overcome by resolves,
he broods
like a miserable wretch.
Hearing the scorn of others,
he’s chagrined.
He makes weapons,
attacked by the words of others.
This, for him, is a great entanglement.
He
sinks
into lies.

They thought him wise
when he committed himself
to the life alone,
but now that he’s given
to sexual intercourse
they declare him a fool.

Seeing these drawbacks, the sage
here — before & after —
stays firm in the life alone;
doesn’t resort to sexual intercourse;
would train himself
in seclusion —
this, for the noble ones, is
supreme.
He wouldn’t, because of that,
think himself
better than others:
He’s on the verge
of Unbinding.

People enmeshed
in sensual pleasures,
envy him: free,
a sage
leading his life
unconcerned for sensual pleasures
— one who’s crossed over the flood.”
See also: AN IV.159; AN V.75; AN V.76.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/atthakavagga.html

The Atthaka Vagga
(The Octet Chapter)
An Introduction
by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

The Atthaka Vagga1 is a set of sixteen poems on the theme of non-clinging. The poems cover all four types of clinging — clinging to sensuality, to views, to practices and precepts, and to doctrines of the self — with a special emphasis on the first two. They describe what constitutes the nature of the clinging in each particular case, the drawbacks of the clinging, the advantages of abandoning clinging, ways to abandon clinging, and the subtle paradoxes of what it means not to cling.

This last point is touched on in many discourses in the Pali Canon, as the Buddhist teachings on non-clinging all contain a central paradox: the objects of clinging that must ultimately be abandoned form part of the path to their abandoning. A certain amount of sensual pleasure is needed in the path to go beyond sensual pleasure; Right View is needed to overcome attachment to views; a regimen of precepts and practices is needed to overcome attachment to precepts and practices; a strong sense of self-responsibility is needed to overcome attachment to doctrines of the self.2 Other passages in the Pali Canon offer clear analogies to explain these paradoxes, often in terms of movement toward a goal — taking a raft across a river, walking to a park, taking a series of relay coaches from one city to another — in which the motive and means of transport are abandoned on reaching the goal. The Atthaka, however, sometimes presents these paradoxes in as mystifying a manner as possible. In fact, some of the paradoxes — particularly in the discussions of abandoning clinging to views — are stated in terms so stark that, on the surface, they are hard to reconcile with teachings in other Pali discourses or with other passages in the Atthaka itself. The question is thus whether these paradoxes should be taken at face value or further interpreted. Or, to put the question in terms used by the Buddha himself (AN II.25): Is their meaning, as stated, already fully drawn out or does it have to be inferred? Readers of the poems have offered arguments for both sides.

The argument for taking the paradoxes at face value is based on a major assumption: that the Atthaka is historically prior to the rest of the Pali Canon. From this assumption, the argument goes on to conclude that these poems contain the earliest recorded teachings of the Buddha, and that if they conflict with other passages in the Canon, that is simply because those other passages are less true to the Buddha’s original message. This argument, however, contains several weaknesses. To begin with, only two pieces of evidence are offered for the relative age of these poems: (1) the Atthaka Vagga, as a set, is mentioned at three other points in the Canon, at Ud V.6, Mv. V, and SN XXII.3;3 and (2) the language of the poems is more archaic than that of the other discourses. However, neither piece of evidence can carry the weight of what it’s supposed to prove. The first piece shows simply that an Atthaka Vagga predates the three passages in question, not necessarily that the Atthaka Vagga as we have it predates the entire remainder of the Canon. As for the archaic nature of the language, that is common to a great deal of the poetry throughout the Pali Canon. Just as Tennyson’s poetry contains more archaisms than Dryden’s prose, the fact that a Pali poem uses archaic language is no proof of its actual age.
The arguments for taking the Atthaka’s paradoxes at face value contain other weaknesses as well. They commonly state that the paradoxes teach a view of no views and a practice of no goals, yet the people who advance this argument are the first to admit that such doctrines are totally impractical. These doctrines are also inconsistent with other passages in the Atthaka itself, such as the clear-cut view explaining the sources of conflict, presented in Sn IV.11, and the frequent references to Unbinding (nibbana/nibbuti) as the goal of the practice. Thus even if the Atthaka is appreciably older than the other Pali discourses, we would have to assume gross inconsistencies in its message if we were to take its paradoxes at face value.

The argument that the meaning of the Atthaka’s paradoxes must be inferred — that they were intentionally stated in obscure terms — is based on firmer ground. To begin with, this is the interpretation that Buddhist tradition has advanced from its earliest centuries. An extended commentary, entitled the Mahaniddesa (Nd.I), reconciling the content of the poems with the teachings in the rest of the discourses, was compiled early enough to be included in the Canon itself. Although some of the explanations given in the Mahaniddesa may seem a little too pat and pedantic, they make clear the point that Buddhists near the time of the Buddha found many useful levels of meaning below the surface level of the poems.

Even if we disregard arguments from tradition, there are other good reasons for maintaining that the meaning of the Atthaka’s paradoxes was designed to be inferred. To begin with there is the question, already mentioned, of the internal consistency of the poems themselves: they make better sense, when taken as a whole, if the paradoxes are explored for meanings not obvious on the surface. A prime example is the passage toward the beginning of Sn IV.9, in which the Buddha seems to be saying that an awakened person would regard purity as being found neither by means of views, precepts and practices, etc., nor through lack of views, precepts and practices, etc. Magandiya, the Buddha’s listener, states understandably that such a teaching is confused. Readers who have acquired a taste for Mahayana non-dualities, and who would take the Buddha’s statement at face value, might scoff at Magandiya’s narrow-mindedness. But, if the words are taken at face value, Magandiya would be right, for there are many passages in the Atthaka that recommend views, precepts, and practices as part of the path to purity. However, if we take the Buddha’s statements as puns on the instrumental case — which can be interpreted not only as “through” or “by means of,” but also as “in terms of” or “in connection with,” the Buddha’s statements to Magandiya make sense in and of themselves, and fit with the rest of the Atthaka: an awakened person would not define purity in terms of views, precepts and practices, etc., but would also realize that purity cannot be attained through a lack of these things.

A second reason for regarding the paradoxes as requiring interpretation is that, in their use of puns and grammatical word-play, they follow an ancient Indian genre — the philosophical enigma — that by its very nature called for extensive interpretation. Evidence in the Rig Veda shows that ancient Vedic ritual included contests in which elder brahmans used puns and other word-play to express philosophical teachings as riddles that contestants were then challenged to solve.4 The purpose of these contests was to teach the contestants — usually students studying to become ritual experts — to use their powers of ingenuity in thinking “outside the box,” in the justified belief that the process of searching for inspiration and being illuminated by the answer would transform the mind in a much deeper way than would be achieved simply by absorbing information. 5
Although the Atthaka poems advise against engaging in intellectual contests, they imitate the Vedic enigmas in the way they use language to challenge the reader. Individual words — sometimes whole lines and stanzas — in the poems can be interpreted in a variety of ways, and it’s up to the reader to explore and consider all the various meanings to decide which ones are most helpful. Although our culture associates word-play with jokes, the Atthaka stands at the head of a long line of Buddhist texts — both Theravada and not — that use word-play with a serious purpose: to teach the reader to think independently, to see through the uncertainties of language and so to help loosen any clinging to the structures that language imposes on the mind.6 This type of rhetoric also rewards anyone who takes the text seriously enough to re-read and re-think what it has to say.

Thus, the obscurity of some of the Atthaka’s language can be regarded as a function, not of the poems’ age, but of the genre to which they belong. The proper reading of a text like this requires that you question your assumptions about its message and clarify the intention behind your efforts at reaching an understanding. In this way, the act of reading is meant not only to inform but to transform. The more you give to it, the more it opens up new possibilities in the mind.
Translating word-play of this sort presents enormous challenges; even when those challenges are surmounted, the act of reading such word games in translation can never be quite the same as reading them in the original language and cultural setting. Fortunately, aside from the more controversial passages, much of the Atthaka is perfectly straightforward — although Ven. Maha Kaccana’s commentary on one of the simpler verses in IV.9 should serve as warning that even the straightforward passages can contain hidden meanings. In passages where I have detected multiple meanings, I’ve included all the detected meanings in the translation — although I’m sure that there are instances of double meanings that I haven’t detected. Wherever the Pali seems ambiguous, I’ve tried to use English equivalents that convey the same ambiguity. Wherever this has proven beyond my abilities, I’ve resorted to explanatory notes. I have also used the notes to cite interpretations from the Mahaniddesa and other passages from earlier parts of the Canon that help explain paradoxes and other obscure points — both as an aid to the serious reader and as a way of showing that the gulf assumed to separate the Atthaka from the rest of the discourse collection is more imagined than real.

Two final notes on reading the Atthaka:

1. Although these poems were originally composed for an audience of wandering, homeless monks, they offer valuable lessons for lay people as well. Even the passages referring directly to the homeless life can be read as symbolic of a state of mind. Ven. Maha Kaccana’s commentary, mentioned above, shows that this has been done ever since canonical times. Addressing a lay person, and commenting on a verse describing the behavior of a sage who has abandoned home and society, he interprets “home” as the khandhas and “society” as sense impressions. Thus in his hands the verse develops an internal meaning that lay people can apply to their lives without necessarily leaving their external home and society. Other verses in the poems can be interpreted in similar ways.

2. The poems center on descriptions of sages (muni) and enlightened people (dhira), but these words don’t have fixed meanings from verse to verse. In some contexts, they denote arahants; in others, nothing more than intelligent run-of-the-mill people. So be alert to context when reading descriptions about sages and enlightened people, to see whether they’re describing people following the path or those who have already reached the goal.
Notes
1. The name of the Atthaka (Octets) derives from the fact that the first four poems in the set — three of which contain the word atthaka in their titles — are composed of eight verses. From this fact, some scholars have argued that these four poems constitute the original collection, and that the other poems are later additions, but this is not necessarily the case. Many of the vaggas (chapters) in the discourse and Vinaya collections are named after the first few members of the chapter, even though the remaining members may contain material that differs radically from what would be suggested by the title of the chapter. Thus there is no way of knowing the relative ages of the different poems in the collection.
2. For a discussion of the four types of clinging, see The Mind Like Fire Unbound, chapter 3.
3. Ven. Maha Kaccana — praised by the Buddha as foremost among his disciples in his ability to draw out the meaning of concise statements — is mentioned in connection with the Atthaka in all three locations. As a well-educated brahman, he would have been trained in detecting and resolving philosophical enigmas. His personal reputation indicates that he enjoyed doing so.
4. On this point, see Willard Johnson’s book, Poetry and Speculation of the Rig Veda, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980.
5. By the Buddha’s time, these contests had left the ritual arena and had become public philosophical debates much closer to our current notion of a formal debate. However, they were driven by an assumption — derived from the belief in the spiritual transformation that accompanied the correct solution of the philosophical enigma — that holding a winning view was, in and of itself, the measure of a person’s high spiritual attainment. The paradoxes in the Atthaka attack this assumption by — paradoxically — making use of the genre of philosophical enigma from which it ultimately derived.
6. Other examples of such word-play in the Pali Canon include SN I.1 and Dhp 97. For more modern examples of Buddhist texts using word play with a serious purpose, see A Heart Released and The Ballad of Liberation from the Khandhas, both by Phra Ajaan Mun Bhuridatto.
See also: “Parayana Vagga (The Chapter on the Way to the Far Shore): An Introduction,” by the same author.
Kama Sutta
Sensual Pleasure
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

If one, longing for sensual pleasure,
achieves it, yes,
he’s enraptured at heart.
The mortal gets what he wants.
But if for that person
— longing, desiring —
the pleasures diminish,
he’s shattered,
as if shot with an arrow.

Whoever avoids sensual desires
— as he would, with his foot,
the head of a snake —
goes beyond, mindful,
this attachment in the world.

A man who is greedy
for fields, land, gold,
cattle, horses,
servants, employees,
women, relatives,
many sensual pleasures,
is overpowered with weakness
and trampled by trouble,
for pain invades him
as water, a cracked boat.

So one, always mindful,
should avoid sensual desires.
Letting them go,
he’d cross over the flood
like one who, having bailed out the boat,
has reached the far shore.

Sn IV.2
Guhatthaka Sutta
The Cave of the Body
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

Staying attached to the cave,
covered heavily over,1
a person sunk in confusion
is far from seclusion —
for sensual pleasures
sensual desires2
in the world
are not lightly let go.

Those chained by desire,
bound by becoming’s allure,
aren’t easily released
for there’s no liberation by others.
Intent, in front or behind,3
on hunger for sensual pleasures
here or before —
greedy
for sensual pleasures,
busy, deluded, ungenerous,
entrenched in the out-of-tune way,4
they — impelled into pain — lament:
“What will we be
when we pass on from here?”

So a person should train
right here & now.
Whatever you know
as out-of-tune in the world,
don’t, for its sake, act out-of-tune,
for that life, the enlightened say,
is short.

I see them,
in the world, floundering around,
people immersed in craving
for states of becoming.
Base people moan in the mouth of death,
their craving, for states of becoming & not-,5
unallayed.

See them,
floundering in their sense of mine,
like fish in the puddles
of a dried-up stream —
and, seeing this,
live with no mine,
not forming attachment
for states of becoming.
Subdue desire
for both sides,6
comprehending7 sensory contact,
with no greed.

Doing nothing for which
he himself
would rebuke himself,
the enlightened person doesn’t adhere
to what’s seen,
to what’s heard.
Comprehending perception,
he’d cross over the flood —
the sage not stuck
on possessions.
Then, with arrow removed,
living heedfully, he longs for neither —
this world,
the next.
Notes
1. Nd.I: “Covered heavily over” with defilements and unskillful mental qualities.
2. “Sensual desires/sensual pleasures”: two possible meanings of kama. According to Nd.I, both meanings are intended here.
3. Nd.I: “In front” means experienced in the past (as does “before” two lines down); “behind” means to-be-experienced in the future.
4. Nd.I: “The out-of-tune way” means the ten types of unskillful action (see AN X.176).
5. States of not-becoming are oblivious states of becoming that people can get themselves into through a desire for annihilation, either after death or as a goal of their religious striving (see Iti 49). As with all states of becoming, these states are impermanent and stressful.
6. According to Nd.I, “both sides” here has several possible meanings: sensory contact and the origination of sensory contact; past and future; name and form; internal and external sense media; self-identity and the origination of self-identity. It also might mean states of becoming and not-becoming, mentioned in the previous verse and below, in Sn IV.5.
7. Nd.I: Comprehending sensory contact has three aspects: being able to identify and distinguish types of sensory contact; contemplating the true nature of sensory contact (e.g., inconstant, stressful, and not-self); and abandoning attachment to sensory contact. The same three aspects would apply to comprehending perception, as mentioned in the following verse.
See also: AN IV.184.

Sn IV.3
Dutthatthaka Sutta
Corrupted
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

There are some who dispute
corrupted at heart,
and those who dispute
their hearts set on truth,
but a sage doesn’t enter
a dispute that’s arisen,
which is why he is
nowhere constrained.

Now, how would one
led on by desire,
entrenched in his likes,
forming his own conclusions,
overcome his own views?
He’d dispute in line
with the way that he knows.

Whoever boasts to others, unasked,
of his practices, precepts,
is, say the skilled,
ignoble by nature —
he who speaks of himself
of his own accord.

But a monk at peace,
fully unbound in himself,
who doesn’t boast of his precepts
— “That’s how I am” —
he, say the skilled,
is noble by nature —
he with no vanity
with regard to the world.

One whose doctrines aren’t clean —
fabricated, formed, given preference
when he sees it to his own advantage —
relies on a peace
dependent
on what can be shaken.

Because entrenchments1 in views
aren’t easily overcome
when considering what’s grasped
among doctrines,
that’s why
a person embraces or rejects a doctrine —
in light of these very
entrenchments.

Now, one who is cleansed2
has no preconceived view
about states of becoming
or not-
anywhere in the world.
Having abandoned conceit3 & illusion,
by what means would he go?4
He isn’t involved.

For one who’s involved
gets into disputes
over doctrines,
but how — in connection with what — 5
would you argue
with one uninvolved?
He has nothing
embraced or rejected,
has sloughed off every view
right here — every one.
Notes
1. Entrenchments: a rendering of the Pali term, nivesana, which can also be rendered as abode, situation, home, or establishment.
2. Nd.I: Cleansed through discernment.
3. Nd.I explains a variety of ways of understanding the word “conceit,” the most comprehensive being a list of nine kinds of conceit: viewing people better than oneself as worse than oneself, on a par with oneself, or better than oneself; viewing people on a par with oneself as worse than oneself, on a par with oneself, or better than oneself; viewing people worse than oneself as worse than oneself, on a par with oneself, or better than oneself. In other words, the truth of the view is not the issue here; the issue is the tendency to compare oneself with others.
4. Nd.I: “By what means would he go” to any destination in any state of becoming.
5. In connection with what: a rendering of the instrumental case that attempts to cover several of its meanings, in particular “by what means” and “in terms of what.” For a discussion of the use of the instrumental case in the Atthaka Vagga, see note 1 to Sn IV.9.
Sn IV.4
Suddhatthaka Sutta
On Purity
Translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
Alternate translation:
Ireland
Thanissaro
“‘Here I see one who is pure, entirely free of sickness. By seeing him a man may attain to purity!’
“Convinced of that and thinking it ‘the highest,’ he believes it to be knowledge when he contemplates ‘the pure one.’1 But if by sights man can gain purification or if through such knowledge he could leave suffering behind, then, one who still has attachments could be purified by another.2 However, this is merely the opinion of those who so assert.
“The (true) brahmana3 has said one is not purified by another, nor by what is seen, heard or perceived (by the other senses), nor, by the performance of ritual observances. He (the true brahmana) is not defiled by merit or demerit. Having given up what he had (previously) grasped at, he no longer engages in producing (any kamma). Having left a former (object) they attach themselves to another, dominated by craving they do not go beyond attachment. They reject and seize, like a monkey letting go of a branch to take hold of another.
“A person having undertaken a ritual act goes this way and that, fettered by his senses. But one with a wide wisdom, having understood and gone into the Dhamma with his experience, does not go this way and that. For a person indifferent towards all conditions, whatever is seen, heard or cognized, he is one who sees it as it really is and lives with clarity (of mind). With what could he be identified in the world?
“They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion), they do not claim perfect purity. Loosening the knot (of clinging) with which they are bound, they do not have longing anywhere in the world. The (true) brahmana who has gone beyond limitations, having understood and seen there is no longer any assumption for him, he is neither disturbed by lust nor agitated by revulsion. For him there is nothing upheld as ‘the highest.’”
Notes
1. This refers to the old Indian belief in “auspicious sights” (dittha-mangala), the belief that by merely beholding something or someone regarded as a holy object or person, purity, or whatever else is desired, may be gained.
2. By another method, other than that of the Noble Eightfold Path (Comy.); but it could also mean, “by the sight of another person.”
3. I.e., the Buddha.
Sn IV.5
Paramatthaka Sutta
On Views
Translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
Alternate translation:
Ireland
Thanissaro

“A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others). In what is seen, heard, cognized and in ritual observances performed, he sees a profit for himself. Just by laying hold of that view he regards every other view as worthless. Those skilled (in judgment)1 say that (a view becomes) a bond if, relying on it, one regards everything else as inferior. Therefore a bhikkhu should not depend on what is seen, heard or cognized, nor upon ritual observances. He should not present himself as equal to, nor imagine himself to be inferior, nor better than, another. Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. Among those who dispute he is certainly not one to take sides. He does not [have] recourse to a view at all. In whom there is no inclination to either extreme, for becoming or non-becoming, here or in another existence, for him there does not exist a fixed viewpoint on investigating the doctrines assumed (by others). Concerning the seen, the heard and the cognized he does not form the least notion. That brahmana2 who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world?
“They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views.”
Notes
1. I.e., the Buddhas and their disciples who have realized the goal.
2. I.e., a perfected one.
Sn IV.6
Jara Sutta
On Decay
Translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
Alternate translation:
Ireland
Thanissaro
“Short indeed is this life, this side of a hundred years one dies; whoever lives long even he dies from old age. People grieve for things they are attached to, yet there exist no permanent possessions but just a state of (constant) separation. Seeing this one should no longer live the household life. That which a man imagines to be his will disappear at death. Knowing this a wise man will have no attachment (to anything).
“As a man awakened from sleep no longer sees what happened in his dream, similarly one does not see a loved one who is dead. Those people who were seen and heard and called by their names as such and such, only their names remain when they have passed away. Those greedy for objects of attachment do not abandon sorrow, grief and avarice, but sages having got rid of possessions, live perceiving security. For a bhikkhu with a detached mind, living in a secluded dwelling, it is right, they say, that he no longer shows himself in the abodes (of existence).1
“A sage who is completely independent does not make close friends or enemies. In him sorrow and selfishness do not stay, like water on a lotus leaf. As a lotus is not wetted by water, so a sage is not affected by what is seen or heard, nor by what is perceived by the other senses. A wise man is not deluded by what is perceived by the senses. He does not expect purity by any other way.2 He is neither pleased nor is he repelled (by the six sense-objects).”
Notes
1. There is a play on words here: “bhavana,” besides meaning “an abode of existence” also means “a house.” So as well as saying, he is not reborn into any realm of existence, the passage also indicates he lives secluded and does not associate with people in the village.
2. By any way other than the Noble Eightfold Path (Comy).
Sn IV.7
Tissa Metteyya Sutta
Tissa Metteyya
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Tell the danger, dear sir,
for one given over
to sexual intercourse.
Having heard your teaching,
we’ll train in seclusion.”
The Buddha:
“In one given over
to sexual intercourse,
the teaching’s confused
and he practices wrongly:
this is ignoble
in him.
Whoever once went alone,
but then resorts
to sexual intercourse
— like a carriage out of control —
is called vile in the world,
a person run-of-the-mill.
His earlier honor & dignity:
lost.
Seeing this,
he should train himself
to abandon sexual intercourse.

Overcome by resolves,
he broods
like a miserable wretch.
Hearing the scorn of others,
he’s chagrined.
He makes weapons,
attacked by the words of others.
This, for him, is a great entanglement.
He
sinks
into lies.

They thought him wise
when he committed himself
to the life alone,
but now that he’s given
to sexual intercourse
they declare him a fool.

Seeing these drawbacks, the sage
here — before & after —
stays firm in the life alone;
doesn’t resort to sexual intercourse;
would train himself
in seclusion —
this, for the noble ones, is
supreme.
He wouldn’t, because of that,
think himself
better than others:
He’s on the verge
of Unbinding.

People enmeshed
in sensual pleasures,
envy him: free,
a sage
leading his life
unconcerned for sensual pleasures
— one who’s crossed over the flood.”
See also: AN IV.159; AN V.75; AN V.76.
Sn IV.8
Pasura Sutta
To Pasura
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Only here is there purity”
— that’s what they say —
“No other doctrines are pure”
— so they say.
Insisting that what they depend on is good,
they are deeply entrenched in their personal truths.

Seeking controversy, they plunge into an assembly,
regarding one another as fools.
Relying on others’ authority,
they speak in debate.
Desiring praise, they claim to be skilled.

Engaged in disputes in the midst of the assembly,
— anxious, desiring praise —
the one defeated is
chagrined.
Shaken with criticism, he seeks for an opening.

He whose doctrine is [judged as] demolished,
defeated, by those judging the issue:
He laments, he grieves — the inferior exponent.
“He beat me,” he mourns.

These disputes have arisen among contemplatives.
In them are elation,
dejection.
Seeing this, one should abstain from disputes,
for they have no other goal
than the gaining of praise.

He who is praised there
for expounding his doctrine
in the midst of the assembly,
laughs on that account & grows haughty,
attaining his heart’s desire.

That haughtiness will be his grounds for vexation,
for he’ll speak in pride & conceit.
Seeing this, one should abstain from debates.
No purity is attained by them, say the skilled.

Like a strong man nourished on royal food,
you go about, roaring, searching out an opponent.
Wherever the battle is,
go there, strong man.
As before, there’s none here.

Those who dispute, taking hold of a view,
saying, “This, and this only, is true,”
those you can talk to.
Here there is nothing —
no confrontation
at the birth of disputes.

Among those who live above confrontation
not pitting view against view,
whom would you gain as opponent, Pasura,
among those here
who are grasping no more?

So here you come,
conjecturing,
your mind conjuring
viewpoints.
You’re paired off with a pure one
and so cannot proceed.
See also: DN 16 (the Buddha’s answer to Subhadda’s question); MN 18; AN III.67; AN III.72; AN V.159.
Sn IV.9
Magandiya Sutta
To Magandiya
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
[Magandiya offers his daughter to the Buddha, who replies:]
On seeing [the daughters of Mara]
— Discontent, Craving, & Passion —
there wasn’t even the desire for sex.
So what would I want with this,
filled with urine & excrement?
I wouldn’t want to touch it
even with my foot.
Magandiya:
If you don’t want
this gem of a woman, coveted
by many kings,
then for what sort of viewpoint,
precept, practice, life,
attainment of [further] becoming
do you argue?
The Buddha:
‘I argue for this’
doesn’t occur to one
when considering what’s grasped
among doctrines.
Looking for what is ungrasped
with regard to views,
and detecting inner peace,
I saw.
Magandiya:
Sage, you speak
without grasping
at any preconceived judgments.
This ‘inner peace’:
what does it mean?
How is it,
by an enlightened person,
proclaimed?
The Buddha:
He doesn’t speak of purity
in connection with view,
learning,
knowledge,
precept or practice.
Nor is it found by a person
through lack of view,
of learning,
of knowledge,
of precept or practice.1
Letting these go, without grasping,
at peace,
independent,
one wouldn’t long for becoming.
Magandiya:
If he doesn’t speak of purity
in connection with view,
learning,
knowledge,
precept or practice.
and it isn’t found by a person
through lack of view,
of learning,
of knowledge,
of precept or practice,
it seems to me that this teaching’s
confused,
for some assume a purity
in terms of
— by means of —
a view.
The Buddha:
Asking questions
dependent on view,
you’re confused
by what you have grasped.
And so you don’t glimpse
even
the slightest
notion
[of what I am saying].
That’s why you think
it’s confused.

Whoever construes
‘equal,’
’superior,’ or
‘inferior,’
by that he’d dispute;
whereas to one unaffected
by these three,
‘equal,’
’superior,’
do not occur.

Of what would the brahman say ‘true’
or ‘false,’
disputing with whom:
he in whom ‘equal,’ ‘unequal’ are not.

Having abandoned home,
living free from society,
the sage
in villages
creates no intimacies.
Rid of sensual passions, free
from yearning,
he wouldn’t engage with people
in quarrelsome debate.2

Those things
aloof from which
he should go about in the world:
the great one
wouldn’t take them up
& argue for them.

As the prickly lotus
is unsmeared by water & mud,
so the sage,
an exponent of peace,
without greed,
is unsmeared by sensuality &
the world.

An attainer-of-wisdom isn’t measured
made proud3
by views or
by what is thought,
for he isn’t affected by them.
He wouldn’t be led
by action,4 learning;
doesn’t reach a conclusion
in any entrenchments.

For one dispassionate toward perception
there are no ties;
for one released by discernment,
no
delusions.
Those who grasp at perceptions & views
go about butting their heads
in the world.
Notes
1. The Pali of the first sentence puts the words for “view, learning, knowledge, precept, & practice” in the instrumental case. This case stands for the relationship “by means of” or “because of” but it also has an idiomatic meaning: “in terms of.” (To keep the translation neutral on this point, I have translated with the idiom, “in connection with,” which can carry both possibilities.) The second sentence puts the words for lack of view, etc., in the ablative case, which carries the meaning “because of” or “from.”
If we assume that the instrumental case in the first sentence is meant in the sense of “by means of,” then we are dealing — as Magandiya asserts — with plain nonsense: the first sentence would say that a person cannot achieve purity by means of views, etc., while the second sentence would be saying that he cannot achieve purity by means of no view, etc. The fact that the two sentences place the relevant terms in different grammatical cases, though, suggests that they are talking about two different kinds of relationships. If we take the instrumental in the first sentence in the sense of “in terms of,” then the stanza not only makes sense but also fits in with teachings of the rest of the Pali discourses: a person cannot be said to be pure simply because he/she holds to a particular view, body of learning, etc. Purity is not defined in those terms. The second sentence goes on to say that a person doesn’t arrive at purity from a lack of view, etc. Putting the two sentences together with the third, the message is this: One uses right views, learning, knowledge, precepts, & practices as a path, a means for arriving at purity. Once one arrives, one lets go of the path, for the purity of inner peace, in its ultimate sense, is something transcending the means by which it is reached.
In the stanza immediately following this one, it’s obvious that Magandiya has not caught this distinction.
For further illustrations of the role of Right View in taking one to a dimension beyond all views, see AN X.93, AN X.96, and MN 24. (The analogy of the relay coaches in MN 24 actually seems more tailored to the issues raised by the Buddha’s remarks in this discourse than it does to the question it addresses in that discourse.) See also sections III/H and III/H/i in The Wings to Awakening.
2. An explanation of this stanza, attributed to Ven. Maha Kaccana, is contained in SN XXII.3.
3. “Measured… made proud” — two meanings of the Pali word manameti.
4. “Action” here can mean either kamma in its general sense — i.e., the attainer-of-wisdom has gone beyond creating kamma — or in a more restricted sense, as ritual action. According to Nd.I, it refers to the factor of “fabrication” (sankhara) in the analysis of dependent co-arising (see SN XII.2).
See also: SN I.1; Sn V.7.
Sn IV.10
Purabheda Sutta
Before the Break-up of the Body
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Seeing how,
behaving how,
is one said to be
at peace?
Gotama, tell me about
— when asked about —
the ultimate person.”

The Buddha:

“Free from craving
before the break-up
[of the body],
independent
of before
& the end,1
not classified in between,2
no yearning is his.

Un- angered,
un- startled,
un- boastful,
un- anxious,
giving counsel unruffled,
he is a sage,
his speech
under control.

Free from attachment
with regard to the future,
not sorrowing
over the past,
he sees seclusion
in the midst of sensory contacts.3
He can’t be led
in terms of views.4

Withdrawn, un-
deceitful, not
stingy, not
miserly, not
insolent, in-
offensive,
he doesn’t engage in
divisive speech.

Not intoxicated with enticements,
nor given to pride,
he’s gentle, quick-witted,
beyond conviction & dispassion.5

Not in hopes of material gain
does he take on the training;
when without material gain
he isn’t upset.

Unobstructed by craving,
he doesn’t through craving6
hunger for flavors.

Equanimous — always — mindful,
he doesn’t conceive himself as
equal,
superior,
inferior,
in the world.
No swellings of pride
are his.

Whose dependencies
don’t exist
when, on knowing the Dhamma,
he’s in-
dependent;
in whom no craving is found
for becoming or not-:
he is said
to be at peace,
un-intent
on sensual pleasures,
with nothing at all
to tie him down:
one who’s crossed over attachment.

He has no children
cattle,
fields,
land.
In him you can’t pin down
what’s embraced
or rejected,
what’s self
or opposed to self.7
He has no yearning
for that which people run-of-the-mill
or priests & contemplatives
might blame —
which is why
he is unperturbed
with regard to their words.

His greed gone,
not miserly,
the sage
doesn’t speak of himself
as among those who are higher,
equal,
or lower.
He,
conjuring-free,
doesn’t submit
to conjuring,
to the cycling of time.8

For whom
nothing in the world
is his own,
who doesn’t grieve
over what is not,
who doesn’t enter into
doctrines
phenomena:9
he is said
to be
at peace.”
Notes
1. Nd.I: “Independent of before & the end” = no craving or view with regard to past or future.
2. For discussions of how the awakened one cannot be classified even in the present, see MN 72 and SN XXII.85-86.
3. Nd.I: “He sees seclusion in the midst of sensory contacts” = he sees contact as empty of self. This passage may also refer to the fact that the awakened person experiences sensory contact as if disjoined from it. On this point, see MN 140 and MN 146, quoted in The Mind Like Fire Unbound, pp. 116 and 113.
4. See AN X.93.
5. Beyond conviction & dispassion — The Pali here can also mean, “A person of no conviction, he does not put away passion.” This is an example of the kind of pun occasionally used in Pali poetry for its shock value. Other examples are at Dhp 97 and the end of Sn IV.13. For an explanation of what is meant by being beyond dispassion, see note 2 to Sn IV.6.
6. The Pali word tanhaya — by/through craving — here is a “lamp,” i.e., a single word that functions in two separate phrases.
7. “Embraced/rejected, what’s self/what lies against self” — a pun on the pair of Pali words, attam/nirattam.
8. “Conjuring, the cycling of time” — two meanings of the Pali word, kappam.
9. “Doctrines, phenomena” — two meanings of the Pali word, dhamma.
Sn IV.12
Cula-viyuha Sutta
The Lesser Array
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Dwelling on
their own views,
quarreling,
different skilled people say:
‘Whoever knows this, understands Dhamma.
Whoever rejects this, is
imperfect.’
Thus quarreling, they dispute:
‘My opponent’s a fool & unskilled.’
Which of these statements is true
when all of them say they are skilled?”
“If, in not accepting
an opponent’s doctrine,
one’s a fool, a beast of inferior discernment,
then all are fools
of inferior discernment —
all of these
who dwell on their views.
But if, in siding with a view,
one’s cleansed,
with discernment made pure,
intelligent, skilled,
then none of them
are of inferior discernment,
for all of them
have their own views.

I don’t say, ‘That’s how it is,’
the way fools say to one another.
They each make out their views to be true
and so regard their opponents as fools.”

“What some say is true
— ‘That’s how it is’ —
others say is ‘falsehood, a lie.’
Thus quarreling, they dispute.
Why can’t contemplatives
say one thing & the same?”

“The truth is one,1
there is no second
about which a person who knows it
would argue with one who knows.
Contemplatives promote
their various personal truths,
that’s why they don’t say
one thing & the same.”

“But why do they say
various truths,
those who say they are skilled?
Have they learned many various truths
or do they follow conjecture?”

“Apart from their perception
there are no
many
various
constant truths
in the world.2
Preconceiving conjecture
with regard to views,
they speak of a pair: true
& false.
Dependent on what’s seen,
heard,
& sensed,
dependent on precepts & practices,
one shows disdain [for others].
Taking a stance on his decisions,
praising himself, he says,
‘My opponent’s a fool & unskilled.’
That by which
he regards his opponents as fools
is that by which
he says he is skilled.
Calling himself skilled
he despises another
who speaks the same way.

Agreeing on a view gone out of bounds,
drunk with conceit, thinking himself perfect,
he has consecrated, with his own mind,
himself
as well as his view.

If, by an opponent’s word,
one’s inferior,
the opponent’s
of inferior discernment as well.
But if, by one’s own word
one’s an attainer-of-wisdom, enlightened,
no one
among contemplative’s
a fool.

‘Those who teach a doctrine other than this
are lacking in purity,
imperfect.’
That’s what the many sectarians say,
for they’re smitten with passion
for their own views.
‘Only here is there purity,’
that’s what they say.
‘In no other doctrine
is purity,’ they say.
That’s how the many sectarians
are entrenched,
speaking firmly there
concerning their own path.
Speaking firmly concerning your own path,
what opponent here would you take as a fool?
You’d simply bring quarrels on yourself
if you said your opponent’s a fool
with an impure doctrine.

Taking a stance on your decisions,
& yourself as your measure,
you dispute further down
into the world.

But one who’s abandoned
all decisions
creates in the world
quarrels no more.”
Notes
1. “The truth is one”: This statement should be kept in mind throughout the following verses, as it forms the background to the discussion of how people who preconceive their conjectures speak of the pair, true and false. The Buddha is not denying that there is such a thing as true and false. Rather, he is saying that all entrenched views, regardless of how true or false their content might be, when considered as events in a causal chain behave in line with the truth of conditioned phenomena as explained in the preceding discourse. If held to, they lead to conceit, conflict, and states of becoming. When they are viewed in this way — as events rather than as true or false depictions of other events (or as events rather than signs) — the tendency to hold to or become entrenched in them is diminished.
2. On the role of perception in leading to conflicting views, see the preceding discourse.
See also: AN X.93; AN X.96.
Sn IV.13
Maha-viyuha Sutta
The Great Array
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Those who, dwelling on views,
dispute, saying, ‘Only this is true’:
do they all incur blame,
or also earn praise there?”

“[The praise:] It’s such a little thing,
not at all appeasing.1
I speak of two fruits of dispute;
and seeing this, you shouldn’t dispute —
seeing the state
where there’s no dispute
as secure.
One who knows
doesn’t get involved
in whatever are
commonplace
conventional
views.
One who is uninvolved:
when he’s forming no preference
for what’s seen, for what’s heard,
why would he get
involved?

Those for whom precepts
are ultimate
say that purity’s
a matter of self-restraint.
Undertaking a practice,
they devote themselves to it:
‘Let’s train just in this,
and then there would be purity.’
Those who say they are skilled
are [thus] led on to becoming.
But if one of them falls
from his precepts or practice,
he trembles,
having failed in his actions.
He hopes for, longs for, purity,
like a lost caravan leader
far from home.

But one who’s abandoned
precepts & practices2
— all —
things that are blamable, blameless,3
not hoping for ‘pure or impure,’4
would live in compassion & peace,
without taking up peace,5
detached.

Dependent
on taboos, austerities,
or what’s seen, heard, or sensed,
they speak of purity
through wandering further on
through becoming & not-,
their craving not gone
for becoming & not-.6
For one who aspires has longings
& trembling with regard to preconceptions.
But one who here
has no passing away & arising:
Why would he tremble?
For what would he long?”

“The teaching some say is ’supreme,’
is the very one others call ‘lowly.’
Which statement is true
when all of these claim to be skilled?”

“They say their own teaching is perfect
while the doctrine of others is lowly.
Thus quarreling, they dispute,
each saying his agreed-on opinion
is true.
If something, because of an opponent’s say-so,
were lowly,
then none among teachings would be
superlative,
for many say
that another’s teaching’s inferior
when firmly asserting their own.
If their worship of their teaching were true,
in line with the way they praise their own path,
then all doctrines
would be true —
for purity’s theirs, according to each.

The brahman has nothing
led by another,
when considering what’s grasped
among doctrines.
Thus he has gone
beyond disputes,
for he doesn’t regard as best
the knowledge of a teaching,
any other mental state.7

‘I know. I see. That’s just how it is!’ —
Some believe purity’s in terms of view.
But even if a person has seen,
what good does it do him?
Having slipped past,
they speak of purity
in connection with something
or somebody else.
A person, in seeing,
sees name & form.
Having seen, he’ll know
only these things.
No matter if he’s seen little, a lot,
the skilled don’t say purity’s
in connection with that.

A person entrenched in his teachings,
honoring a preconceived view,
isn’t easy to discipline.
Whatever he depends on
he describes it as lovely,
says that it’s purity,
that there he saw truth.

The brahman, evaluating,
isn’t involved with conjurings,
doesn’t follow views,
isn’t tied even to knowledge.8
And on knowing
whatever’s conventional, commonplace,
he remains equanimous:
‘That’s what others hold onto.’

Having released the knots
that tie him down,
the sage here in the world
doesn’t follow a faction
when disputes have arisen.
At peace among those not at peace,
he’s equanimous, doesn’t hold on:
‘That’s what others hold onto.’

Giving up old fermentations,
not forming new,
neither pursuing desire,
nor entrenched in his teachings,
he’s totally released
from viewpoints,
enlightened.

He doesn’t adhere to the world,
is without self-rebuke;
is enemy-free9
with regard to all things
seen, heard, or sensed.

His burden laid down,
the sage totally released

is improper / is free from conjuring
hasn’t stopped / isn’t impassioned
isn’t worth wanting / doesn’t
desire,”10

the Blessed One said.
Notes
1. Or: Not enough to appease (the defilements, says Nd.I).
2. Nd.I: Abandoning precepts & practices in the sense of no longer believing that purity is measured in terms of them, the view discussed in the preceding verse.
3. Nd.I: “Blamable, blameless” = black and white kamma (see AN IV.232, 234, 237-238, quoted in The Wings to Awakening, section I/B).
4. Nd.I: Having abandoned impure mental qualities, and having fully attained the goal, the arahant has no need to hope for anything at all.
5. “In compassion & peace, without taking up peace” — a pun on the word, santimanuggahaya.
6. The word bhavabhavesu — through/for becoming & not- becoming — here is a lamp, i.e., a single word functioning in two phrases.
7. “The knowledge of a teaching, any other mental state” — a pun on the word, dhammamaññam.
8. According to Nd.I, this compound — ñana-bandhu — should be translated as “tied by means of knowledge,” in that the arahant doesn’t use the knowledge that comes with the mastery of concentration, the five mundane forms of psychic power (abhiñña), or any wrong knowledge to create the bonds of craving or views. However, the compound may also refer to the fact that the arahant isn’t tied even to the knowledge that forms part of the path to arahantship (see MN 117).
9. See note 7 under Sn IV.4.
10. “Is improper / is free from conjuring, hasn’t stopped / isn’t impassioned, isn’t worth wanting / doesn’t desire” — a series of puns — na kappiyo, nuparato, na patthiyo — each with a strongly positive and a strongly negative meaning, probably meant for their shock value. For a similar set of puns, see Dhp 97.
See also: AN X.93; AN X.96.
Sn IV.14
Tuvataka Sutta
Quickly
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
“I ask the kinsman of the Sun, the great seer,
about seclusion & the state of peace.
Seeing in what way is a monk unbound,
clinging to nothing in the world?”
“He should put an entire stop
to the root of complication-classifications:
‘I am the thinker.’1
He should train, always mindful,
to subdue any craving inside him.
Whatever truth he may know,
within or without,
he shouldn’t get entrenched
in connection with it,
for that isn’t called
Unbinding by the good.
He shouldn’t, because of it, think himself
better,
lower, or
equal.
Touched by contact in various ways,
he shouldn’t keep conjuring self.
Stilled right within,
a monk shouldn’t seek peace from another
from anything else.
For one stilled right within,
there’s nothing embraced,
so how rejected?
Nothing that’s self,
so from whence would there be
against-self?2

As in the middle of the sea
it is still,
with no waves upwelling,
so the monk — unperturbed, still —
should not swell himself
anywhere.”

“He whose eyes are open has described
the Dhamma he’s witnessed,
subduing danger.
Now tell us, sir, the practice:
the code of discipline & concentration.”

“One shouldn’t be careless with his eyes,
should close his ears to village-talk,
shouldn’t hunger for flavors,
or view anything in the world
as mine.
When touched by contact
he shouldn’t lament,
shouldn’t covet anywhere any
states of becoming,
or tremble at terrors.
When gaining food & drink,
staples & cloth,
he should not make a hoard.
Nor should he be upset
when receiving no gains.
Absorbed, not foot-loose,
he should refrain from restlessness,
shouldn’t be heedless,
should live in a noise-less abode.
Not making much of sleep,
ardent, given to wakefulness,
he should abandon sloth, deception,
laughter, sports,
fornication, & all that goes with it;
should not practice charms,
interpret physical marks, dreams,
the stars, animal cries;
should not be devoted to
practicing medicine or inducing fertility.

A monk shouldn’t tremble at blame
or grow haughty with praise;
should thrust aside selfishness, greed,
divisive speech, anger;
shouldn’t buy or sell
or revile anyone anywhere;
shouldn’t linger in villages,
or flatter people in hopes of gains.

A monk shouldn’t boast
or speak with ulterior motive,
shouldn’t train in insolence
or speak quarrelsome words;
shouldn’t engage in deception
or knowingly cheat;
shouldn’t despise others for their
life,
discernment,
precepts,
or practices.
Provoked with many words
from contemplatives
or ordinary people,
he shouldn’t respond harshly,
for those who retaliate
aren’t calm.

Knowing this teaching,
a monk inquiring
should always
train in it mindfully.
Knowing Unbinding as peace,
he shouldn’t be heedless
of Gotama’s message —
for he, the Conqueror unconquered,
witnessed the Dhamma,
not by hearsay,
but directly, himself.
So, heedful, you
should always train
in line with that Blessed One’s message,”

the Blessed One said.
Notes
1. On complication-classifications and their role in leading to conflict, see Sn IV.11 and the introduction to MN 18. The perception, “I am the thinker” lies at the root of these classifications in that it reads into the immediate present a set of distinctions — I/not-I; being/not-being; thinker/thought; identity/non-identity — that then can proliferate into mental and physical conflict. The conceit inherent in this perception thus forms a fetter on the mind. To become unbound, one must learn to examine these distinctions — which we all take for granted — to see that they are simply assumptions that are not inherent in experience, and that we would be better off to be able to drop them.
2. “Embraced/rejected, self/against-self” — a pun on the pair of Pali words, atta/nirattam.
See also: DN 2; AN IV.37.
Sn IV.15
Attadanda Sutta
The Training
Translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
Alternate translation:
Ireland
Olendzki
Thanissaro
“Violence breeds misery; 1 look at people quarreling. I will relate the emotion agitating me.
“Having seen people struggling and contending with each other like fish in a small amount of water, fear entered me. The world is everywhere insecure, every direction is in turmoil; desiring an abode for myself I did not find one uninhabited. 2 When I saw contention as the sole outcome, aversion increased in me; but then I saw an arrow 3 here, difficult to see, set in the heart. Pierced by it, once runs in every direction, but having pulled it out one does not run nor does one sink. 4
“Here follows the (rule of) training:
“Whatever are worldly fetters, may you not be bound by them! Completely break down sensual desires and practice so as to realize Nibbana for yourself!
“A sage should be truthful, not arrogant, not deceitful, not given to slandering others, and should be without anger. He should remove the evil of attachment and wrongly directed longing; he should conquer drowsiness, lassitude and sloth, and not dwell in indolence. A man whose mind is set on Nibbana should not be arrogant. He should not lapse into untruth nor generate love for sense objects. He should thoroughly understand (the nature of) conceit and abstain from violence. He should not delight in what is past, nor be fond of what is new, nor sorrow for what is disappearing, nor crave for the attractive.
“Greed, I say, is a great flood; it is a whirlpool sucking one down, a constant yearning, seeking a hold, continually in movement; 5 difficult to cross is the morass of sensual desire. A sage does not deviate from truth, a brahmana 6 stands on firm ground; renouncing all, he is truly called ‘calmed.’
“Having actually experienced and understood the Dhamma he has realized the highest knowledge and is independent. 7 He comports himself correctly in the world and does not envy anyone here. He who has left behind sensual pleasures, an attachment difficult to leave behind, does not grieve nor have any longing; has cut across the stream and is unfettered.
“Dry out that which is past, 8 let there be nothing for you in the future. 9 If you do not grasp at anything in the present you will go about at peace. One who, in regard to this entire mindbody complex, has no cherishing of it as ‘mine,’ and who does not grieve for what is non-existent truly suffers no loss in the world. For him there is no thought of anything as ‘this is mine’ or ‘this is another’s’; not finding any state of ownership, and realizing, ‘nothing is mine,’ he does not grieve.
“To be not callous, not greedy, at rest and unruffled by circumstances — that is the profitable result I proclaim when asked about one who does not waver. For one who does not crave, who has understanding, there is no production (of new kamma). 10 Refraining from initiating (new kamma) he sees security everywhere. A sage does not speak in terms of being equal, lower or higher. Calmed and without selfishness he neither grasps nor rejects.”
Notes
1. Attadanda bhayam jatam: “Violence” (attadanda, lit.: “seizing a stick” or “weapons”) includes in it all wrong conduct in deeds, words and thoughts. Bhaya is either a subjective state of mind, “fear,” or the objective condition of “fearfulness,” danger, misery; and so it is explained in the Comy. as the evil consequences of wrong conduct, in this life and in future existence.
2. Uninhabited by decay and death, etc. (Comy).
3. The arrow of lust, hate, delusion and (wrong) views.
4. That is, sink into the four “floods” of sensual desire, continual becoming, wrong views and ignorance. These are the two contrasting dangers of Samsara, i.e., restless running, ever seeking after sensual delights, and sinking, or passively clinging to the defilements, whereby one is overwhelmed by the “flood.” In the first discourse of the Samyutta-nikaya the Buddha says: “If I stood still, I sank; if I struggled, I was carried away. Thus by neither standing still nor struggling, I crossed the flood.”
5. According to the commentary these four phrases, beginning with a “whirlpool sucking down,” are all synonyms for craving (tanha) or greed (gedha) called the “great flood.”
6. In Buddhism the title “Brahmana” is sometimes used for one who has reached final deliverance. The Buddha himself is sometimes called “the Brahmana.”
7. Independent of craving and views.
8. “Dry out” (visodehi) your former, and not your matured kamma, i.e., make it unproductive, by not giving room to passions that may grow out of the past actions.
9. Do not rouse in kamma-productive passions concerning the future.
10. Volitional acts, good or bad, manifesting in deeds of body, speech and mind leading to a future result.
Sn IV.16
Sariputta Sutta
To Sariputta
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Never before
have I seen or heard
from anyone
of a teacher with such lovely speech
come, together with his following
from Tusita heaven,1
as the One with Eyes
who appears to the world with its devas
having dispelled all darkness
having arrived at delight
all alone.

To that One Awakened —
unentangled, Such, un-
deceptive,
come with his following —
I have come with a question
on behalf of the many
here who are fettered.
For a monk disaffected,
frequenting a place that’s remote —
the root of a tree,
a cemetery,
in mountain caves
various places to stay —
how many are the fears there
at which he shouldn’t tremble
— there in his noiseless abode —
how many the dangers in the world
for the monk going the direction
he never has gone
that he should transcend
there in his isolated abode?
What should be
the ways of his speech?
What should be
his range there of action?
What should be
a resolute monk’s
precepts & practices?2
Undertaking what training
— alone, astute, & mindful —
would he blow away
his own impurities
as a silver smith,
those in molten silver?”
The Buddha:
“I will tell you
as one who knows,
what is comfort
for one disaffected
resorting to a remote place,
desiring self-awakening
in line with the Dhamma.
An enlightened monk,
living circumscribed,
mindful,
shouldn’t fear the five fears:
of horseflies, mosquitoes, snakes,
human contact, four-footed beings;
shouldn’t be disturbed
by those following another’s teaching
even on seeing their manifold
terrors;
should overcome still other
further dangers
as he seeks what is skillful.

Touched
by the touch
of discomforts, hunger,
he should endure cold
& inordinate heat.
He with no home,
in many ways touched by these things,
striving, should make firm his persistence.

He shouldn’t commit a theft,
shouldn’t speak a lie,
should touch with thoughts of good will
beings firm & infirm.
Conscious of when
his mind is stirred up & turbid,
he should dispel it:
‘It’s on the Dark One’s side.’

He shouldn’t come under the sway
of anger or pride.
Having dug up their root
he would stand firm.
Then, when prevailing
— yes —
he’d prevail over his sense of dear & undear.
Yearning for discernment
enraptured with what’s admirable,
he should overcome these dangers,
should conquer discontent
in his isolated spot,
should conquer these four
thoughts of lament:

‘What will I eat,
or where will I eat.
How badly I slept.
Tonight where will I sleep?’

These lamenting thoughts
he should subdue —
one under training,
wandering without home.
Receiving food & cloth
at appropriate times,
he should have a sense of enough
for the sake of contentment.3
Guarded in regard to these things
going restrained into a village,
even when harassed
he shouldn’t say a harsh word.

With eyes downcast,
& not footloose,
committed to jhana,
he should be continually wakeful.4
Strengthening equanimity,
centered within,
he should cut off any penchant
to conjecture or worry.
When reprimanded,
he should — mindful —
rejoice;5
should smash any stubbornness
toward his fellows in the holy life;
should utter skillful words
that are not untimely;
should give no mind
to the gossip people might say.

And then there are in the world
the five kinds of dust
for whose dispelling, mindful
he should train:
with regard to forms, sounds, tastes,
smells, & tactile sensations
he should conquer passion;
with regard to these things
he should subdue his desire.

A monk, mindful,
his mind well-released,
contemplating the right Dhamma
at the right times,
on coming
to oneness
should annihilate
darkness,”

the Blessed One said.
Notes
1. The Buddha spent his next-to-last lifetime in the Tusita heaven, one of the highest levels on the sensual plane.
2. The fact that the Buddha answers this question in a straightforward manner illustrates the point that abandoning precepts and practices does not mean having no precepts and practices. See note 2 to Sn IV.13.
3. See AN IV.37 and AN VII.64.
4. See AN IV.37.
5. See Dhp 76-77.
See also: AN V.77; AN VIII.30.

Pasura Sutta
To Pasura
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Only here is there purity”
— that’s what they say —
“No other doctrines are pure”
— so they say.
Insisting that what they depend on is good,
they are deeply entrenched in their personal truths.

Seeking controversy, they plunge into an assembly,
regarding one another as fools.
Relying on others’ authority,
they speak in debate.
Desiring praise, they claim to be skilled.

Engaged in disputes in the midst of the assembly,
— anxious, desiring praise —
the one defeated is
chagrined.
Shaken with criticism, he seeks for an opening.

He whose doctrine is [judged as] demolished,
defeated, by those judging the issue:
He laments, he grieves — the inferior exponent.
“He beat me,” he mourns.

These disputes have arisen among contemplatives.
In them are elation,
dejection.
Seeing this, one should abstain from disputes,
for they have no other goal
than the gaining of praise.

He who is praised there
for expounding his doctrine
in the midst of the assembly,
laughs on that account & grows haughty,
attaining his heart’s desire.

That haughtiness will be his grounds for vexation,
for he’ll speak in pride & conceit.
Seeing this, one should abstain from debates.
No purity is attained by them, say the skilled.

Like a strong man nourished on royal food,
you go about, roaring, searching out an opponent.
Wherever the battle is,
go there, strong man.
As before, there’s none here.

Those who dispute, taking hold of a view,
saying, “This, and this only, is true,”
those you can talk to.
Here there is nothing —
no confrontation
at the birth of disputes.

Among those who live above confrontation
not pitting view against view,
whom would you gain as opponent, Pasura,
among those here
who are grasping no more?

So here you come,
conjecturing,
your mind conjuring
viewpoints.
You’re paired off with a pure one
and so cannot proceed.
See also: DN 16 (the Buddha’s answer to Subhadda’s question); MN 18; AN III.67; AN III.72; AN V.159.

Sn IV.9
Magandiya Sutta
To Magandiya
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
[Magandiya offers his daughter to the Buddha, who replies:]
On seeing [the daughters of Mara]
— Discontent, Craving, & Passion —
there wasn’t even the desire for sex.
So what would I want with this,
filled with urine & excrement?
I wouldn’t want to touch it
even with my foot.
Magandiya:
If you don’t want
this gem of a woman, coveted
by many kings,
then for what sort of viewpoint,
precept, practice, life,
attainment of [further] becoming
do you argue?
The Buddha:
‘I argue for this’
doesn’t occur to one
when considering what’s grasped
among doctrines.
Looking for what is ungrasped
with regard to views,
and detecting inner peace,
I saw.
Magandiya:
Sage, you speak
without grasping
at any preconceived judgments.
This ‘inner peace’:
what does it mean?
How is it,
by an enlightened person,
proclaimed?
The Buddha:
He doesn’t speak of purity
in connection with view,
learning,
knowledge,
precept or practice.
Nor is it found by a person
through lack of view,
of learning,
of knowledge,
of precept or practice.1
Letting these go, without grasping,
at peace,
independent,
one wouldn’t long for becoming.
Magandiya:
If he doesn’t speak of purity
in connection with view,
learning,
knowledge,
precept or practice.
and it isn’t found by a person
through lack of view,
of learning,
of knowledge,
of precept or practice,
it seems to me that this teaching’s
confused,
for some assume a purity
in terms of
— by means of —
a view.
The Buddha:
Asking questions
dependent on view,
you’re confused
by what you have grasped.
And so you don’t glimpse
even
the slightest
notion
[of what I am saying].
That’s why you think
it’s confused.

Whoever construes
‘equal,’
’superior,’ or
‘inferior,’
by that he’d dispute;
whereas to one unaffected
by these three,
‘equal,’
’superior,’
do not occur.

Of what would the brahman say ‘true’
or ‘false,’
disputing with whom:
he in whom ‘equal,’ ‘unequal’ are not.

Having abandoned home,
living free from society,
the sage
in villages
creates no intimacies.
Rid of sensual passions, free
from yearning,
he wouldn’t engage with people
in quarrelsome debate.2

Those things
aloof from which
he should go about in the world:
the great one
wouldn’t take them up
& argue for them.

As the prickly lotus
is unsmeared by water & mud,
so the sage,
an exponent of peace,
without greed,
is unsmeared by sensuality &
the world.

An attainer-of-wisdom isn’t measured
made proud3
by views or
by what is thought,
for he isn’t affected by them.
He wouldn’t be led
by action,4 learning;
doesn’t reach a conclusion
in any entrenchments.

For one dispassionate toward perception
there are no ties;
for one released by discernment,
no
delusions.
Those who grasp at perceptions & views
go about butting their heads
in the world.
Notes
1. The Pali of the first sentence puts the words for “view, learning, knowledge, precept, & practice” in the instrumental case. This case stands for the relationship “by means of” or “because of” but it also has an idiomatic meaning: “in terms of.” (To keep the translation neutral on this point, I have translated with the idiom, “in connection with,” which can carry both possibilities.) The second sentence puts the words for lack of view, etc., in the ablative case, which carries the meaning “because of” or “from.”
If we assume that the instrumental case in the first sentence is meant in the sense of “by means of,” then we are dealing — as Magandiya asserts — with plain nonsense: the first sentence would say that a person cannot achieve purity by means of views, etc., while the second sentence would be saying that he cannot achieve purity by means of no view, etc. The fact that the two sentences place the relevant terms in different grammatical cases, though, suggests that they are talking about two different kinds of relationships. If we take the instrumental in the first sentence in the sense of “in terms of,” then the stanza not only makes sense but also fits in with teachings of the rest of the Pali discourses: a person cannot be said to be pure simply because he/she holds to a particular view, body of learning, etc. Purity is not defined in those terms. The second sentence goes on to say that a person doesn’t arrive at purity from a lack of view, etc. Putting the two sentences together with the third, the message is this: One uses right views, learning, knowledge, precepts, & practices as a path, a means for arriving at purity. Once one arrives, one lets go of the path, for the purity of inner peace, in its ultimate sense, is something transcending the means by which it is reached.
In the stanza immediately following this one, it’s obvious that Magandiya has not caught this distinction.
For further illustrations of the role of Right View in taking one to a dimension beyond all views, see AN X.93, AN X.96, and MN 24. (The analogy of the relay coaches in MN 24 actually seems more tailored to the issues raised by the Buddha’s remarks in this discourse than it does to the question it addresses in that discourse.) See also sections III/H and III/H/i in The Wings to Awakening.
2. An explanation of this stanza, attributed to Ven. Maha Kaccana, is contained in SN XXII.3.
3. “Measured… made proud” — two meanings of the Pali word manameti.
4. “Action” here can mean either kamma in its general sense — i.e., the attainer-of-wisdom has gone beyond creating kamma — or in a more restricted sense, as ritual action. According to Nd.I, it refers to the factor of “fabrication” (sankhara) in the analysis of dependent co-arising (see SN XII.2).
See also: SN I.1; Sn V.7.

Sn IV.10
Purabheda Sutta
Before the Break-up of the Body
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Seeing how,
behaving how,
is one said to be
at peace?
Gotama, tell me about
— when asked about —
the ultimate person.”

The Buddha:

“Free from craving
before the break-up
[of the body],
independent
of before
& the end,1
not classified in between,2
no yearning is his.

Un- angered,
un- startled,
un- boastful,
un- anxious,
giving counsel unruffled,
he is a sage,
his speech
under control.

Free from attachment
with regard to the future,
not sorrowing
over the past,
he sees seclusion
in the midst of sensory contacts.3
He can’t be led
in terms of views.4

Withdrawn, un-
deceitful, not
stingy, not
miserly, not
insolent, in-
offensive,
he doesn’t engage in
divisive speech.

Not intoxicated with enticements,
nor given to pride,
he’s gentle, quick-witted,
beyond conviction & dispassion.5

Not in hopes of material gain
does he take on the training;
when without material gain
he isn’t upset.

Unobstructed by craving,
he doesn’t through craving6
hunger for flavors.

Equanimous — always — mindful,
he doesn’t conceive himself as
equal,
superior,
inferior,
in the world.
No swellings of pride
are his.

Whose dependencies
don’t exist
when, on knowing the Dhamma,
he’s in-
dependent;
in whom no craving is found
for becoming or not-:
he is said
to be at peace,
un-intent
on sensual pleasures,
with nothing at all
to tie him down:
one who’s crossed over attachment.

He has no children
cattle,
fields,
land.
In him you can’t pin down
what’s embraced
or rejected,
what’s self
or opposed to self.7
He has no yearning
for that which people run-of-the-mill
or priests & contemplatives
might blame —
which is why
he is unperturbed
with regard to their words.

His greed gone,
not miserly,
the sage
doesn’t speak of himself
as among those who are higher,
equal,
or lower.
He,
conjuring-free,
doesn’t submit
to conjuring,
to the cycling of time.8

For whom
nothing in the world
is his own,
who doesn’t grieve
over what is not,
who doesn’t enter into
doctrines
phenomena:9
he is said
to be
at peace.”
Notes
1. Nd.I: “Independent of before & the end” = no craving or view with regard to past or future.
2. For discussions of how the awakened one cannot be classified even in the present, see MN 72 and SN XXII.85-86.
3. Nd.I: “He sees seclusion in the midst of sensory contacts” = he sees contact as empty of self. This passage may also refer to the fact that the awakened person experiences sensory contact as if disjoined from it. On this point, see MN 140 and MN 146, quoted in The Mind Like Fire Unbound, pp. 116 and 113.
4. See AN X.93.
5. Beyond conviction & dispassion — The Pali here can also mean, “A person of no conviction, he does not put away passion.” This is an example of the kind of pun occasionally used in Pali poetry for its shock value. Other examples are at Dhp 97 and the end of Sn IV.13. For an explanation of what is meant by being beyond dispassion, see note 2 to Sn IV.6.
6. The Pali word tanhaya — by/through craving — here is a “lamp,” i.e., a single word that functions in two separate phrases.
7. “Embraced/rejected, what’s self/what lies against self” — a pun on the pair of Pali words, attam/nirattam.
8. “Conjuring, the cycling of time” — two meanings of the Pali word, kappam.
9. “Doctrines, phenomena” — two meanings of the Pali word, dhamma.

Sn IV.12
Cula-viyuha Sutta
The Lesser Array
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Dwelling on
their own views,
quarreling,
different skilled people say:
‘Whoever knows this, understands Dhamma.
Whoever rejects this, is
imperfect.’
Thus quarreling, they dispute:
‘My opponent’s a fool & unskilled.’
Which of these statements is true
when all of them say they are skilled?”
“If, in not accepting
an opponent’s doctrine,
one’s a fool, a beast of inferior discernment,
then all are fools
of inferior discernment —
all of these
who dwell on their views.
But if, in siding with a view,
one’s cleansed,
with discernment made pure,
intelligent, skilled,
then none of them
are of inferior discernment,
for all of them
have their own views.

I don’t say, ‘That’s how it is,’
the way fools say to one another.
They each make out their views to be true
and so regard their opponents as fools.”

“What some say is true
— ‘That’s how it is’ —
others say is ‘falsehood, a lie.’
Thus quarreling, they dispute.
Why can’t contemplatives
say one thing & the same?”

“The truth is one,1
there is no second
about which a person who knows it
would argue with one who knows.
Contemplatives promote
their various personal truths,
that’s why they don’t say
one thing & the same.”

“But why do they say
various truths,
those who say they are skilled?
Have they learned many various truths
or do they follow conjecture?”

“Apart from their perception
there are no
many
various
constant truths
in the world.2
Preconceiving conjecture
with regard to views,
they speak of a pair: true
& false.
Dependent on what’s seen,
heard,
& sensed,
dependent on precepts & practices,
one shows disdain [for others].
Taking a stance on his decisions,
praising himself, he says,
‘My opponent’s a fool & unskilled.’
That by which
he regards his opponents as fools
is that by which
he says he is skilled.
Calling himself skilled
he despises another
who speaks the same way.

Agreeing on a view gone out of bounds,
drunk with conceit, thinking himself perfect,
he has consecrated, with his own mind,
himself
as well as his view.

If, by an opponent’s word,
one’s inferior,
the opponent’s
of inferior discernment as well.
But if, by one’s own word
one’s an attainer-of-wisdom, enlightened,
no one
among contemplative’s
a fool.

‘Those who teach a doctrine other than this
are lacking in purity,
imperfect.’
That’s what the many sectarians say,
for they’re smitten with passion
for their own views.
‘Only here is there purity,’
that’s what they say.
‘In no other doctrine
is purity,’ they say.
That’s how the many sectarians
are entrenched,
speaking firmly there
concerning their own path.
Speaking firmly concerning your own path,
what opponent here would you take as a fool?
You’d simply bring quarrels on yourself
if you said your opponent’s a fool
with an impure doctrine.

Taking a stance on your decisions,
& yourself as your measure,
you dispute further down
into the world.

But one who’s abandoned
all decisions
creates in the world
quarrels no more.”
Notes
1. “The truth is one”: This statement should be kept in mind throughout the following verses, as it forms the background to the discussion of how people who preconceive their conjectures speak of the pair, true and false. The Buddha is not denying that there is such a thing as true and false. Rather, he is saying that all entrenched views, regardless of how true or false their content might be, when considered as events in a causal chain behave in line with the truth of conditioned phenomena as explained in the preceding discourse. If held to, they lead to conceit, conflict, and states of becoming. When they are viewed in this way — as events rather than as true or false depictions of other events (or as events rather than signs) — the tendency to hold to or become entrenched in them is diminished.
2. On the role of perception in leading to conflicting views, see the preceding discourse.
See also: AN X.93; AN X.96.

Sn IV.13
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/atthakavagga.html

The Atthaka Vagga
(The Octet Chapter)
An Introduction
by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

The Atthaka Vagga1 is a set of sixteen poems on the theme of non-clinging. The poems cover all four types of clinging — clinging to sensuality, to views, to practices and precepts, and to doctrines of the self — with a special emphasis on the first two. They describe what constitutes the nature of the clinging in each particular case, the drawbacks of the clinging, the advantages of abandoning clinging, ways to abandon clinging, and the subtle paradoxes of what it means not to cling.

This last point is touched on in many discourses in the Pali Canon, as the Buddhist teachings on non-clinging all contain a central paradox: the objects of clinging that must ultimately be abandoned form part of the path to their abandoning. A certain amount of sensual pleasure is needed in the path to go beyond sensual pleasure; Right View is needed to overcome attachment to views; a regimen of precepts and practices is needed to overcome attachment to precepts and practices; a strong sense of self-responsibility is needed to overcome attachment to doctrines of the self.2 Other passages in the Pali Canon offer clear analogies to explain these paradoxes, often in terms of movement toward a goal — taking a raft across a river, walking to a park, taking a series of relay coaches from one city to another — in which the motive and means of transport are abandoned on reaching the goal. The Atthaka, however, sometimes presents these paradoxes in as mystifying a manner as possible. In fact, some of the paradoxes — particularly in the discussions of abandoning clinging to views — are stated in terms so stark that, on the surface, they are hard to reconcile with teachings in other Pali discourses or with other passages in the Atthaka itself. The question is thus whether these paradoxes should be taken at face value or further interpreted. Or, to put the question in terms used by the Buddha himself (AN II.25): Is their meaning, as stated, already fully drawn out or does it have to be inferred? Readers of the poems have offered arguments for both sides.

The argument for taking the paradoxes at face value is based on a major assumption: that the Atthaka is historically prior to the rest of the Pali Canon. From this assumption, the argument goes on to conclude that these poems contain the earliest recorded teachings of the Buddha, and that if they conflict with other passages in the Canon, that is simply because those other passages are less true to the Buddha’s original message. This argument, however, contains several weaknesses. To begin with, only two pieces of evidence are offered for the relative age of these poems: (1) the Atthaka Vagga, as a set, is mentioned at three other points in the Canon, at Ud V.6, Mv. V, and SN XXII.3;3 and (2) the language of the poems is more archaic than that of the other discourses. However, neither piece of evidence can carry the weight of what it’s supposed to prove. The first piece shows simply that an Atthaka Vagga predates the three passages in question, not necessarily that the Atthaka Vagga as we have it predates the entire remainder of the Canon. As for the archaic nature of the language, that is common to a great deal of the poetry throughout the Pali Canon. Just as Tennyson’s poetry contains more archaisms than Dryden’s prose, the fact that a Pali poem uses archaic language is no proof of its actual age.
The arguments for taking the Atthaka’s paradoxes at face value contain other weaknesses as well. They commonly state that the paradoxes teach a view of no views and a practice of no goals, yet the people who advance this argument are the first to admit that such doctrines are totally impractical. These doctrines are also inconsistent with other passages in the Atthaka itself, such as the clear-cut view explaining the sources of conflict, presented in Sn IV.11, and the frequent references to Unbinding (nibbana/nibbuti) as the goal of the practice. Thus even if the Atthaka is appreciably older than the other Pali discourses, we would have to assume gross inconsistencies in its message if we were to take its paradoxes at face value.

The argument that the meaning of the Atthaka’s paradoxes must be inferred — that they were intentionally stated in obscure terms — is based on firmer ground. To begin with, this is the interpretation that Buddhist tradition has advanced from its earliest centuries. An extended commentary, entitled the Mahaniddesa (Nd.I), reconciling the content of the poems with the teachings in the rest of the discourses, was compiled early enough to be included in the Canon itself. Although some of the explanations given in the Mahaniddesa may seem a little too pat and pedantic, they make clear the point that Buddhists near the time of the Buddha found many useful levels of meaning below the surface level of the poems.

Even if we disregard arguments from tradition, there are other good reasons for maintaining that the meaning of the Atthaka’s paradoxes was designed to be inferred. To begin with there is the question, already mentioned, of the internal consistency of the poems themselves: they make better sense, when taken as a whole, if the paradoxes are explored for meanings not obvious on the surface. A prime example is the passage toward the beginning of Sn IV.9, in which the Buddha seems to be saying that an awakened person would regard purity as being found neither by means of views, precepts and practices, etc., nor through lack of views, precepts and practices, etc. Magandiya, the Buddha’s listener, states understandably that such a teaching is confused. Readers who have acquired a taste for Mahayana non-dualities, and who would take the Buddha’s statement at face value, might scoff at Magandiya’s narrow-mindedness. But, if the words are taken at face value, Magandiya would be right, for there are many passages in the Atthaka that recommend views, precepts, and practices as part of the path to purity. However, if we take the Buddha’s statements as puns on the instrumental case — which can be interpreted not only as “through” or “by means of,” but also as “in terms of” or “in connection with,” the Buddha’s statements to Magandiya make sense in and of themselves, and fit with the rest of the Atthaka: an awakened person would not define purity in terms of views, precepts and practices, etc., but would also realize that purity cannot be attained through a lack of these things.

A second reason for regarding the paradoxes as requiring interpretation is that, in their use of puns and grammatical word-play, they follow an ancient Indian genre — the philosophical enigma — that by its very nature called for extensive interpretation. Evidence in the Rig Veda shows that ancient Vedic ritual included contests in which elder brahmans used puns and other word-play to express philosophical teachings as riddles that contestants were then challenged to solve.4 The purpose of these contests was to teach the contestants — usually students studying to become ritual experts — to use their powers of ingenuity in thinking “outside the box,” in the justified belief that the process of searching for inspiration and being illuminated by the answer would transform the mind in a much deeper way than would be achieved simply by absorbing information. 5
Although the Atthaka poems advise against engaging in intellectual contests, they imitate the Vedic enigmas in the way they use language to challenge the reader. Individual words — sometimes whole lines and stanzas — in the poems can be interpreted in a variety of ways, and it’s up to the reader to explore and consider all the various meanings to decide which ones are most helpful. Although our culture associates word-play with jokes, the Atthaka stands at the head of a long line of Buddhist texts — both Theravada and not — that use word-play with a serious purpose: to teach the reader to think independently, to see through the uncertainties of language and so to help loosen any clinging to the structures that language imposes on the mind.6 This type of rhetoric also rewards anyone who takes the text seriously enough to re-read and re-think what it has to say.

Thus, the obscurity of some of the Atthaka’s language can be regarded as a function, not of the poems’ age, but of the genre to which they belong. The proper reading of a text like this requires that you question your assumptions about its message and clarify the intention behind your efforts at reaching an understanding. In this way, the act of reading is meant not only to inform but to transform. The more you give to it, the more it opens up new possibilities in the mind.
Translating word-play of this sort presents enormous challenges; even when those challenges are surmounted, the act of reading such word games in translation can never be quite the same as reading them in the original language and cultural setting. Fortunately, aside from the more controversial passages, much of the Atthaka is perfectly straightforward — although Ven. Maha Kaccana’s commentary on one of the simpler verses in IV.9 should serve as warning that even the straightforward passages can contain hidden meanings. In passages where I have detected multiple meanings, I’ve included all the detected meanings in the translation — although I’m sure that there are instances of double meanings that I haven’t detected. Wherever the Pali seems ambiguous, I’ve tried to use English equivalents that convey the same ambiguity. Wherever this has proven beyond my abilities, I’ve resorted to explanatory notes. I have also used the notes to cite interpretations from the Mahaniddesa and other passages from earlier parts of the Canon that help explain paradoxes and other obscure points — both as an aid to the serious reader and as a way of showing that the gulf assumed to separate the Atthaka from the rest of the discourse collection is more imagined than real.

Two final notes on reading the Atthaka:

1. Although these poems were originally composed for an audience of wandering, homeless monks, they offer valuable lessons for lay people as well. Even the passages referring directly to the homeless life can be read as symbolic of a state of mind. Ven. Maha Kaccana’s commentary, mentioned above, shows that this has been done ever since canonical times. Addressing a lay person, and commenting on a verse describing the behavior of a sage who has abandoned home and society, he interprets “home” as the khandhas and “society” as sense impressions. Thus in his hands the verse develops an internal meaning that lay people can apply to their lives without necessarily leaving their external home and society. Other verses in the poems can be interpreted in similar ways.

2. The poems center on descriptions of sages (muni) and enlightened people (dhira), but these words don’t have fixed meanings from verse to verse. In some contexts, they denote arahants; in others, nothing more than intelligent run-of-the-mill people. So be alert to context when reading descriptions about sages and enlightened people, to see whether they’re describing people following the path or those who have already reached the goal.
Notes
1. The name of the Atthaka (Octets) derives from the fact that the first four poems in the set — three of which contain the word atthaka in their titles — are composed of eight verses. From this fact, some scholars have argued that these four poems constitute the original collection, and that the other poems are later additions, but this is not necessarily the case. Many of the vaggas (chapters) in the discourse and Vinaya collections are named after the first few members of the chapter, even though the remaining members may contain material that differs radically from what would be suggested by the title of the chapter. Thus there is no way of knowing the relative ages of the different poems in the collection.
2. For a discussion of the four types of clinging, see The Mind Like Fire Unbound, chapter 3.
3. Ven. Maha Kaccana — praised by the Buddha as foremost among his disciples in his ability to draw out the meaning of concise statements — is mentioned in connection with the Atthaka in all three locations. As a well-educated brahman, he would have been trained in detecting and resolving philosophical enigmas. His personal reputation indicates that he enjoyed doing so.
4. On this point, see Willard Johnson’s book, Poetry and Speculation of the Rig Veda, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980.
5. By the Buddha’s time, these contests had left the ritual arena and had become public philosophical debates much closer to our current notion of a formal debate. However, they were driven by an assumption — derived from the belief in the spiritual transformation that accompanied the correct solution of the philosophical enigma — that holding a winning view was, in and of itself, the measure of a person’s high spiritual attainment. The paradoxes in the Atthaka attack this assumption by — paradoxically — making use of the genre of philosophical enigma from which it ultimately derived.
6. Other examples of such word-play in the Pali Canon include SN I.1 and Dhp 97. For more modern examples of Buddhist texts using word play with a serious purpose, see A Heart Released and The Ballad of Liberation from the Khandhas, both by Phra Ajaan Mun Bhuridatto.
See also: “Parayana Vagga (The Chapter on the Way to the Far Shore): An Introduction,” by the same author.
Kama Sutta
Sensual Pleasure
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

If one, longing for sensual pleasure,
achieves it, yes,
he’s enraptured at heart.
The mortal gets what he wants.
But if for that person
— longing, desiring —
the pleasures diminish,
he’s shattered,
as if shot with an arrow.

Whoever avoids sensual desires
— as he would, with his foot,
the head of a snake —
goes beyond, mindful,
this attachment in the world.

A man who is greedy
for fields, land, gold,
cattle, horses,
servants, employees,
women, relatives,
many sensual pleasures,
is overpowered with weakness
and trampled by trouble,
for pain invades him
as water, a cracked boat.

So one, always mindful,
should avoid sensual desires.
Letting them go,
he’d cross over the flood
like one who, having bailed out the boat,
has reached the far shore.

Sn IV.2
Guhatthaka Sutta
The Cave of the Body
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

Staying attached to the cave,
covered heavily over,1
a person sunk in confusion
is far from seclusion —
for sensual pleasures
sensual desires2
in the world
are not lightly let go.

Those chained by desire,
bound by becoming’s allure,
aren’t easily released
for there’s no liberation by others.
Intent, in front or behind,3
on hunger for sensual pleasures
here or before —
greedy
for sensual pleasures,
busy, deluded, ungenerous,
entrenched in the out-of-tune way,4
they — impelled into pain — lament:
“What will we be
when we pass on from here?”

So a person should train
right here & now.
Whatever you know
as out-of-tune in the world,
don’t, for its sake, act out-of-tune,
for that life, the enlightened say,
is short.

I see them,
in the world, floundering around,
people immersed in craving
for states of becoming.
Base people moan in the mouth of death,
their craving, for states of becoming & not-,5
unallayed.

See them,
floundering in their sense of mine,
like fish in the puddles
of a dried-up stream —
and, seeing this,
live with no mine,
not forming attachment
for states of becoming.
Subdue desire
for both sides,6
comprehending7 sensory contact,
with no greed.

Doing nothing for which
he himself
would rebuke himself,
the enlightened person doesn’t adhere
to what’s seen,
to what’s heard.
Comprehending perception,
he’d cross over the flood —
the sage not stuck
on possessions.
Then, with arrow removed,
living heedfully, he longs for neither —
this world,
the next.
Notes
1. Nd.I: “Covered heavily over” with defilements and unskillful mental qualities.
2. “Sensual desires/sensual pleasures”: two possible meanings of kama. According to Nd.I, both meanings are intended here.
3. Nd.I: “In front” means experienced in the past (as does “before” two lines down); “behind” means to-be-experienced in the future.
4. Nd.I: “The out-of-tune way” means the ten types of unskillful action (see AN X.176).
5. States of not-becoming are oblivious states of becoming that people can get themselves into through a desire for annihilation, either after death or as a goal of their religious striving (see Iti 49). As with all states of becoming, these states are impermanent and stressful.
6. According to Nd.I, “both sides” here has several possible meanings: sensory contact and the origination of sensory contact; past and future; name and form; internal and external sense media; self-identity and the origination of self-identity. It also might mean states of becoming and not-becoming, mentioned in the previous verse and below, in Sn IV.5.
7. Nd.I: Comprehending sensory contact has three aspects: being able to identify and distinguish types of sensory contact; contemplating the true nature of sensory contact (e.g., inconstant, stressful, and not-self); and abandoning attachment to sensory contact. The same three aspects would apply to comprehending perception, as mentioned in the following verse.
See also: AN IV.184.

Sn IV.3
Dutthatthaka Sutta
Corrupted
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

There are some who dispute
corrupted at heart,
and those who dispute
their hearts set on truth,
but a sage doesn’t enter
a dispute that’s arisen,
which is why he is
nowhere constrained.

Now, how would one
led on by desire,
entrenched in his likes,
forming his own conclusions,
overcome his own views?
He’d dispute in line
with the way that he knows.

Whoever boasts to others, unasked,
of his practices, precepts,
is, say the skilled,
ignoble by nature —
he who speaks of himself
of his own accord.

But a monk at peace,
fully unbound in himself,
who doesn’t boast of his precepts
— “That’s how I am” —
he, say the skilled,
is noble by nature —
he with no vanity
with regard to the world.

One whose doctrines aren’t clean —
fabricated, formed, given preference
when he sees it to his own advantage —
relies on a peace
dependent
on what can be shaken.

Because entrenchments1 in views
aren’t easily overcome
when considering what’s grasped
among doctrines,
that’s why
a person embraces or rejects a doctrine —
in light of these very
entrenchments.

Now, one who is cleansed2
has no preconceived view
about states of becoming
or not-
anywhere in the world.
Having abandoned conceit3 & illusion,
by what means would he go?4
He isn’t involved.

For one who’s involved
gets into disputes
over doctrines,
but how — in connection with what — 5
would you argue
with one uninvolved?
He has nothing
embraced or rejected,
has sloughed off every view
right here — every one.
Notes
1. Entrenchments: a rendering of the Pali term, nivesana, which can also be rendered as abode, situation, home, or establishment.
2. Nd.I: Cleansed through discernment.
3. Nd.I explains a variety of ways of understanding the word “conceit,” the most comprehensive being a list of nine kinds of conceit: viewing people better than oneself as worse than oneself, on a par with oneself, or better than oneself; viewing people on a par with oneself as worse than oneself, on a par with oneself, or better than oneself; viewing people worse than oneself as worse than oneself, on a par with oneself, or better than oneself. In other words, the truth of the view is not the issue here; the issue is the tendency to compare oneself with others.
4. Nd.I: “By what means would he go” to any destination in any state of becoming.
5. In connection with what: a rendering of the instrumental case that attempts to cover several of its meanings, in particular “by what means” and “in terms of what.” For a discussion of the use of the instrumental case in the Atthaka Vagga, see note 1 to Sn IV.9.
Sn IV.4
Suddhatthaka Sutta
On Purity
Translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
Alternate translation:
Ireland
Thanissaro
“‘Here I see one who is pure, entirely free of sickness. By seeing him a man may attain to purity!’
“Convinced of that and thinking it ‘the highest,’ he believes it to be knowledge when he contemplates ‘the pure one.’1 But if by sights man can gain purification or if through such knowledge he could leave suffering behind, then, one who still has attachments could be purified by another.2 However, this is merely the opinion of those who so assert.
“The (true) brahmana3 has said one is not purified by another, nor by what is seen, heard or perceived (by the other senses), nor, by the performance of ritual observances. He (the true brahmana) is not defiled by merit or demerit. Having given up what he had (previously) grasped at, he no longer engages in producing (any kamma). Having left a former (object) they attach themselves to another, dominated by craving they do not go beyond attachment. They reject and seize, like a monkey letting go of a branch to take hold of another.
“A person having undertaken a ritual act goes this way and that, fettered by his senses. But one with a wide wisdom, having understood and gone into the Dhamma with his experience, does not go this way and that. For a person indifferent towards all conditions, whatever is seen, heard or cognized, he is one who sees it as it really is and lives with clarity (of mind). With what could he be identified in the world?
“They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion), they do not claim perfect purity. Loosening the knot (of clinging) with which they are bound, they do not have longing anywhere in the world. The (true) brahmana who has gone beyond limitations, having understood and seen there is no longer any assumption for him, he is neither disturbed by lust nor agitated by revulsion. For him there is nothing upheld as ‘the highest.’”
Notes
1. This refers to the old Indian belief in “auspicious sights” (dittha-mangala), the belief that by merely beholding something or someone regarded as a holy object or person, purity, or whatever else is desired, may be gained.
2. By another method, other than that of the Noble Eightfold Path (Comy.); but it could also mean, “by the sight of another person.”
3. I.e., the Buddha.
Sn IV.5
Paramatthaka Sutta
On Views
Translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
Alternate translation:
Ireland
Thanissaro

“A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others). In what is seen, heard, cognized and in ritual observances performed, he sees a profit for himself. Just by laying hold of that view he regards every other view as worthless. Those skilled (in judgment)1 say that (a view becomes) a bond if, relying on it, one regards everything else as inferior. Therefore a bhikkhu should not depend on what is seen, heard or cognized, nor upon ritual observances. He should not present himself as equal to, nor imagine himself to be inferior, nor better than, another. Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. Among those who dispute he is certainly not one to take sides. He does not [have] recourse to a view at all. In whom there is no inclination to either extreme, for becoming or non-becoming, here or in another existence, for him there does not exist a fixed viewpoint on investigating the doctrines assumed (by others). Concerning the seen, the heard and the cognized he does not form the least notion. That brahmana2 who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world?
“They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views.”
Notes
1. I.e., the Buddhas and their disciples who have realized the goal.
2. I.e., a perfected one.
Sn IV.6
Jara Sutta
On Decay
Translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
Alternate translation:
Ireland
Thanissaro
“Short indeed is this life, this side of a hundred years one dies; whoever lives long even he dies from old age. People grieve for things they are attached to, yet there exist no permanent possessions but just a state of (constant) separation. Seeing this one should no longer live the household life. That which a man imagines to be his will disappear at death. Knowing this a wise man will have no attachment (to anything).
“As a man awakened from sleep no longer sees what happened in his dream, similarly one does not see a loved one who is dead. Those people who were seen and heard and called by their names as such and such, only their names remain when they have passed away. Those greedy for objects of attachment do not abandon sorrow, grief and avarice, but sages having got rid of possessions, live perceiving security. For a bhikkhu with a detached mind, living in a secluded dwelling, it is right, they say, that he no longer shows himself in the abodes (of existence).1
“A sage who is completely independent does not make close friends or enemies. In him sorrow and selfishness do not stay, like water on a lotus leaf. As a lotus is not wetted by water, so a sage is not affected by what is seen or heard, nor by what is perceived by the other senses. A wise man is not deluded by what is perceived by the senses. He does not expect purity by any other way.2 He is neither pleased nor is he repelled (by the six sense-objects).”
Notes
1. There is a play on words here: “bhavana,” besides meaning “an abode of existence” also means “a house.” So as well as saying, he is not reborn into any realm of existence, the passage also indicates he lives secluded and does not associate with people in the village.
2. By any way other than the Noble Eightfold Path (Comy).
Sn IV.7
Tissa Metteyya Sutta
Tissa Metteyya
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Tell the danger, dear sir,
for one given over
to sexual intercourse.
Having heard your teaching,
we’ll train in seclusion.”
The Buddha:
“In one given over
to sexual intercourse,
the teaching’s confused
and he practices wrongly:
this is ignoble
in him.
Whoever once went alone,
but then resorts
to sexual intercourse
— like a carriage out of control —
is called vile in the world,
a person run-of-the-mill.
His earlier honor & dignity:
lost.
Seeing this,
he should train himself
to abandon sexual intercourse.

Overcome by resolves,
he broods
like a miserable wretch.
Hearing the scorn of others,
he’s chagrined.
He makes weapons,
attacked by the words of others.
This, for him, is a great entanglement.
He
sinks
into lies.

They thought him wise
when he committed himself
to the life alone,
but now that he’s given
to sexual intercourse
they declare him a fool.

Seeing these drawbacks, the sage
here — before & after —
stays firm in the life alone;
doesn’t resort to sexual intercourse;
would train himself
in seclusion —
this, for the noble ones, is
supreme.
He wouldn’t, because of that,
think himself
better than others:
He’s on the verge
of Unbinding.

People enmeshed
in sensual pleasures,
envy him: free,
a sage
leading his life
unconcerned for sensual pleasures
— one who’s crossed over the flood.”
See also: AN IV.159; AN V.75; AN V.76.
Sn IV.8
Pasura Sutta
To Pasura
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Only here is there purity”
— that’s what they say —
“No other doctrines are pure”
— so they say.
Insisting that what they depend on is good,
they are deeply entrenched in their personal truths.

Seeking controversy, they plunge into an assembly,
regarding one another as fools.
Relying on others’ authority,
they speak in debate.
Desiring praise, they claim to be skilled.

Engaged in disputes in the midst of the assembly,
— anxious, desiring praise —
the one defeated is
chagrined.
Shaken with criticism, he seeks for an opening.

He whose doctrine is [judged as] demolished,
defeated, by those judging the issue:
He laments, he grieves — the inferior exponent.
“He beat me,” he mourns.

These disputes have arisen among contemplatives.
In them are elation,
dejection.
Seeing this, one should abstain from disputes,
for they have no other goal
than the gaining of praise.

He who is praised there
for expounding his doctrine
in the midst of the assembly,
laughs on that account & grows haughty,
attaining his heart’s desire.

That haughtiness will be his grounds for vexation,
for he’ll speak in pride & conceit.
Seeing this, one should abstain from debates.
No purity is attained by them, say the skilled.

Like a strong man nourished on royal food,
you go about, roaring, searching out an opponent.
Wherever the battle is,
go there, strong man.
As before, there’s none here.

Those who dispute, taking hold of a view,
saying, “This, and this only, is true,”
those you can talk to.
Here there is nothing —
no confrontation
at the birth of disputes.

Among those who live above confrontation
not pitting view against view,
whom would you gain as opponent, Pasura,
among those here
who are grasping no more?

So here you come,
conjecturing,
your mind conjuring
viewpoints.
You’re paired off with a pure one
and so cannot proceed.
See also: DN 16 (the Buddha’s answer to Subhadda’s question); MN 18; AN III.67; AN III.72; AN V.159.
Sn IV.9
Magandiya Sutta
To Magandiya
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
[Magandiya offers his daughter to the Buddha, who replies:]
On seeing [the daughters of Mara]
— Discontent, Craving, & Passion —
there wasn’t even the desire for sex.
So what would I want with this,
filled with urine & excrement?
I wouldn’t want to touch it
even with my foot.
Magandiya:
If you don’t want
this gem of a woman, coveted
by many kings,
then for what sort of viewpoint,
precept, practice, life,
attainment of [further] becoming
do you argue?
The Buddha:
‘I argue for this’
doesn’t occur to one
when considering what’s grasped
among doctrines.
Looking for what is ungrasped
with regard to views,
and detecting inner peace,
I saw.
Magandiya:
Sage, you speak
without grasping
at any preconceived judgments.
This ‘inner peace’:
what does it mean?
How is it,
by an enlightened person,
proclaimed?
The Buddha:
He doesn’t speak of purity
in connection with view,
learning,
knowledge,
precept or practice.
Nor is it found by a person
through lack of view,
of learning,
of knowledge,
of precept or practice.1
Letting these go, without grasping,
at peace,
independent,
one wouldn’t long for becoming.
Magandiya:
If he doesn’t speak of purity
in connection with view,
learning,
knowledge,
precept or practice.
and it isn’t found by a person
through lack of view,
of learning,
of knowledge,
of precept or practice,
it seems to me that this teaching’s
confused,
for some assume a purity
in terms of
— by means of —
a view.
The Buddha:
Asking questions
dependent on view,
you’re confused
by what you have grasped.
And so you don’t glimpse
even
the slightest
notion
[of what I am saying].
That’s why you think
it’s confused.

Whoever construes
‘equal,’
’superior,’ or
‘inferior,’
by that he’d dispute;
whereas to one unaffected
by these three,
‘equal,’
’superior,’
do not occur.

Of what would the brahman say ‘true’
or ‘false,’
disputing with whom:
he in whom ‘equal,’ ‘unequal’ are not.

Having abandoned home,
living free from society,
the sage
in villages
creates no intimacies.
Rid of sensual passions, free
from yearning,
he wouldn’t engage with people
in quarrelsome debate.2

Those things
aloof from which
he should go about in the world:
the great one
wouldn’t take them up
& argue for them.

As the prickly lotus
is unsmeared by water & mud,
so the sage,
an exponent of peace,
without greed,
is unsmeared by sensuality &
the world.

An attainer-of-wisdom isn’t measured
made proud3
by views or
by what is thought,
for he isn’t affected by them.
He wouldn’t be led
by action,4 learning;
doesn’t reach a conclusion
in any entrenchments.

For one dispassionate toward perception
there are no ties;
for one released by discernment,
no
delusions.
Those who grasp at perceptions & views
go about butting their heads
in the world.
Notes
1. The Pali of the first sentence puts the words for “view, learning, knowledge, precept, & practice” in the instrumental case. This case stands for the relationship “by means of” or “because of” but it also has an idiomatic meaning: “in terms of.” (To keep the translation neutral on this point, I have translated with the idiom, “in connection with,” which can carry both possibilities.) The second sentence puts the words for lack of view, etc., in the ablative case, which carries the meaning “because of” or “from.”
If we assume that the instrumental case in the first sentence is meant in the sense of “by means of,” then we are dealing — as Magandiya asserts — with plain nonsense: the first sentence would say that a person cannot achieve purity by means of views, etc., while the second sentence would be saying that he cannot achieve purity by means of no view, etc. The fact that the two sentences place the relevant terms in different grammatical cases, though, suggests that they are talking about two different kinds of relationships. If we take the instrumental in the first sentence in the sense of “in terms of,” then the stanza not only makes sense but also fits in with teachings of the rest of the Pali discourses: a person cannot be said to be pure simply because he/she holds to a particular view, body of learning, etc. Purity is not defined in those terms. The second sentence goes on to say that a person doesn’t arrive at purity from a lack of view, etc. Putting the two sentences together with the third, the message is this: One uses right views, learning, knowledge, precepts, & practices as a path, a means for arriving at purity. Once one arrives, one lets go of the path, for the purity of inner peace, in its ultimate sense, is something transcending the means by which it is reached.
In the stanza immediately following this one, it’s obvious that Magandiya has not caught this distinction.
For further illustrations of the role of Right View in taking one to a dimension beyond all views, see AN X.93, AN X.96, and MN 24. (The analogy of the relay coaches in MN 24 actually seems more tailored to the issues raised by the Buddha’s remarks in this discourse than it does to the question it addresses in that discourse.) See also sections III/H and III/H/i in The Wings to Awakening.
2. An explanation of this stanza, attributed to Ven. Maha Kaccana, is contained in SN XXII.3.
3. “Measured… made proud” — two meanings of the Pali word manameti.
4. “Action” here can mean either kamma in its general sense — i.e., the attainer-of-wisdom has gone beyond creating kamma — or in a more restricted sense, as ritual action. According to Nd.I, it refers to the factor of “fabrication” (sankhara) in the analysis of dependent co-arising (see SN XII.2).
See also: SN I.1; Sn V.7.
Sn IV.10
Purabheda Sutta
Before the Break-up of the Body
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Seeing how,
behaving how,
is one said to be
at peace?
Gotama, tell me about
— when asked about —
the ultimate person.”

The Buddha:

“Free from craving
before the break-up
[of the body],
independent
of before
& the end,1
not classified in between,2
no yearning is his.

Un- angered,
un- startled,
un- boastful,
un- anxious,
giving counsel unruffled,
he is a sage,
his speech
under control.

Free from attachment
with regard to the future,
not sorrowing
over the past,
he sees seclusion
in the midst of sensory contacts.3
He can’t be led
in terms of views.4

Withdrawn, un-
deceitful, not
stingy, not
miserly, not
insolent, in-
offensive,
he doesn’t engage in
divisive speech.

Not intoxicated with enticements,
nor given to pride,
he’s gentle, quick-witted,
beyond conviction & dispassion.5

Not in hopes of material gain
does he take on the training;
when without material gain
he isn’t upset.

Unobstructed by craving,
he doesn’t through craving6
hunger for flavors.

Equanimous — always — mindful,
he doesn’t conceive himself as
equal,
superior,
inferior,
in the world.
No swellings of pride
are his.

Whose dependencies
don’t exist
when, on knowing the Dhamma,
he’s in-
dependent;
in whom no craving is found
for becoming or not-:
he is said
to be at peace,
un-intent
on sensual pleasures,
with nothing at all
to tie him down:
one who’s crossed over attachment.

He has no children
cattle,
fields,
land.
In him you can’t pin down
what’s embraced
or rejected,
what’s self
or opposed to self.7
He has no yearning
for that which people run-of-the-mill
or priests & contemplatives
might blame —
which is why
he is unperturbed
with regard to their words.

His greed gone,
not miserly,
the sage
doesn’t speak of himself
as among those who are higher,
equal,
or lower.
He,
conjuring-free,
doesn’t submit
to conjuring,
to the cycling of time.8

For whom
nothing in the world
is his own,
who doesn’t grieve
over what is not,
who doesn’t enter into
doctrines
phenomena:9
he is said
to be
at peace.”
Notes
1. Nd.I: “Independent of before & the end” = no craving or view with regard to past or future.
2. For discussions of how the awakened one cannot be classified even in the present, see MN 72 and SN XXII.85-86.
3. Nd.I: “He sees seclusion in the midst of sensory contacts” = he sees contact as empty of self. This passage may also refer to the fact that the awakened person experiences sensory contact as if disjoined from it. On this point, see MN 140 and MN 146, quoted in The Mind Like Fire Unbound, pp. 116 and 113.
4. See AN X.93.
5. Beyond conviction & dispassion — The Pali here can also mean, “A person of no conviction, he does not put away passion.” This is an example of the kind of pun occasionally used in Pali poetry for its shock value. Other examples are at Dhp 97 and the end of Sn IV.13. For an explanation of what is meant by being beyond dispassion, see note 2 to Sn IV.6.
6. The Pali word tanhaya — by/through craving — here is a “lamp,” i.e., a single word that functions in two separate phrases.
7. “Embraced/rejected, what’s self/what lies against self” — a pun on the pair of Pali words, attam/nirattam.
8. “Conjuring, the cycling of time” — two meanings of the Pali word, kappam.
9. “Doctrines, phenomena” — two meanings of the Pali word, dhamma.
Sn IV.12
Cula-viyuha Sutta
The Lesser Array
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Dwelling on
their own views,
quarreling,
different skilled people say:
‘Whoever knows this, understands Dhamma.
Whoever rejects this, is
imperfect.’
Thus quarreling, they dispute:
‘My opponent’s a fool & unskilled.’
Which of these statements is true
when all of them say they are skilled?”
“If, in not accepting
an opponent’s doctrine,
one’s a fool, a beast of inferior discernment,
then all are fools
of inferior discernment —
all of these
who dwell on their views.
But if, in siding with a view,
one’s cleansed,
with discernment made pure,
intelligent, skilled,
then none of them
are of inferior discernment,
for all of them
have their own views.

I don’t say, ‘That’s how it is,’
the way fools say to one another.
They each make out their views to be true
and so regard their opponents as fools.”

“What some say is true
— ‘That’s how it is’ —
others say is ‘falsehood, a lie.’
Thus quarreling, they dispute.
Why can’t contemplatives
say one thing & the same?”

“The truth is one,1
there is no second
about which a person who knows it
would argue with one who knows.
Contemplatives promote
their various personal truths,
that’s why they don’t say
one thing & the same.”

“But why do they say
various truths,
those who say they are skilled?
Have they learned many various truths
or do they follow conjecture?”

“Apart from their perception
there are no
many
various
constant truths
in the world.2
Preconceiving conjecture
with regard to views,
they speak of a pair: true
& false.
Dependent on what’s seen,
heard,
& sensed,
dependent on precepts & practices,
one shows disdain [for others].
Taking a stance on his decisions,
praising himself, he says,
‘My opponent’s a fool & unskilled.’
That by which
he regards his opponents as fools
is that by which
he says he is skilled.
Calling himself skilled
he despises another
who speaks the same way.

Agreeing on a view gone out of bounds,
drunk with conceit, thinking himself perfect,
he has consecrated, with his own mind,
himself
as well as his view.

If, by an opponent’s word,
one’s inferior,
the opponent’s
of inferior discernment as well.
But if, by one’s own word
one’s an attainer-of-wisdom, enlightened,
no one
among contemplative’s
a fool.

‘Those who teach a doctrine other than this
are lacking in purity,
imperfect.’
That’s what the many sectarians say,
for they’re smitten with passion
for their own views.
‘Only here is there purity,’
that’s what they say.
‘In no other doctrine
is purity,’ they say.
That’s how the many sectarians
are entrenched,
speaking firmly there
concerning their own path.
Speaking firmly concerning your own path,
what opponent here would you take as a fool?
You’d simply bring quarrels on yourself
if you said your opponent’s a fool
with an impure doctrine.

Taking a stance on your decisions,
& yourself as your measure,
you dispute further down
into the world.

But one who’s abandoned
all decisions
creates in the world
quarrels no more.”
Notes
1. “The truth is one”: This statement should be kept in mind throughout the following verses, as it forms the background to the discussion of how people who preconceive their conjectures speak of the pair, true and false. The Buddha is not denying that there is such a thing as true and false. Rather, he is saying that all entrenched views, regardless of how true or false their content might be, when considered as events in a causal chain behave in line with the truth of conditioned phenomena as explained in the preceding discourse. If held to, they lead to conceit, conflict, and states of becoming. When they are viewed in this way — as events rather than as true or false depictions of other events (or as events rather than signs) — the tendency to hold to or become entrenched in them is diminished.
2. On the role of perception in leading to conflicting views, see the preceding discourse.
See also: AN X.93; AN X.96.
Sn IV.13
Maha-viyuha Sutta
The Great Array
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Those who, dwelling on views,
dispute, saying, ‘Only this is true’:
do they all incur blame,
or also earn praise there?”

“[The praise:] It’s such a little thing,
not at all appeasing.1
I speak of two fruits of dispute;
and seeing this, you shouldn’t dispute —
seeing the state
where there’s no dispute
as secure.
One who knows
doesn’t get involved
in whatever are
commonplace
conventional
views.
One who is uninvolved:
when he’s forming no preference
for what’s seen, for what’s heard,
why would he get
involved?

Those for whom precepts
are ultimate
say that purity’s
a matter of self-restraint.
Undertaking a practice,
they devote themselves to it:
‘Let’s train just in this,
and then there would be purity.’
Those who say they are skilled
are [thus] led on to becoming.
But if one of them falls
from his precepts or practice,
he trembles,
having failed in his actions.
He hopes for, longs for, purity,
like a lost caravan leader
far from home.

But one who’s abandoned
precepts & practices2
— all —
things that are blamable, blameless,3
not hoping for ‘pure or impure,’4
would live in compassion & peace,
without taking up peace,5
detached.

Dependent
on taboos, austerities,
or what’s seen, heard, or sensed,
they speak of purity
through wandering further on
through becoming & not-,
their craving not gone
for becoming & not-.6
For one who aspires has longings
& trembling with regard to preconceptions.
But one who here
has no passing away & arising:
Why would he tremble?
For what would he long?”

“The teaching some say is ’supreme,’
is the very one others call ‘lowly.’
Which statement is true
when all of these claim to be skilled?”

“They say their own teaching is perfect
while the doctrine of others is lowly.
Thus quarreling, they dispute,
each saying his agreed-on opinion
is true.
If something, because of an opponent’s say-so,
were lowly,
then none among teachings would be
superlative,
for many say
that another’s teaching’s inferior
when firmly asserting their own.
If their worship of their teaching were true,
in line with the way they praise their own path,
then all doctrines
would be true —
for purity’s theirs, according to each.

The brahman has nothing
led by another,
when considering what’s grasped
among doctrines.
Thus he has gone
beyond disputes,
for he doesn’t regard as best
the knowledge of a teaching,
any other mental state.7

‘I know. I see. That’s just how it is!’ —
Some believe purity’s in terms of view.
But even if a person has seen,
what good does it do him?
Having slipped past,
they speak of purity
in connection with something
or somebody else.
A person, in seeing,
sees name & form.
Having seen, he’ll know
only these things.
No matter if he’s seen little, a lot,
the skilled don’t say purity’s
in connection with that.

A person entrenched in his teachings,
honoring a preconceived view,
isn’t easy to discipline.
Whatever he depends on
he describes it as lovely,
says that it’s purity,
that there he saw truth.

The brahman, evaluating,
isn’t involved with conjurings,
doesn’t follow views,
isn’t tied even to knowledge.8
And on knowing
whatever’s conventional, commonplace,
he remains equanimous:
‘That’s what others hold onto.’

Having released the knots
that tie him down,
the sage here in the world
doesn’t follow a faction
when disputes have arisen.
At peace among those not at peace,
he’s equanimous, doesn’t hold on:
‘That’s what others hold onto.’

Giving up old fermentations,
not forming new,
neither pursuing desire,
nor entrenched in his teachings,
he’s totally released
from viewpoints,
enlightened.

He doesn’t adhere to the world,
is without self-rebuke;
is enemy-free9
with regard to all things
seen, heard, or sensed.

His burden laid down,
the sage totally released

is improper / is free from conjuring
hasn’t stopped / isn’t impassioned
isn’t worth wanting / doesn’t
desire,”10

the Blessed One said.
Notes
1. Or: Not enough to appease (the defilements, says Nd.I).
2. Nd.I: Abandoning precepts & practices in the sense of no longer believing that purity is measured in terms of them, the view discussed in the preceding verse.
3. Nd.I: “Blamable, blameless” = black and white kamma (see AN IV.232, 234, 237-238, quoted in The Wings to Awakening, section I/B).
4. Nd.I: Having abandoned impure mental qualities, and having fully attained the goal, the arahant has no need to hope for anything at all.
5. “In compassion & peace, without taking up peace” — a pun on the word, santimanuggahaya.
6. The word bhavabhavesu — through/for becoming & not- becoming — here is a lamp, i.e., a single word functioning in two phrases.
7. “The knowledge of a teaching, any other mental state” — a pun on the word, dhammamaññam.
8. According to Nd.I, this compound — ñana-bandhu — should be translated as “tied by means of knowledge,” in that the arahant doesn’t use the knowledge that comes with the mastery of concentration, the five mundane forms of psychic power (abhiñña), or any wrong knowledge to create the bonds of craving or views. However, the compound may also refer to the fact that the arahant isn’t tied even to the knowledge that forms part of the path to arahantship (see MN 117).
9. See note 7 under Sn IV.4.
10. “Is improper / is free from conjuring, hasn’t stopped / isn’t impassioned, isn’t worth wanting / doesn’t desire” — a series of puns — na kappiyo, nuparato, na patthiyo — each with a strongly positive and a strongly negative meaning, probably meant for their shock value. For a similar set of puns, see Dhp 97.
See also: AN X.93; AN X.96.
Sn IV.14
Tuvataka Sutta
Quickly
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
“I ask the kinsman of the Sun, the great seer,
about seclusion & the state of peace.
Seeing in what way is a monk unbound,
clinging to nothing in the world?”
“He should put an entire stop
to the root of complication-classifications:
‘I am the thinker.’1
He should train, always mindful,
to subdue any craving inside him.
Whatever truth he may know,
within or without,
he shouldn’t get entrenched
in connection with it,
for that isn’t called
Unbinding by the good.
He shouldn’t, because of it, think himself
better,
lower, or
equal.
Touched by contact in various ways,
he shouldn’t keep conjuring self.
Stilled right within,
a monk shouldn’t seek peace from another
from anything else.
For one stilled right within,
there’s nothing embraced,
so how rejected?
Nothing that’s self,
so from whence would there be
against-self?2

As in the middle of the sea
it is still,
with no waves upwelling,
so the monk — unperturbed, still —
should not swell himself
anywhere.”

“He whose eyes are open has described
the Dhamma he’s witnessed,
subduing danger.
Now tell us, sir, the practice:
the code of discipline & concentration.”

“One shouldn’t be careless with his eyes,
should close his ears to village-talk,
shouldn’t hunger for flavors,
or view anything in the world
as mine.
When touched by contact
he shouldn’t lament,
shouldn’t covet anywhere any
states of becoming,
or tremble at terrors.
When gaining food & drink,
staples & cloth,
he should not make a hoard.
Nor should he be upset
when receiving no gains.
Absorbed, not foot-loose,
he should refrain from restlessness,
shouldn’t be heedless,
should live in a noise-less abode.
Not making much of sleep,
ardent, given to wakefulness,
he should abandon sloth, deception,
laughter, sports,
fornication, & all that goes with it;
should not practice charms,
interpret physical marks, dreams,
the stars, animal cries;
should not be devoted to
practicing medicine or inducing fertility.

A monk shouldn’t tremble at blame
or grow haughty with praise;
should thrust aside selfishness, greed,
divisive speech, anger;
shouldn’t buy or sell
or revile anyone anywhere;
shouldn’t linger in villages,
or flatter people in hopes of gains.

A monk shouldn’t boast
or speak with ulterior motive,
shouldn’t train in insolence
or speak quarrelsome words;
shouldn’t engage in deception
or knowingly cheat;
shouldn’t despise others for their
life,
discernment,
precepts,
or practices.
Provoked with many words
from contemplatives
or ordinary people,
he shouldn’t respond harshly,
for those who retaliate
aren’t calm.

Knowing this teaching,
a monk inquiring
should always
train in it mindfully.
Knowing Unbinding as peace,
he shouldn’t be heedless
of Gotama’s message —
for he, the Conqueror unconquered,
witnessed the Dhamma,
not by hearsay,
but directly, himself.
So, heedful, you
should always train
in line with that Blessed One’s message,”

the Blessed One said.
Notes
1. On complication-classifications and their role in leading to conflict, see Sn IV.11 and the introduction to MN 18. The perception, “I am the thinker” lies at the root of these classifications in that it reads into the immediate present a set of distinctions — I/not-I; being/not-being; thinker/thought; identity/non-identity — that then can proliferate into mental and physical conflict. The conceit inherent in this perception thus forms a fetter on the mind. To become unbound, one must learn to examine these distinctions — which we all take for granted — to see that they are simply assumptions that are not inherent in experience, and that we would be better off to be able to drop them.
2. “Embraced/rejected, self/against-self” — a pun on the pair of Pali words, atta/nirattam.
See also: DN 2; AN IV.37.
Sn IV.15
Attadanda Sutta
The Training
Translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
Alternate translation:
Ireland
Olendzki
Thanissaro
“Violence breeds misery; 1 look at people quarreling. I will relate the emotion agitating me.
“Having seen people struggling and contending with each other like fish in a small amount of water, fear entered me. The world is everywhere insecure, every direction is in turmoil; desiring an abode for myself I did not find one uninhabited. 2 When I saw contention as the sole outcome, aversion increased in me; but then I saw an arrow 3 here, difficult to see, set in the heart. Pierced by it, once runs in every direction, but having pulled it out one does not run nor does one sink. 4
“Here follows the (rule of) training:
“Whatever are worldly fetters, may you not be bound by them! Completely break down sensual desires and practice so as to realize Nibbana for yourself!
“A sage should be truthful, not arrogant, not deceitful, not given to slandering others, and should be without anger. He should remove the evil of attachment and wrongly directed longing; he should conquer drowsiness, lassitude and sloth, and not dwell in indolence. A man whose mind is set on Nibbana should not be arrogant. He should not lapse into untruth nor generate love for sense objects. He should thoroughly understand (the nature of) conceit and abstain from violence. He should not delight in what is past, nor be fond of what is new, nor sorrow for what is disappearing, nor crave for the attractive.
“Greed, I say, is a great flood; it is a whirlpool sucking one down, a constant yearning, seeking a hold, continually in movement; 5 difficult to cross is the morass of sensual desire. A sage does not deviate from truth, a brahmana 6 stands on firm ground; renouncing all, he is truly called ‘calmed.’
“Having actually experienced and understood the Dhamma he has realized the highest knowledge and is independent. 7 He comports himself correctly in the world and does not envy anyone here. He who has left behind sensual pleasures, an attachment difficult to leave behind, does not grieve nor have any longing; has cut across the stream and is unfettered.
“Dry out that which is past, 8 let there be nothing for you in the future. 9 If you do not grasp at anything in the present you will go about at peace. One who, in regard to this entire mindbody complex, has no cherishing of it as ‘mine,’ and who does not grieve for what is non-existent truly suffers no loss in the world. For him there is no thought of anything as ‘this is mine’ or ‘this is another’s’; not finding any state of ownership, and realizing, ‘nothing is mine,’ he does not grieve.
“To be not callous, not greedy, at rest and unruffled by circumstances — that is the profitable result I proclaim when asked about one who does not waver. For one who does not crave, who has understanding, there is no production (of new kamma). 10 Refraining from initiating (new kamma) he sees security everywhere. A sage does not speak in terms of being equal, lower or higher. Calmed and without selfishness he neither grasps nor rejects.”
Notes
1. Attadanda bhayam jatam: “Violence” (attadanda, lit.: “seizing a stick” or “weapons”) includes in it all wrong conduct in deeds, words and thoughts. Bhaya is either a subjective state of mind, “fear,” or the objective condition of “fearfulness,” danger, misery; and so it is explained in the Comy. as the evil consequences of wrong conduct, in this life and in future existence.
2. Uninhabited by decay and death, etc. (Comy).
3. The arrow of lust, hate, delusion and (wrong) views.
4. That is, sink into the four “floods” of sensual desire, continual becoming, wrong views and ignorance. These are the two contrasting dangers of Samsara, i.e., restless running, ever seeking after sensual delights, and sinking, or passively clinging to the defilements, whereby one is overwhelmed by the “flood.” In the first discourse of the Samyutta-nikaya the Buddha says: “If I stood still, I sank; if I struggled, I was carried away. Thus by neither standing still nor struggling, I crossed the flood.”
5. According to the commentary these four phrases, beginning with a “whirlpool sucking down,” are all synonyms for craving (tanha) or greed (gedha) called the “great flood.”
6. In Buddhism the title “Brahmana” is sometimes used for one who has reached final deliverance. The Buddha himself is sometimes called “the Brahmana.”
7. Independent of craving and views.
8. “Dry out” (visodehi) your former, and not your matured kamma, i.e., make it unproductive, by not giving room to passions that may grow out of the past actions.
9. Do not rouse in kamma-productive passions concerning the future.
10. Volitional acts, good or bad, manifesting in deeds of body, speech and mind leading to a future result.
Sn IV.16
Sariputta Sutta
To Sariputta
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Never before
have I seen or heard
from anyone
of a teacher with such lovely speech
come, together with his following
from Tusita heaven,1
as the One with Eyes
who appears to the world with its devas
having dispelled all darkness
having arrived at delight
all alone.

To that One Awakened —
unentangled, Such, un-
deceptive,
come with his following —
I have come with a question
on behalf of the many
here who are fettered.
For a monk disaffected,
frequenting a place that’s remote —
the root of a tree,
a cemetery,
in mountain caves
various places to stay —
how many are the fears there
at which he shouldn’t tremble
— there in his noiseless abode —
how many the dangers in the world
for the monk going the direction
he never has gone
that he should transcend
there in his isolated abode?
What should be
the ways of his speech?
What should be
his range there of action?
What should be
a resolute monk’s
precepts & practices?2
Undertaking what training
— alone, astute, & mindful —
would he blow away
his own impurities
as a silver smith,
those in molten silver?”
The Buddha:
“I will tell you
as one who knows,
what is comfort
for one disaffected
resorting to a remote place,
desiring self-awakening
in line with the Dhamma.
An enlightened monk,
living circumscribed,
mindful,
shouldn’t fear the five fears:
of horseflies, mosquitoes, snakes,
human contact, four-footed beings;
shouldn’t be disturbed
by those following another’s teaching
even on seeing their manifold
terrors;
should overcome still other
further dangers
as he seeks what is skillful.

Touched
by the touch
of discomforts, hunger,
he should endure cold
& inordinate heat.
He with no home,
in many ways touched by these things,
striving, should make firm his persistence.

He shouldn’t commit a theft,
shouldn’t speak a lie,
should touch with thoughts of good will
beings firm & infirm.
Conscious of when
his mind is stirred up & turbid,
he should dispel it:
‘It’s on the Dark One’s side.’

He shouldn’t come under the sway
of anger or pride.
Having dug up their root
he would stand firm.
Then, when prevailing
— yes —
he’d prevail over his sense of dear & undear.
Yearning for discernment
enraptured with what’s admirable,
he should overcome these dangers,
should conquer discontent
in his isolated spot,
should conquer these four
thoughts of lament:

‘What will I eat,
or where will I eat.
How badly I slept.
Tonight where will I sleep?’

These lamenting thoughts
he should subdue —
one under training,
wandering without home.
Receiving food & cloth
at appropriate times,
he should have a sense of enough
for the sake of contentment.3
Guarded in regard to these things
going restrained into a village,
even when harassed
he shouldn’t say a harsh word.

With eyes downcast,
& not footloose,
committed to jhana,
he should be continually wakeful.4
Strengthening equanimity,
centered within,
he should cut off any penchant
to conjecture or worry.
When reprimanded,
he should — mindful —
rejoice;5
should smash any stubbornness
toward his fellows in the holy life;
should utter skillful words
that are not untimely;
should give no mind
to the gossip people might say.

And then there are in the world
the five kinds of dust
for whose dispelling, mindful
he should train:
with regard to forms, sounds, tastes,
smells, & tactile sensations
he should conquer passion;
with regard to these things
he should subdue his desire.

A monk, mindful,
his mind well-released,
contemplating the right Dhamma
at the right times,
on coming
to oneness
should annihilate
darkness,”

the Blessed One said.
Notes
1. The Buddha spent his next-to-last lifetime in the Tusita heaven, one of the highest levels on the sensual plane.
2. The fact that the Buddha answers this question in a straightforward manner illustrates the point that abandoning precepts and practices does not mean having no precepts and practices. See note 2 to Sn IV.13.
3. See AN IV.37 and AN VII.64.
4. See AN IV.37.
5. See Dhp 76-77.
See also: AN V.77; AN VIII.30.

Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Those who, dwelling on views,
dispute, saying, ‘Only this is true’:
do they all incur blame,
or also earn praise there?”

“[The praise:] It’s such a little thing,
not at all appeasing.1
I speak of two fruits of dispute;
and seeing this, you shouldn’t dispute —
seeing the state
where there’s no dispute
as secure.
One who knows
doesn’t get involved
in whatever are
commonplace
conventional
views.
One who is uninvolved:
when he’s forming no preference
for what’s seen, for what’s heard,
why would he get
involved?

Those for whom precepts
are ultimate
say that purity’s
a matter of self-restraint.
Undertaking a practice,
they devote themselves to it:
‘Let’s train just in this,
and then there would be purity.’
Those who say they are skilled
are [thus] led on to becoming.
But if one of them falls
from his precepts or practice,
he trembles,
having failed in his actions.
He hopes for, longs for, purity,
like a lost caravan leader
far from home.

But one who’s abandoned
precepts & practices2
— all —
things that are blamable, blameless,3
not hoping for ‘pure or impure,’4
would live in compassion & peace,
without taking up peace,5
detached.

Dependent
on taboos, austerities,
or what’s seen, heard, or sensed,
they speak of purity
through wandering further on
through becoming & not-,
their craving not gone
for becoming & not-.6
For one who aspires has longings
& trembling with regard to preconceptions.
But one who here
has no passing away & arising:
Why would he tremble?
For what would he long?”

“The teaching some say is ’supreme,’
is the very one others call ‘lowly.’
Which statement is true
when all of these claim to be skilled?”

“They say their own teaching is perfect
while the doctrine of others is lowly.
Thus quarreling, they dispute,
each saying his agreed-on opinion
is true.
If something, because of an opponent’s say-so,
were lowly,
then none among teachings would be
superlative,
for many say
that another’s teaching’s inferior
when firmly asserting their own.
If their worship of their teaching were true,
in line with the way they praise their own path,
then all doctrines
would be true —
for purity’s theirs, according to each.

The brahman has nothing
led by another,
when considering what’s grasped
among doctrines.
Thus he has gone
beyond disputes,
for he doesn’t regard as best
the knowledge of a teaching,
any other mental state.7

‘I know. I see. That’s just how it is!’ —
Some believe purity’s in terms of view.
But even if a person has seen,
what good does it do him?
Having slipped past,
they speak of purity
in connection with something
or somebody else.
A person, in seeing,
sees name & form.
Having seen, he’ll know
only these things.
No matter if he’s seen little, a lot,
the skilled don’t say purity’s
in connection with that.

A person entrenched in his teachings,
honoring a preconceived view,
isn’t easy to discipline.
Whatever he depends on
he describes it as lovely,
says that it’s purity,
that there he saw truth.

The brahman, evaluating,
isn’t involved with conjurings,
doesn’t follow views,
isn’t tied even to knowledge.8
And on knowing
whatever’s conventional, commonplace,
he remains equanimous:
‘That’s what others hold onto.’

Having released the knots
that tie him down,
the sage here in the world
doesn’t follow a faction
when disputes have arisen.
At peace among those not at peace,
he’s equanimous, doesn’t hold on:
‘That’s what others hold onto.’

Giving up old fermentations,
not forming new,
neither pursuing desire,
nor entrenched in his teachings,
he’s totally released
from viewpoints,
enlightened.

He doesn’t adhere to the world,
is without self-rebuke;
is enemy-free9
with regard to all things
seen, heard, or sensed.

His burden laid down,
the sage totally released

is improper / is free from conjuring
hasn’t stopped / isn’t impassioned
isn’t worth wanting / doesn’t
desire,”10

the Blessed One said.
Notes
1. Or: Not enough to appease (the defilements, says Nd.I).
2. Nd.I: Abandoning precepts & practices in the sense of no longer believing that purity is measured in terms of them, the view discussed in the preceding verse.
3. Nd.I: “Blamable, blameless” = black and white kamma (see AN IV.232, 234, 237-238, quoted in The Wings to Awakening, section I/B).
4. Nd.I: Having abandoned impure mental qualities, and having fully attained the goal, the arahant has no need to hope for anything at all.
5. “In compassion & peace, without taking up peace” — a pun on the word, santimanuggahaya.
6. The word bhavabhavesu — through/for becoming & not- becoming — here is a lamp, i.e., a single word functioning in two phrases.
7. “The knowledge of a teaching, any other mental state” — a pun on the word, dhammamaññam.
8. According to Nd.I, this compound — ñana-bandhu — should be translated as “tied by means of knowledge,” in that the arahant doesn’t use the knowledge that comes with the mastery of concentration, the five mundane forms of psychic power (abhiñña), or any wrong knowledge to create the bonds of craving or views. However, the compound may also refer to the fact that the arahant isn’t tied even to the knowledge that forms part of the path to arahantship (see MN 117).
9. See note 7 under Sn IV.4.
10. “Is improper / is free from conjuring, hasn’t stopped / isn’t impassioned, isn’t worth wanting / doesn’t desire” — a series of puns — na kappiyo, nuparato, na patthiyo — each with a strongly positive and a strongly negative meaning, probably meant for their shock value. For a similar set of puns, see Dhp 97.
See also: AN X.93; AN X.96.
Sn IV.14
Tuvataka Sutta
Quickly
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
“I ask the kinsman of the Sun, the great seer,
about seclusion & the state of peace.
Seeing in what way is a monk unbound,
clinging to nothing in the world?”
“He should put an entire stop
to the root of complication-classifications:
‘I am the thinker.’1
He should train, always mindful,
to subdue any craving inside him.
Whatever truth he may know,
within or without,
he shouldn’t get entrenched
in connection with it,
for that isn’t called
Unbinding by the good.
He shouldn’t, because of it, think himself
better,
lower, or
equal.
Touched by contact in various ways,
he shouldn’t keep conjuring self.
Stilled right within,
a monk shouldn’t seek peace from another
from anything else.
For one stilled right within,
there’s nothing embraced,
so how rejected?
Nothing that’s self,
so from whence would there be
against-self?2

As in the middle of the sea
it is still,
with no waves upwelling,
so the monk — unperturbed, still —
should not swell himself
anywhere.”

“He whose eyes are open has described
the Dhamma he’s witnessed,
subduing danger.
Now tell us, sir, the practice:
the code of discipline & concentration.”

“One shouldn’t be careless with his eyes,
should close his ears to village-talk,
shouldn’t hunger for flavors,
or view anything in the world
as mine.
When touched by contact
he shouldn’t lament,
shouldn’t covet anywhere any
states of becoming,
or tremble at terrors.
When gaining food & drink,
staples & cloth,
he should not make a hoard.
Nor should he be upset
when receiving no gains.
Absorbed, not foot-loose,
he should refrain from restlessness,
shouldn’t be heedless,
should live in a noise-less abode.
Not making much of sleep,
ardent, given to wakefulness,
he should abandon sloth, deception,
laughter, sports,
fornication, & all that goes with it;
should not practice charms,
interpret physical marks, dreams,
the stars, animal cries;
should not be devoted to
practicing medicine or inducing fertility.

A monk shouldn’t tremble at blame
or grow haughty with praise;
should thrust aside selfishness, greed,
divisive speech, anger;
shouldn’t buy or sell
or revile anyone anywhere;
shouldn’t linger in villages,
or flatter people in hopes of gains.

A monk shouldn’t boast
or speak with ulterior motive,
shouldn’t train in insolence
or speak quarrelsome words;
shouldn’t engage in deception
or knowingly cheat;
shouldn’t despise others for their
life,
discernment,
precepts,
or practices.
Provoked with many words
from contemplatives
or ordinary people,
he shouldn’t respond harshly,
for those who retaliate
aren’t calm.

Knowing this teaching,
a monk inquiring
should always
train in it mindfully.
Knowing Unbinding as peace,
he shouldn’t be heedless
of Gotama’s message —
for he, the Conqueror unconquered,
witnessed the Dhamma,
not by hearsay,
but directly, himself.
So, heedful, you
should always train
in line with that Blessed One’s message,”

the Blessed One said.
Notes
1. On complication-classifications and their role in leading to conflict, see Sn IV.11 and the introduction to MN 18. The perception, “I am the thinker” lies at the root of these classifications in that it reads into the immediate present a set of distinctions — I/not-I; being/not-being; thinker/thought; identity/non-identity — that then can proliferate into mental and physical conflict. The conceit inherent in this perception thus forms a fetter on the mind. To become unbound, one must learn to examine these distinctions — which we all take for granted — to see that they are simply assumptions that are not inherent in experience, and that we would be better off to be able to drop them.
2. “Embraced/rejected, self/against-self” — a pun on the pair of Pali words, atta/nirattam.
See also: DN 2; AN IV.37.
Sn IV.15
Attadanda Sutta
The Training
Translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
Alternate translation:
Ireland
Olendzki
Thanissaro
“Violence breeds misery; 1 look at people quarreling. I will relate the emotion agitating me.
“Having seen people struggling and contending with each other like fish in a small amount of water, fear entered me. The world is everywhere insecure, every direction is in turmoil; desiring an abode for myself I did not find one uninhabited. 2 When I saw contention as the sole outcome, aversion increased in me; but then I saw an arrow 3 here, difficult to see, set in the heart. Pierced by it, once runs in every direction, but having pulled it out one does not run nor does one sink. 4
“Here follows the (rule of) training:
“Whatever are worldly fetters, may you not be bound by them! Completely break down sensual desires and practice so as to realize Nibbana for yourself!
“A sage should be truthful, not arrogant, not deceitful, not given to slandering others, and should be without anger. He should remove the evil of attachment and wrongly directed longing; he should conquer drowsiness, lassitude and sloth, and not dwell in indolence. A man whose mind is set on Nibbana should not be arrogant. He should not lapse into untruth nor generate love for sense objects. He should thoroughly understand (the nature of) conceit and abstain from violence. He should not delight in what is past, nor be fond of what is new, nor sorrow for what is disappearing, nor crave for the attractive.
“Greed, I say, is a great flood; it is a whirlpool sucking one down, a constant yearning, seeking a hold, continually in movement; 5 difficult to cross is the morass of sensual desire. A sage does not deviate from truth, a brahmana 6 stands on firm ground; renouncing all, he is truly called ‘calmed.’
“Having actually experienced and understood the Dhamma he has realized the highest knowledge and is independent. 7 He comports himself correctly in the world and does not envy anyone here. He who has left behind sensual pleasures, an attachment difficult to leave behind, does not grieve nor have any longing; has cut across the stream and is unfettered.
“Dry out that which is past, 8 let there be nothing for you in the future. 9 If you do not grasp at anything in the present you will go about at peace. One who, in regard to this entire mindbody complex, has no cherishing of it as ‘mine,’ and who does not grieve for what is non-existent truly suffers no loss in the world. For him there is no thought of anything as ‘this is mine’ or ‘this is another’s’; not finding any state of ownership, and realizing, ‘nothing is mine,’ he does not grieve.
“To be not callous, not greedy, at rest and unruffled by circumstances — that is the profitable result I proclaim when asked about one who does not waver. For one who does not crave, who has understanding, there is no production (of new kamma). 10 Refraining from initiating (new kamma) he sees security everywhere. A sage does not speak in terms of being equal, lower or higher. Calmed and without selfishness he neither grasps nor rejects.”
Notes
1. Attadanda bhayam jatam: “Violence” (attadanda, lit.: “seizing a stick” or “weapons”) includes in it all wrong conduct in deeds, words and thoughts. Bhaya is either a subjective state of mind, “fear,” or the objective condition of “fearfulness,” danger, misery; and so it is explained in the Comy. as the evil consequences of wrong conduct, in this life and in future existence.
2. Uninhabited by decay and death, etc. (Comy).
3. The arrow of lust, hate, delusion and (wrong) views.
4. That is, sink into the four “floods” of sensual desire, continual becoming, wrong views and ignorance. These are the two contrasting dangers of Samsara, i.e., restless running, ever seeking after sensual delights, and sinking, or passively clinging to the defilements, whereby one is overwhelmed by the “flood.” In the first discourse of the Samyutta-nikaya the Buddha says: “If I stood still, I sank; if I struggled, I was carried away. Thus by neither standing still nor struggling, I crossed the flood.”
5. According to the commentary these four phrases, beginning with a “whirlpool sucking down,” are all synonyms for craving (tanha) or greed (gedha) called the “great flood.”
6. In Buddhism the title “Brahmana” is sometimes used for one who has reached final deliverance. The Buddha himself is sometimes called “the Brahmana.”
7. Independent of craving and views.
8. “Dry out” (visodehi) your former, and not your matured kamma, i.e., make it unproductive, by not giving room to passions that may grow out of the past actions.
9. Do not rouse in kamma-productive passions concerning the future.
10. Volitional acts, good or bad, manifesting in deeds of body, speech and mind leading to a future result.
Sn IV.16
Sariputta Sutta
To Sariputta
Translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

“Never before
have I seen or heard
from anyone
of a teacher with such lovely speech
come, together with his following
from Tusita heaven,1
as the One with Eyes
who appears to the world with its devas
having dispelled all darkness
having arrived at delight
all alone.

To that One Awakened —
unentangled, Such, un-
deceptive,
come with his following —
I have come with a question
on behalf of the many
here who are fettered.
For a monk disaffected,
frequenting a place that’s remote —
the root of a tree,
a cemetery,
in mountain caves
various places to stay —
how many are the fears there
at which he shouldn’t tremble
— there in his noiseless abode —
how many the dangers in the world
for the monk going the direction
he never has gone
that he should transcend
there in his isolated abode?
What should be
the ways of his speech?
What should be
his range there of action?
What should be
a resolute monk’s
precepts & practices?2
Undertaking what training
— alone, astute, & mindful —
would he blow away
his own impurities
as a silver smith,
those in molten silver?”
The Buddha:
“I will tell you
as one who knows,
what is comfort
for one disaffected
resorting to a remote place,
desiring self-awakening
in line with the Dhamma.
An enlightened monk,
living circumscribed,
mindful,
shouldn’t fear the five fears:
of horseflies, mosquitoes, snakes,
human contact, four-footed beings;
shouldn’t be disturbed
by those following another’s teaching
even on seeing their manifold
terrors;
should overcome still other
further dangers
as he seeks what is skillful.

Touched
by the touch
of discomforts, hunger,
he should endure cold
& inordinate heat.
He with no home,
in many ways touched by these things,
striving, should make firm his persistence.

He shouldn’t commit a theft,
shouldn’t speak a lie,
should touch with thoughts of good will
beings firm & infirm.
Conscious of when
his mind is stirred up & turbid,
he should dispel it:
‘It’s on the Dark One’s side.’

He shouldn’t come under the sway
of anger or pride.
Having dug up their root
he would stand firm.
Then, when prevailing
— yes —
he’d prevail over his sense of dear & undear.
Yearning for discernment
enraptured with what’s admirable,
he should overcome these dangers,
should conquer discontent
in his isolated spot,
should conquer these four
thoughts of lament:

‘What will I eat,
or where will I eat.
How badly I slept.
Tonight where will I sleep?’

These lamenting thoughts
he should subdue —
one under training,
wandering without home.
Receiving food & cloth
at appropriate times,
he should have a sense of enough
for the sake of contentment.3
Guarded in regard to these things
going restrained into a village,
even when harassed
he shouldn’t say a harsh word.

With eyes downcast,
& not footloose,
committed to jhana,
he should be continually wakeful.4
Strengthening equanimity,
centered within,
he should cut off any penchant
to conjecture or worry.
When reprimanded,
he should — mindful —
rejoice;5
should smash any stubbornness
toward his fellows in the holy life;
should utter skillful words
that are not untimely;
should give no mind
to the gossip people might say.

And then there are in the world
the five kinds of dust
for whose dispelling, mindful
he should train:
with regard to forms, sounds, tastes,
smells, & tactile sensations
he should conquer passion;
with regard to these things
he should subdue his desire.

A monk, mindful,
his mind well-released,
contemplating the right Dhamma
at the right times,
on coming
to oneness
should annihilate
darkness,”
the Blessed One said.

Notes
1. The Buddha spent his next-to-last lifetime in the Tusita heaven, one of the highest levels on the sensual plane.
2. The fact that the Buddha answers this question in a straightforward manner illustrates the point that abandoning precepts and practices does not mean having no precepts and practices. See note 2 to Sn IV.13.
3. See AN IV.37 and AN VII.64.
4. See AN IV.37.
5. See Dhp 76-77.
See also: AN V.77; AN VIII.30.

Studies Continue for 2006

2005 is drawing to a close. Tomorrow is my daughters 7th birthday. It has been an amazing 7 years. Hecks, it has been an amazing life. My December goal setting is in progress. I have finished up my psychology studies for my Minor and for 2006 I have to RETAKE the GRE and MAT (mine are 10 years old and will no longer be valid). I am also deciding if I am going to commit myself for my black-belt training. It’s more of a commitment that I’m currently observing and one that if started will cement me in Ohio for a few more years. I am trying to wait to see how this work/school balance gels out before I make that commitment, so we may be waiting until March for that one. I have to make sure that Mia has a class or at least something to keep her occupied while my sessions take place. My first priority is to her. I think I am ready for the commitment, I’m just not sure my life circumstances are properly aligned. Being the only parent is difficult to balance all the things the NEED to get done, then all the things I WANT to get done. Black-belt is a want, therefore it gets put to the side. A path will be cleared in time, I’m sure.

Also to note is I’ve taken a new Roshi. Or a new Roshi has taken me? I’m never quite sure which way that goes… Anyhow, I attend a small Academy that I attend that blends meditation, martial skill, dharma study and life skills. Since Noah moved to Cali and I started at my current work contract, I haven’t been able to make the monthly DharmaPunx meeting in NYC. It’s a LOOOONG drive and two nights in a hotel and 17 hours of driving all for a 5 hour visit was really difficult. After Adrian made an pretentious ass out of himself by showing his true colors at a child support hearing in which he was IN Ohio and made absolutely no attempt to even contact Mia I had to come to the realization that he just doesn’t care. It doesn’t matter if he lacks the ability, or has difficulty expressing, the fact is his efforts are non-existent and dealing with him is tedious. I have introduced Mia to her biological father. I have and will continue to take care of her. Whatever relationship she wishes to foster with him, will be her business in her time. I’m drained trying to do it for her. He’s a selfish, stuck-up ass and always has been. Not ONCE have I ever longed for my relationship with him to continue. Yes, the universe fated us to have a child together. A child that has blessed my beyond belief. But in the words of my sponsor, when I was bitching and moaning about my own parents lack of skill in my upbringing;

“maybe they were just supposed to fuck so you would get here. Maybe that was their only purpose, and in doing that…Their [Will] was fulfilled, so stop expecting the sun and the moon from them. They may not be capable of giving it.”

Those were wise words. I’m cool with my expectations of the situation. He’s a fuck and a weasel and his promises are empty and he only serves to disappoint. I know this. As a parent, I want to protect Mia from this hurt. But, I can’t control it. I can only be there to love and support her as she wrestles with her understanding.

May we all know peace.
Xeper and Nameste
As it Is…So be It.

China

Mind Like Fire Unbound An Image in the Early Buddh…

Mind Like Fire Unbound
An Image in the Early Buddhist Discourses
by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
(Geoffrey DeGraff)

According to the Pali Canon — the earliest record of the Buddha’s teachings now extant — nothing outside of the realm of differentiation can be properly described by the conventions of language. In one mode of analysis, this realm is divided into the six senses (counting the mind as the sixth) & their objects; in another, it is divided into the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, thought processes, & consciousness. The two modes cover mutually equivalent areas. However, one passage in the Canon points to another realm — where the six senses & their objects cease — which can be experienced although not otherwise described, even in terms of existing, not existing, both, or neither. The attainment of the Buddhist goal belongs to this second realm, and this of course raised problems for the Buddha in how to teach & describe the goal.

He solved the problem by illustrating the goal with similes & metaphors. The best-known metaphor for the goal is the name nibbana (nirvana), which means the extinguishing of a fire. Attempts to work out the implications of this metaphor have all too often taken it out of context. Some writers, drawing on modern, every-day notions of fire, come to the conclusion that nibbana implies extinction, inasmuch as we feel that a fire goes out of existence when extinguished. Others, however, note that the Vedas — ancient Indian religious texts that predate Buddhism by many thousands of years — describe fire as immortal: Even when extinguished it simply goes into hiding, in a latent, diffused state, only to be reborn when a new fire is lit. These writers then assume that the Buddha accepted the Vedic theory in its entirety, and so maintain that nibbana implies eternal existence.

The weakness of both these interpretations is that they do not take into account the way the Pali Canon describes (1) the workings of fire, (2) the limits beyond which no phenomenon may be described, and (3) the precise implications that the Buddha himself drew from his metaphor in light of (1) & (2). The purpose of this essay is to place this metaphor in its original context, so as to show what it was and was not meant to imply.

Any discussion of the way the Buddha used the term nibbana must begin with the distinction that there are two levels of nibbana (or, to use the original terminology, two nibbana properties). The first is the nibbana experienced by a person who has attained the goal and is still alive. This is described metaphorically as the extinguishing of passion, aversion, & delusion. The second is the nibbana after death. The simile for these two states is the distinction between a fire that has gone out but whose embers are still warm, and one so totally out that its embers are cold. The Buddha used the views of fire current in his day in somewhat different ways when discussing these two levels of nibbana, and so we must consider them separately.

To understand the implications of nibbana in the present life, it is necessary to know something of the way in which fire is described in the Pali Canon. There, fire is said to be caused by the excitation or agitation of the heat property. To continue burning, it must have sustenance (upadana). Its relationship to its sustenance is one of clinging, dependence, & entrapment. When it goes out, the heat property is no longer agitated, and the fire is said to be freed. Thus the metaphor of nibbana in this case would have implications of calming together with release from dependencies, attachments, & bondage. This in turn suggests that of all the attempts to describe the etymology of the word nibbana, the closest is one Buddhaghosa proposed in The Path of Purification: Un- (nir) + binding (vana): Unbinding.

To understand further what is meant by the unbinding of the mind, it is also important to know that the word upadana — the sustenance for the fire — also means clinging, and that according to the Buddha the mind has four forms of clinging that keep it in bondage: clinging to sensuality, to views, to precepts & practices, and to doctrines of the self. In each case, the clinging is the passion & desire the mind feels for these things. To overcome this clinging, then, the mind must see not only the drawbacks of these four objects of clinging, but, more importantly, the drawbacks of the act of passion & desire itself.

The mind does this by following a threefold training: virtue, concentration, & discernment. Virtue provides the joy & freedom from remorse that are essential for concentration. Concentration provides an internal basis of pleasure, rapture, equanimity, & singleness of mind that are not dependent on sensual objects, so that discernment can have the strength & stability it needs to cut through the mind’s clingings. Discernment functions by viewing these clingings as part of a causal chain: seeing their origin, their passing away, their allure, the drawbacks of their results, &, finally, emancipation from them.

Although the Canon reports cases where individuals cut through all four forms of clinging at the same time, the more common pattern is for discernment first to cut through sensual clinging by focusing on the inconstancy & stressfulness of all sensory objects and on the worthlessness of any passion or desire directed to them. Thus freed, the mind can turn its discernment inward in a similar way to cut through its clinging to the practice of concentration itself, as well as to views in general and notions of ’self’ in particular. Once it no longer views experience in terms of self, the entire self/not-self dichotomy collapses.

The mind at this point attains Deathlessness, although there is no sense of ‘I’ in the attainment. There is simply the realization, ‘There is this.’ From this point onward the mind experiences mental & physical phenomena with a sense of being dissociated from them. One simile for this state is that of a hide removed from the carcass of a cow: Even if the hide is then placed back on the cow, one cannot say that it is attached as before, because the connective tissues that once held the hide to the carcass — in other words, passion & desire — have all been cut (by the knife of discernment). The person who has attained the goal — called a Tathagata in some contexts, an arahant in others — thus lives out the remainder of his/her life in the world, but independent of it.

Death as experienced by a Tathagata is described simply as, ‘All this, no longer being relished, grows cold right here.’ All attempts to describe the experience of nibbana or the state of the Tathagata after death — as existing, not existing, both, or neither — are refuted by the Buddha. To explain his point, he again makes use of the metaphor of the extinguished fire, although here he draws on the Vedic view of latent fire as modified by Buddhist notions of what does and does not lie within the realm of valid description.

To describe the state of the Tathagata’s mind, there has to be a way of knowing what his/her consciousness is dependent on. Here we must remember that, according to the texts, a meditator may develop intuitive powers through the practice of concentration enabling him/her to know the state of another person’s mind, or the destination of that person after death. To do so, though, that person’s consciousness must be dwelling on a particular object, for it is only through knowledge of the object that the state of the mind can be known. With ordinary people this is no problem, for ordinary consciousness is always dependent on one object or another, but with Tathagatas this is impossible, for their consciousness is totally independent. Because terms such as existing, not existing, both, or neither, apply only to what may be measured against a criterion of knowing, they cannot apply to the Tathagata.

The Buddha borrows two points from the Vedic notion of fire to illustrate this point. Even if one wants to assume that fire still exists after being extinguished, it is (1) so subtle that it cannot be perceived, and (2) so diffuse that it cannot be said to go to any one place or in any particular direction. Just as notions of going east, west, north, or south do not apply to an extinguished fire, notions of existing and so forth do not apply to the Tathagata after death.

As for the question of how nibbana is experienced after death, the Buddha says that there is no limit in that experience by which it could be described. The word ‘limit’ here is the important one. In one of the ancient Vedic myths of creation, the universe starts when a limit appears that separates male from female, sky from earth. Thus the implication of the Buddha’s statement is that the experience of nibbana is so free from even the most basic notions making up the universe that it lies beyond description. This implication is borne out by other passages stating that there is nothing in that experience of the known universe — earth, water, wind, fire, sun, moon, darkness, coming, going, or stasis — at all.

Thus, when viewed in light of the way the Pali Canon describes the workings of fire and uses fire imagery to describe the workings of the mind, it is clear that the word nibbana is primarily meant to convey notions of freedom: freedom in the present life from agitation, dependency, & clinging; and freedom after death from even the most basic concepts or limitations — such as existence, non-existence, both, or neither — that make up the describable universe.

Here, Hemaka,
with regard to things that are dear
seen, heard, sensed, & cognized,
there is: the dispelling of desire & passion,
the undying state of Unbinding.
Those knowing this, mindful,
fully extinguished/unbound
in the here & now,
are forever calmed
have gone beyond
entanglement in the world.
— Sn V.9

Freed, dissociated, & released from ten things, the Tathagata dwells with unrestricted awareness, Vahuna. Which ten? Freed, dissociated, & released from form… feeling… perception… processes… consciousness… birth… aging… death… stress*… defilement, he dwells with unrestricted awareness. Just as a red, blue, or white lotus born in the water and growing in the water, rises up above the water and stands with no water adhering to it, in the same way the Tathagata — freed, dissociated, & released from these ten things — dwells with unrestricted awareness.
— A X.81

Just as the great ocean has but one taste, the taste of salt, even so does this doctrine & discipline have but one taste: the taste of release.
— Ud V.5

INTRODUCTION

The discourses of the Pali Canon make a frequent analogy between the workings of fire and those of the mind: The mind unawakened to the supreme goal is like a burning fire; the awakened mind, like a fire gone out. The analogy is made both indirectly & directly: indirectly in the use of terminology borrowed from the physics of fire to describe mental events (the word nibbana being the best-known example); directly in any number of metaphors:

I have heard that on one occasion, when the Master was newly Awakened — living at Uruvela by the banks of the Nerañjara River in the shade of the Bodhi tree, the tree of Awakening — he sat in the shade of the Bodhi tree for seven days in one session, sensitive to the bliss of release. At the end of seven days, after emerging from that concentration, he surveyed the world with the eye of an Awakened One. As he did so, he saw living beings burning with the many fevers and aflame with the many fires born of passion, aversion, & delusion…
— Ud III.10

The All is aflame. Which All is aflame? The eye is aflame. Forms are aflame. Visual consciousness is aflame. Visual contact is aflame. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on visual contact, experienced as pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain, that too is aflame. Aflame with what? Aflame with the fire of passion, the fire of aversion, the fire of delusion. Aflame, I tell you, with birth, aging, & death, with sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs.

The ear is aflame. Sounds are aflame…
The nose is aflame. Aromas are aflame…
The tongue is aflame. Flavors are aflame…
The body is aflame. Tactile sensations are aflame…
The intellect is aflame. Ideas are aflame. Mental consciousness is aflame. Mental contact is aflame. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on mental contact, experienced as pleasure, pain or neither pleasure nor pain, that too is aflame. Aflame with what? Aflame with the fire of passion, the fire of aversion, the fire of delusion. Aflame, I tell you, with birth, aging, & death, with sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs.
— S XXXV.28

The fire of passion burns in a mortal
excited, smitten
with sensual desires;
the fire of aversion, in a malevolent person
taking life;
the fire of delusion, in a bewildered person
ignorant of the Noble Teaching.
Not understanding these fires, people
— fond of self-identity —
unreleased from the shackles of death,
swell the ranks of purgatory,
the wombs of common animals, demons,
the realm of the hungry shades.
While those who, day & night
are devoted to the teachings
of the One Rightly Self-awakened,
put out the fire of passion,
constantly perceiving the repulsive.
They, the highest men, put out the fire of aversion
with good will,
And the fire of delusion
with the discernment leading to penetration.
They, the masterful, by night & day,
having put out [the fires],
Go totally out,
without remainder,
having totally comprehended stress,
without remainder.
They, the wise, with an attainer-of-wisdom’s
noble vision
with regard to right knowing,
fully knowing the passing away of birth,
return to no further becoming.*
—

Not only is the extinguishing of passion, aversion, & delusion compared to the extinguishing of a fire, but so is the passing away of a person in whom they are extinguished.
Ended the old,
there is no new taking birth:
Dispassioned their minds
toward future becoming,
they, with no seed,
no desire for growth,
the wise, they go out
like this flame.
— Khp 6

Sister Sumedha:
This, without aging,
this without death,
this, the unaging, undying state
with no sorrow
hostility
bonds
with no burning…
— Thig XVI.1

When the Master was totally gone out — simultaneously with the total going out — Ven. Anuruddha uttered these stanzas:
He had no in-&-out breathing,
the one who was Such*, the firm-minded one.
imperturbable & bent on peace:
the sage completing his span.
With heart unbowed
he endured the pain.
Like a flame’s going out
was the liberation
of awareness.
— DN 16

The aim of this essay is to explore the implications of this imagery — to give a sense of what it was & was not intended to convey — by first making reference to the views concerning the physics of fire current in the Buddha’s time. This, short of an actual experience of Awakening — something no book can provide — seems the most natural approach for drawing the proper inferences from this imagery. Otherwise, we are bound to interpret it in terms of our own views of how fire works, a mistake as misleading & anachronistic as that of painting a picture of the Buddha dressed as Albert Einstein or Isaac Newton.

The presentation here is more like a photomosaic than an exposition. Quotations have been aligned & overlapped so as to reflect & expand on one another. Comments have intentionally been kept to a bare minimum, so as to allow the quotations to speak for themselves. The weakness of this approach is that it covers several fronts at once and can make its points only incrementally. Its strength lies in its cumulative effect: revealing — beneath apparently disparate teachings — unifying patterns that might go unnoticed in a more linear narrative, much as satellite pictures can reveal buried archaeological remains that would go unnoticed by a person standing on the ground.

One of the noteworthy features of the Pali Canon is that common patterns of thought & imagery shape the extemporaneous words of a wide variety of people reported within it. Here we will hear the voices not only of the Buddha — the speaker in all passages from the Canon where none is identified — but also of lay people such as Citta, monks such as Vens. Ananda & MahaKaccana, and nuns such as Sisters Nanda, Sumedha, & Patacara. Each has his or her own style of expression, both in poetry & in prose, but they all speak from a similarity of background & experience that makes it possible to view their message as a single whole, in structure as well as content.

The structure we are most concerned with here centers on the image of extinguished fire and its implications for the word ‘nibbana’ (nirvana) & related concepts. Used with reference to fire, nibbana means ‘being out’ or ‘going out.’ Used with reference to the mind, it refers to the final goal and to the goal’s attainment. Our essay into the cluster of meanings surrounding this word is meant to read like a journey of exploration, but a brief preview will help us keep track both of where we are in relation to the map provided by the Abstract, and of where we are going.
The first chapter surveys ancient Vedic ideas of fire as subsisting in a diffused state even when extinguished. It then shows how the Buddha took an original approach to those ideas to illustrate the concept of nibbana after death as referring not to eternal existence, but rather to absolute freedom from all constraints of time, space, & being.

The remaining three chapters deal with the concept of nibbana in the present life. Chapter II introduces a cluster of Buddhist ideas concerning the nature of burning fire — as agitated, clinging, bound, & dependent — and draws out the implications that these ideas have for what happens when a fire goes out and, in parallel fashion, when the mind attains nibbana. In particular, it concludes that of all the etymologies traditionally offered for nibbana, Buddhaghosa’s ‘unbinding’ is probably closest to the original connotations of the term.
Chapter III takes up the notion of clinging as it applies to the mind — as sensuality, views, precepts & practices, and doctrines of the self — to show in detail what is loosened in the mind’s unbinding, whereas Chapter IV shows how, by detailing the way in which the practice of virtue, concentration, & discernment frees the mind from its fetters. This final chapter culminates in an array of passages from the texts that recapitulate the pattern of fire-&-freedom imagery covered in the preceding discussion. If read reflectively, they also serve as reminders that their perspectives on the concept of nibbana can best be connected only in light of that pattern.

We should note at the outset, though, that nibbana is only one of the Buddhist goal’s many names. One section of the Canon lists 33, and the composite impression they convey is worth bearing in mind:
The unfashioned, the end,
the effluent-less*, the true, the beyond,
the subtle, the very-hard-to-see,
the ageless, permanence, the undecaying,
the featureless, non-differentiation,
peace, the deathless,
the exquisite, bliss, solace,
the exhaustion of craving,
the wonderful, the marvelous,
the secure, security,
nibbana,
the unafflicted, the passionless, the pure,
release, non-attachment,
the island, shelter, harbor, refuge,
the ultimate.
— S XLIII.1-44

CHAPTER 1

The discourses report two instances where Brahmans asked the Buddha about the nature of the goal he taught, and he responded with the analogy of the extinguished fire. There is every reason to believe that, in choosing this analogy, he was referring to a concept of fire familiar to his listeners, and, as they had been educated in the Vedic tradition, that he probably had the Vedic concept of fire in mind. This, of course, is not to say that he himself adhered to the Vedic concept or that he was referring to it in all its details. He was simply drawing on a particular aspect of fire as seen in the Vedas so that his listeners could have a familiar reference point for making sense of what he was saying.

Now, although the Vedic texts contain several different theories concerning the physics of fire, there is at least one basic point on which they agree: Fire, even when not manifest, continues to exist in a latent form. The Vedic view of all physical phenomena is that they are the manifestation of pre-existent potencies inherent in nature. Each type of phenomenon has its corresponding potency, which has both personal & impersonal characteristics: as a god and as the powers he wields. In the case of fire, both the god & the phenomenon are called Agni:
Agni, who is generated, being produced (churned) by men through the agency of sahas.
— RV 6,48,5

‘Sahas’ here is the potency, the power of subjugation, wielded by Agni himself. Jan Gonda, in discussing this passage, comments, ‘The underlying theory must have been… that a man and his physical strength are by no means able to produce a god or potency of Agni’s rank. Only the cooperation or conjunction of that special principle which seems to have been central in the descriptions of Agni’s character, his power of subjugation, his overwhelming power, can lead to the result desired, the appearance of sparks and the generation of fire.’ Further, ‘a divine being like Agni was in a way already pre-existent when being generated by a pair of kindling sticks’ (1957, pp. 22-3). As fire burns, Agni ‘continues entering’ into the fire (AV 4,39,9).

Scattered in many places — as many separate fires — he is nevertheless one & the same thing (RV 3,55). Other fires are attached to him as branches to a tree (RV 8,19).

When fire is extinguished, Agni and his powers do not pass out of existence. Instead, they go into hiding. This point is expressed in a myth, mentioned frequently in the Vedic texts, of Agni’s trying to hide himself from the other gods in places where he thought they would never perceive him. In the version told in RV 10,51, the gods finally find the hidden Agni as an embryo in the water.

[Addressed to Agni:] Great was the membrane & firm, that enveloped you when you entered the waters… We searched for you in various places, O Agni, knower of creatures, when you had entered into the waters & plants.
— RV 10,51

As Chauncey Blair notes, ‘The concept of Agni in the waters does not imply destruction of Agni. He is merely a hidden, a potential Agni, and no less capable of powerful action’ (1961, p. 103).
The implications of Agni’s being an embryo are best understood in light of the theories of biological generation held in ancient India:

The husband, after having entered his wife, becomes an embryo and is born again of her.
— Laws of Manu, 9,8

Just as ancient Indians saw an underlying identity connecting a father & his offspring, so too did they perceive a single identity underlying the manifest & embryonic forms of fire. In this way, Agni, repeatedly reborn, was seen as immortal; and in fact, the Vedas attribute immortality to him more frequently than to any other of the gods.

To you, immortal! When you spring to life, all the gods sing for joy… By your powers they were made immortal…[Agni], who extended himself over all the worlds, is the protector of immortality.
— RV 6,7

Not only immortal, but also omnipresent: Agni in his manifest form is present in all three levels of the cosmos — heaven, air, & earth — as sun, lightning, & flame-fire. As for his latent presence, he states in the myth of his hiding, ‘my bodies entered various places’; a survey of the Vedas reveals a wide variety of places where his embryos may be found. Some of them — such as stone, wood, plants, & kindling sticks — relate directly to the means by which fire is kindled & fueled. Others relate more to fire-like qualities & powers, such as brilliance & vitality, present in water, plants, animals, & all beings. In the final analysis, Agni fills the entire universe as the latent embryo of growth & vitality. As Raimundo Panikkar writes, ‘Agni… is one of the most comprehensive symbols of the reality that is all-encompassing’ (1977, p.325).

Agni pervades & decks the heaven & earth… his forms are scattered everywhere.
— RV 10,80
He [Agni] who is the embryo of waters, embryo of woods, embryo of all things that move & do not move.
— RV 1,70,2
In plants & herbs, in all existent beings, I [Agni] have deposited the embryo of increase. I have engendered all progeny on earth, and sons in women hereafter.
— RV 10,183,3
You [Agni] have filled earth, heaven, & the air between, and follow the whole cosmos like a shadow.
— RV 1,73,8
We call upon the sage with holy verses, Agni Vaisvanara the ever-beaming, who has surpassed both heaven & earth in greatness. He is a god below, a god above us.
— RV 10,88,14.

This view that Agni/fire in a latent state is immortal & omnipresent occurs also in the Upanisads that were composed circa 850-750 B.C. and later accepted into the Vedic Canon. The authors of these texts use this view to illustrate, by way of analogy, the doctrines of a unitary identity immanent in all things, and of the immortality of the soul in spite of apparent death.

Now, the light that shines higher than this heaven, on the backs of all, on the backs of everything, in the highest worlds, than which there are no higher — truly that is the same as the light here within a person. There is this hearing of it — when one closes one’s ears and hears a sound, a roar, as of a fire blazing.
— ChU 3.13.7-8

Truly, this Brahma [the god that the Upanisads say is immanent in the cosmos] shines when fire blazes, and disappears when it does not blaze. Its brilliance goes to the sun; its vital breath to the wind.

This Brahma shines when the sun is seen, and disappears when it is not seen. Its brilliance goes to the moon, its vital breath to the wind. (Similarly for moon & lightning.)

Truly, all these divinities, having entered into wind, do not perish when they die (disappear) in the wind; indeed, from there they come forth again.
— KauU 2.12

In the major non-canonical Upanisads — whose period of composition is believed to overlap with the time of the Buddha — the analogy is even more explicit:

As the one fire has entered the world
and becomes corresponding in form to every form,
so the Inner Soul of all things
corresponds in form to every form,
and yet is outside.
— KathU 2.2.9

As the material form of fire,
when latent in its source,
is not perceived —
and yet its subtle form
is not destroyed,
but may be seized again
in its fuel-source —
so truly both (the universal Brahma
& the individual Soul)
are (to be seized) in the body
by means of (the meditation word) AUM.
Making one’s body the lower friction stick,
and AUM the upper stick,
practicing the drill of meditative absorption,
one may see the god,
hidden as it were.
— SvU 1.13-14

One interesting development in this stratum of the Vedic literature is the positive sense in which it comes to regard extinguished fire. The Vedic hymns & earlier Upanisads saw burning fire as a positive force, the essence of life & vitality. These texts, though, see the tranquillity & inactivity of the extinguished fire as an ideal image for the soul’s desired destination.

To that God, illumined by his own intellect,
do I, desiring liberation, resort for refuge —
to him without parts,
without activity,
tranquil,
impeccable, spotless,
the highest bridge to the deathless,
like a fire with fuel consumed.
— SvU 6.18-19

As fire through loss of fuel
grows still (extinguished) in its own source,
so thought by loss of activeness
grows still in its own source…
For by tranquillity of thought
one destroys
good & evil karma.
With tranquil soul, stayed on the Soul,
one enjoys
unending ease.
— MaiU 6.34

Whether this re-evaluation of the image of fire — seeing its extinguishing as preferable to its burning — predated the founding of Buddhism, was influenced by it, or simply paralleled it, no one can say for sure, as there are no firm dates for any of the Upanisads. At any rate, in both stages of the Vedic attitude toward fire, the thought of a fire going out carried no connotations of going out of existence at all. Instead, it implied a return to an omnipresent, immortal state. This has led some scholars to assume that, in using the image of an extinguished fire to illustrate the goal he taught, the Buddha was simply adopting the Vedic position wholesale and meant it to carry the same implications as the last quotation above: a pleasant eternal existence for a tranquil soul.

But when we look at how the Buddha actually used the image of extinguished fire in his teachings, we find that he approached the Vedic idea of latent fire from another angle entirely: If latent fire is everywhere all at once, it is nowhere in particular. If it is conceived as always present in everything, it has to be so loosely defined that it has no defining characteristics, nothing by which it might be known at all. Thus, instead of using the subsistence of latent fire as an image for immortality, he uses the diffuse, indeterminate nature of extinguished fire as understood by the Vedists to illustrate the absolute indescribability of the person who has reached the Buddhist goal.

Just as the destination of a glowing fire
struck with a [blacksmith's] iron hammer,
gradually growing calm,
isn’t known:
Even so, there’s no destination to describe
for those who are rightly released
— having crossed over the flood
of sensuality’s bonds —
for those who’ve attained
unwavering ease.
— Ud VIII.10

‘But, Venerable Gotama [the Brahman, Aggivessana Vacchagotta, is addressing the Buddha], the monk whose mind is thus released: Where does he reappear?’
‘”Reappear,” Vaccha, doesn’t apply.’
‘In that case, Venerable Gotama, he does not reappear.’
‘”Does not reappear,” Vaccha, doesn’t apply.’
‘…both does & does not reappear.’
‘…doesn’t apply.’
‘…neither does nor does not reappear.’
‘…doesn’t apply.’…
‘At this point, Venerable Gotama, I am befuddled; at this point, confused. The modicum of clarity coming to me from your earlier conversation is now obscured.’
‘Of course you’re befuddled, Vaccha. Of course you’re confused. Deep, Vaccha, is this phenomenon, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. For those with other views, other practices, other satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know. That being the case, I will now put some questions to you. Answer as you see fit. What do you think, Vaccha: If a fire were burning in front of you, would you know that, “This fire is burning in front of me”?’
‘…yes…’
‘And suppose someone were to ask you, Vaccha, “This fire burning in front of you, dependent on what is it burning?” Thus asked, how would you reply?’
‘…I would reply, “This fire burning in front of me is burning dependent on grass & timber as its sustenance.”‘
‘If the fire burning in front of you were to go out, would you know that “This fire burning in front of me has gone out”?’
‘…yes…’
‘And suppose someone were to ask you, “This fire that has gone out in front of you, in which direction from here has it gone? East? West? North? Or south?” Thus asked, how would you reply?’
‘That doesn’t apply, Venerable Gotama. Any fire burning dependent on a sustenance of grass & timber, being unnourished — from having consumed that sustenance and not being offered any other — is classified simply as “out” (nibbuto).’
‘Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, like an uprooted palm tree, deprived of the conditions of existence, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of form, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard-to-fathom, like the sea. “Reappears” doesn’t apply. “Does not reappear” doesn’t apply. “Both does & does not reappear” doesn’t apply. “Neither reappears nor does not reappear” doesn’t apply.
‘Any feeling… Any perception… Any mental process…
‘Any act of consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned… Freed from the classification of consciousness, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard-to-fathom, like the sea.’
— M 72

The person who has attained the goal is thus indescribable because he/she has abandoned all things by which he/she could be described. This point is asserted in even more thoroughgoing fashion in a pair of dialogues where two inexperienced monks who have attempted to describe the state of the Tathagata after death are cross-examined on the matter by Sariputta & the Buddha himself.
Sariputta: What do you think, my friend Yamaka: Do you regard form as the Tathagata?
Yamaka: No, sir.
Sariputta: Do you regard feeling as the Tathagata?
Yamaka: No, sir.
Sariputta: …perception…?
Yamaka: No, sir.
Sariputta: …mental processes…?
Yamaka: No, sir.
Sariputta: …consciousness…?
Yamaka: No, sir.
Sariputta: Do you regard the Tathagata as being in form? Elsewhere than form? In feeling? Elsewhere than feeling? In perception? Elsewhere than perception? In mental processes? Elsewhere than mental processes? In consciousness? Elsewhere than consciousness?
Yamaka: No, sir.
Sariputta: Do you regard the Tathagata as form-feeling-perception-mental processes-consciousness?
Yamaka: No, sir.
Sariputta: Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without feeling, without perception, without mental processes, without consciousness?
Yamaka: No, sir.
Sariputta: And so, my friend Yamaka — when you can’t pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life — is it proper for you to declare, ‘As I understand the Teaching explained by the Master, a monk with no more mental effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death’?
Yamaka: Previously, friend Sariputta, I did foolishly hold that evil supposition. But now, having heard your explanation of the Teaching, I have abandoned that evil supposition, and the Teaching has become clear.
Sariputta: Then, friend Yamaka, how would you answer if you are thus asked: A monk, a worthy one, with no more mental effluents, what is he on the break-up of the body, after death?
Yamaka: Thus asked, I would answer, ‘Form… feeling… perception… mental processes… consciousness are inconstant. That which is inconstant is stressful. That which is stressful has stopped and gone to its end.’
— S XXII.85

The Buddha puts the same series of questions to the monk Anuradha who — knowing that the Tathagata after death could not be described in terms of existence, non-existence, both, or neither — had attempted to describe the Tathagata in other terms. After receiving the same answers as Yamaka had given Sariputta, the Buddha concludes:

‘And so, Anuradha — when you can’t pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life — is it proper for you to declare, “Friend, the Tathagata — the supreme man, the superlative man, attainer of the superlative attainment — being described, is described otherwise than with these four positions: The Tathagata exists after death, does not exist after death, both does & does not exist after death, neither exists nor does not exist after death”?’
‘No, lord.’
‘Very good, Anuradha. Both formerly & now, Anuradha, it is only stress that I describe, and the stopping of stress.’
— S XXII.86

Thus none of the four alternatives — reappearing/existing, not reappearing/existing, both, & neither — can apply to the Tathagata after death, because even in this lifetime there is no way of defining or identifying what the Tathagata is.

To identify a person by the contents of his or her mind — such things as feelings, perceptions, or mental processes — there would have to be a way of knowing what those contents are. In ordinary cases, the texts say, this is possible through either of two cognitive skills that a meditator can develop through the practice of meditation and that beings on higher planes of existence can also share: the ability to know where a living being is reborn after death, and the ability to know another being’s thoughts.

In both skills the knowledge is made possible by the fact that the ordinary mind exists in a state of dependency on its objects. When a being is reborn, its consciousness has to become established at a certain point: This point is what a master of the first skill perceives. When the ordinary mind thinks, it needs a mental object to act as a prop or support (arammana) for its thoughts: This support is what a master of the second skill perceives. The mind of a person who has attained the goal, though, is free from all dependencies and so offers no means by which a master of either skill can perceive it.

Then the Master went with a large number of monks to the Black Rock on the slope of Isigili. From afar he saw Ven. Vakkali lying dead on a couch. Now at that time a smokiness, a darkness was moving to the east, moved to the west, moved to the north, the south, above, below, moved to the intermediate directions. The Master said, ‘Monks, do you see that smokiness, that darkness…?’

‘Yes, Lord.’

‘That is Mara*, the Evil One. He is searching for the consciousness of Vakkali the Clansman: “Where is the consciousness of Vakkali the Clansman established?” But, monks, it is through unestablished consciousness that Vakkali the Clansman has attained total nibbana.’
— S XXII.87

[The Buddha describes the meditative state of a person who has achieved the goal and is experiencing a foretaste of nibbana after death while still alive. We will discuss the nature of this meditative state below. Here, though, we are interested in how this person appears to those who would normally be able to fathom another person's mind.]

There is the case, Sandha, where for an excellent thorough-bred of a man the perception of earth with regard to earth has ceased to exist; the perception of liquid with regard to liquid… the perception of heat with regard to heat… the perception of wind with regard to wind… the perception of the dimension of the infinitude of space with regard to the dimension of the infinitude of space… the perception of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness with regard to the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness… the perception of the dimension of nothingness with regard to the dimension of nothingness… the perception of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception with regard to the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception… the perception of this world with regard to this world… the next world with regard to the next world… and whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: the perception with regard even to that has ceased to exist.
Absorbed in this way, the excellent thoroughbred of a man is absorbed dependent neither on earth, liquid, heat, wind, the dimension of the infinitude of space, the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, the dimension of nothingness, the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, this world, the next world; nor on whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after or pondered by the intellect — and yet he is absorbed. And to this excellent thoroughbred of a man, absorbed in this way, the gods, together with Indra, the Brahmas & their chief queens, pay homage even from afar:

Homage to you, O thoroughbred man.
Homage to you, O superlative man —
of whom we have no direct knowledge
even by means of that with which
you are absorbed.
— A XI.10

Thus the mind that has attained the goal cannot be known or described from the outside because it is completely free of any dependency — any support or object inside it — by which it might be known. This point forms the context for the dialogue in which the Brahman Upasiva asks the Buddha about the person who attains the goal.

Upasiva:
If he stays there, O All-around Eye
unaffected for many years,
right there
would he be cooled & released?
Would [his] consciousness be like that?
The Buddha:
As a flame overthrown by the force of the wind
goes to an end that cannot be classified,
so the sage freed from naming (mental) activity
goes to an end that cannot be classified.

Upasiva:
He who has reached the end:
Does he not exist,
or is he for eternity free from affliction?
Please, sage, declare this to me
as this phenomenon has been known by you.
The Buddha:
One who has reached the end has no criterion
by which anyone would say that —
for him it doesn’t exist.
When all phenomena are done away with
All means of speaking are done away with as well.
— Sn V.6

The important term in the last verse is pamana: ‘criterion.’ It is a pregnant term, with meanings both in philosophical and in ordinary usage. In philosophical discourse, it refers to a means of knowledge or a standard used to assess the validity of an assertion or object. In the Buddha’s time and later, various schools of thought specialized in discussing the nature and role of such criteria. The Maitri Upanisad contains one of their basic tenets:

Because of its precision, this [the course of the sun through the zodiac] is the criterion for time. For without a criterion, there is no ascertaining the things to be assessed.
— MaiU 6.14

Thus when a mind has abandoned all phenomena, there is no means or criterion by which anyone else could know or say anything about it. This much is obvious. But the verse also seems to be saying that the goal is indescribable from the inside — for the person experiencing it — as well. First, the verse is in response to Upasiva’s inquiry into the goal as the Buddha has known it. Secondly, the line, ‘for him it doesn’t exist,’ can mean not only that the person experiencing the goal offers no criteria to the outside by which anyone else might describe him/her, but also that the experience offers no criteria from the inside for describing it either. And as we have already noted, the outside criteria by which a person might be described are determined precisely by what is there inside the person’s mind. Thus, for the person experiencing the goal, there would not even be any means of knowing whether or not there was a person having the experience. There would simply be the experience in & of itself.
This is where the ordinary meaning of pamana — as limit or measurement — comes in. This meaning goes back to the Vedic hymns. There, the act of measuring is seen as an essential part of the process of the creation (or ‘building,’ like a house) of the cosmos. In one Rg Vedic hymn (X.129), for example, the creation of mind is followed by the appearance of a horizontal limit or measuring line separating male from female (heaven from earth). From this line, the rest of the cosmos is laid out.

So to say that no criterion/measurement/limit exists for the person experiencing the goal means that the person’s experience is totally free of all the most elementary perceptions & distinctions that underlie our knowledge of the cosmos. And the word ‘free’ — one of the few the Buddha uses in a straightforward way to describe the mind that has attained the goal — thus carries two meanings: free from dependency, as we have already seen; and free from limitations, even of the most abstruse & subtlest sort.
This second reading of the verse — dealing with the limitlessness & indescribability of the goal for the person experiencing it — is supported by a number of other passages in the Pali Canon referring explicitly to the inner experience of the goal.

Consciousness without feature, without end
luminous all around:
Here water, earth, fire, & wind have no footing.
Here long & short
coarse & fine
fair & foul
name & form
are all brought to an end.
With the stopping
of [the activity of] consciousness,
each is here brought to an end.
— D 11

There is, monks, that dimension where there is neither earth nor water, nor fire nor wind, nor dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, nor this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor stasis, nor passing away, nor arising: without stance, without foundation, without support (mental object). This, just this, is the end of stress.
— Ud VIII.1

Where water, earth, fire, & wind have no footing:
There the stars do not shine,
the sun is not visible,
the moon does not appear,
darkness is not found.
And when a sage, a worthy one, through sagacity
has known [this] for himself,
then from form & formless,
from pleasure & pain,
he is freed.
— Ud I.10

Consciousness without feature, without end, luminous all around, does not partake of the solidity of earth, the liquidity of water, the radiance of fire, the windiness of wind, the divinity of devas (and so on through a list of the various levels of godhood to) the allness of the All.
— M 49

The phrase ‘does not partake of the allness of the All’ can best be understood with reference to the following three passages:

What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is termed the All. Anyone who would say, ‘Repudiating this All, I will describe another,’ if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range.
— S XXXV.23

If the six senses & their objects — sometimes called the six spheres of contact — constitute the All, is there anything beyond the All?
MahaKotthita: With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six spheres of contact [vision, hearing, smell, taste, touch, & intellection] is it the case that there is anything else?
Sariputta: Do not say that, my friend.
MahaKotthita: With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six spheres of contact, is it the case that there is not anything else?
Sariputta: Do not say that, my friend.
MahaKotthita: …is it the case that there both is & is not anything else?
Sariputta: Do not say that, my friend.
MahaKotthita: …is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?
Sariputta: Do not say that, my friend.
MahaKotthita: Being asked… if there is anything else, you say, ‘Do not say that, my friend.’ Being asked… if there is not anything else… if there both is & is not anything else… if there neither is nor is not anything else, you say, ‘Do not say that, my friend.’ Now, how is the meaning of this statement to be understood?
Sariputta: Saying… is it the case that there is anything else… is it the case that there is not anything else… is it the case that there both is & is not anything else… is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else, one is differentiating non-differentiation. However far the six spheres of contact go, that is how far differentiation goes. However far differentiation goes, that is how far the six spheres of contact go. With the remainderless fading & stopping of the six spheres of contact, there comes to be the stopping, the allaying of differentiation.
— A IV.173

The dimension of non-differentiation, although it may not be described, may be realized through direct experience.

Monks, that sphere should be realized where the eye (vision) stops and the perception (mental noting) of form fades. That sphere is to be realized where the ear stops and the perception of sound fades… where the nose stops and the perception of aroma fades… where the tongue stops and the perception of flavor fades… where the body stops and the perception of tactile sensation fades… where the intellect stops and the perception of idea/phenomenon fades: That sphere should be realized.
— S XXXV.116

This experience of the goal — absolutely unlimited freedom, beyond classification and exclusive of all else — is termed the elemental nibbana property with no ‘fuel’ remaining (anupadisesa-nibbana-dhatu). It is one of two ways in which nibbana is experienced, the distinction between the two being expressed as follows:

Monks, there are these two forms of the nibbana property. Which two? The nibbana property with fuel remaining, and the nibbana property with no fuel remaining.

And what is the nibbana property with fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is a worthy one devoid of mental effluents, who has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the bonds of becoming, and is released through right knowing. His five sense faculties still remain, and owing to their being intact, he is cognizant of the pleasant & the unpleasant, and is sensitive to pleasure & pain. That which is the passing away of passion, aversion, & delusion in him is termed the nibbana property with fuel remaining.
And what is the nibbana property with no fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is a worthy one… released through right knowing. For him, all that is sensed, being unrelished will grow cold right here. This is termed the nibbana property with no fuel remaining.
— Iti 44

The phrase referring to the range of feeling as ‘growing cold right here’ is a set expression describing death as experienced by one who has reached the goal. The verse following this passage states explicitly that this is what is meant here.

These two
nibbana properties
proclaimed by the one with vision
the one independent
the one who is Such:
one property, here in this life
with fuel remaining
from the ending of craving,
the guide to becoming
and that with no fuel remaining
after this life
in which all becoming
completely stops.
Those who know this state uncompounded
their minds released
through the ending of craving,
the guide to becoming,
they, attaining the Teaching’s core,
delighting in the ending of craving,
have abandoned all becoming:
they, the Such.
— Iti 44

The Verses of the Elder Udayin suggest a simile to illustrate the distinction between these two nibbana properties:
A great blazing fire
unnourished grows calm
and while its embers exist
is said to be out:
Conveying a meaning,
this image is taught by the cognizant.
Great Nagas* will recognize
the Naga as taught by the Naga
as free from passion
free from aversion
free from delusion
without mental effluent.
His body discarded, the Naga
will go totally out
without effluent.
— Thag XV.2

Here Ven. Udayin compares the nibbana property with fuel remaining — the state of being absolutely free from passion, aversion, & delusion — to a fire whose flames have died out, but whose embers are still glowing. Although he does not complete the analogy, he seems to imply that the nibbana property without fuel remaining — when the Worthy One discards his body at death — is like a fire so totally out that its embers have grown cold.
Thus the completely free & unadulterated experience we have been discussing is that of nibbana after death. There are, though, states of concentration which give a foretaste of this experience in the present life and which enabled the Buddha to say that he taught the goal on the basis of direct knowledge.

Ananda: In what way, lord, might a monk attain concentration of such a form that he would have neither the perception of earth with regard to earth, nor of water with regard to water, nor of fire… wind… the dimension of the infinitude of space… the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness… the dimension of nothingness… the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception… this world… nor of the next world with regard to the next world, and yet he would still be percipient?

The Buddha: There is the case, Ananda, where he would be percipient of this: ‘This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all mental processes; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; stopping; nibbana.’
— A X.6

[Ananda puts the same question to Sariputta, who responds that he himself once had experienced such a concentration.]
Ananda: But what were you percipient of at that time?
Sariputta: ‘The stopping of becoming — nibbana — the stopping of becoming — nibbana’: One perception arose in me as another perception stopped. Just as in a blazing woodchip fire, one flame arises as another flame disappears, even so, ‘The stopping of becoming — nibbana — the stopping of becoming — nibbana’: One perception arose in me as another one stopped. I was percipient of the stopping of becoming — nibbana.
— A X.7

Ananda: It is amazing, my friend, it is marvelous, how the Master has attained & recognized the opportunity for the purification of beings… and the direct realization of nibbana, where the eye will be, and forms, and yet one will not be sensitive to that sphere; where the ear will be, and sounds… where the nose will be, and aromas… where the tongue will be, and flavors… where the body will be, and tactile sensations, and yet one will not be sensitive to that sphere.
Udayin: Is one insensitive to that sphere with or without a perception in mind?
Ananda: …with a perception in mind…
Udayin: …what perception?
Ananda: There is the case where with the complete transcending of perceptions dealing with form, and the passing away of perceptions of resistance, and not heeding perceptions of diversity, thinking, ‘infinite space,’ one remains in the dimension of the infinitude of space: Having this perception in mind, one is not sensitive to that sphere.
Further, with the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of space, thinking, ‘infinite consciousness,’ one remains in the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness: Having this perception in mind, one is not sensitive to that sphere.
Further, with the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, thinking, ‘There is nothing,’ one remains in the dimension of nothingness: Having this perception in mind, one is not sensitive to that sphere.
Once, friend, when I was staying in Saketa at the Game Refuge in the Black Forest, the nun Jatila Bhagika went to where I was staying, and on arrival — having bowed to me — stood to one side. As she was standing to one side, she said to me: ‘The concentration whereby — neither pressed down nor forced back, nor with mental processes kept blocked or suppressed — still as a result of release, contented as a result of stillness, and as a result of contentment one is not agitated: This concentration is said by the Master to be the fruit of what?’
I said to her, ‘…This concentration is said by the Master to be the fruit of gnosis (the knowledge of Awakening).’ Having this sort of perception, friend, one is not sensitive to that sphere.
— A IX.37

In this extraordinary state of mental poise — neither pressed, forced, blocked, or suppressed — nibbana in the present life is experienced as freedom from all perception dealing with the six sensory spheres & the spheres of meditative absorption. Although one is conscious, and these spheres are present, one does not partake of them.
On the level of ordinary sensory experience, however, nibbana in the present life is experienced by the Worthy One as the passing away of passion, aversion, & delusion. This implies that these three states are analogous to fire; and as we saw in the Introduction, they are directly referred to as fires at various points in the Canon. On the surface, the notion of passion & aversion as fires hardly requires explanation, but in order to gain a fuller appreciation of the analogies that the Canon draws between fire on the one hand, and passion, aversion, & delusion on the other, we first need some background on the specifically Buddhist views on fire it contains.

CHAPTER 2

Although the compilers of the Pali Canon were not concerned with teaching the physical sciences, there are frequent passages where they cite the behavior of the physical universe, in similes or examples, to illustrate points of doctrine. A number of these passages discuss questions of heat, motion, meteorology, the etiology of diseases, and so forth, in enough detail to show that a common theory underlies their explanation. That theory centers on the concept of ‘dhatu,’ property or potential. The physical properties presented in this theory are four: those of earth (solidity), liquid, heat, & wind (motion). Three of them — liquid, heat, & wind — are potentially active. When they are aggravated, agitated or provoked — the Pali term here, ‘pakuppati,’ is used also on the psychological level, where it means angered or upset — they act as the underlying cause for activity in nature. Fire, for example, is said to occur when the heat property is provoked.

There comes a time when the external heat property is provoked and consumes village, town & city, countryside & rural area; and then, coming to the edge of a green district, the edge of a road, the edge of a rocky district, to the water’s edge, or to a lush, well-watered area, goes out from lack of sustenance.
— M 28

Once a fire has been provoked, it needs ‘upadana’ — commonly translated as fuel — to continue burning. Upadana has other meanings besides fuel, though — one is the nourishment that sustains the life & growth of a tree — and as we will see below, wind can also function as a fire’s upadana. Thus, ’sustenance’ would seem to be a more precise translation for the term.
‘What do you think, young man: Which fire would be more brilliant, luminous, & dazzling — that which burned in dependence on a sustenance of grass & timber, or that which burned in dependence on having relinquished a sustenance of grass & timber?’
‘If it were possible, Gotama, for a fire to burn in dependence on having relinquished a sustenance of grass & timber, that fire would be the more brilliant, luminous, & dazzling.’
‘It’s impossible, young man, there is no way that a fire could burn in dependence on having relinquished a sustenance of grass & timber, aside from a feat of psychic power…’
— M 99

‘Just as a fire, Vaccha, burns with sustenance, and not without sustenance, even so I declare the rebirth of one who has sustenance, and not of one without sustenance.’
‘But, Venerable Gotama, at the moment a flame is being swept on by the wind and goes a far distance, what do you say is its sustenance then?’
‘Vaccha, when a flame is being swept on by the wind and goes a far distance, I say that it is wind-sustained. The wind, Vaccha, is its sustenance at that time.’
‘And at the moment when a being sets this body aside and has not yet attained another body, what do you say is its sustenance then?’
‘Actually, Vaccha, when a being sets this body aside and has not yet attained another body, I say that it is craving-sustained. Craving, Vaccha, is its sustenance at that time.’
— S XLIV.9

Another meaning for upadana is clinging, which suggests that, just as a tree clings to the soil that provides its sustenance, fire clings to its fuel. Thus the above passage could also read, ‘fire burns with clinging and not without clinging’ — a characteristic of fire that was observed in other ancient Asian traditions, such as the Chinese I Ching, as well.
The clinging nature of fire is reflected in a number of other idioms used by the Pali Canon to describe its workings. For one, an object that catches fire is said to get ’stuck’ (passive) or to ’stick’ (active): Adherence is a two-way process.

Just as a wing bone or tendon parings, monks, thrown into a fire don’t catch fire (lit: ’stick’ or ‘get stuck’), keep apart, turn aside, and are not drawn in; even so the heart of a monk who spends time often with a mind accustomed to focusing on the repulsive, doesn’t stick to the [thought of] engaging in the sexual act, keeps apart, turns aside, and is not drawn in, and remains either indifferent or repelled.
— A VII.46

The second side of the attachment — that fire, in sticking to something, gets stuck — is reflected in yet another idiom in the Pali Canon: When it leaves a piece of fuel it has been clinging to, it is said to be released.

Just as fire… after being released from a house of reeds or a house of grass, burns even gabled houses, plastered, latched, shut against the wind; even so, all dangers that arise, arise from fools, and not from wise people; all disasters… all troubles that arise, arise from fools and not from wise people.
— M 115

This sense of fire’s being entrapped as it burns echoes the stanza from the Svetasvatara Upanisad, quoted above (page 19), that refers to fire as being ’seized’ when ignited by the friction of fire sticks. Apparently the Buddhists were not alone in their time in seeing attachment & entrapment as they watched a fire burn. And this would account for the way early Buddhist poetry tends to couple the image of an extinguished fire with the notion of freedom:
like a flame’s going out
was the liberation of awareness.
— D 16

as a flame overthrown by the force of the wind…
so the sage freed from mental activity…
— Sn V.6

So, to summarize: The image of an extinguished fire carried no connotations of annihilation for the early Buddhists. Rather, the aspects of fire that to them had significance for the mind-fire analogy are these: Fire, when burning, is in a state of agitation, dependence, attachment, & entrapment — both clinging & being stuck to its sustenance. Extinguished, it becomes calm, independent, indeterminate, & unattached: It lets go of its sustenance and is released.
This same nexus of events, applied to the workings of the mind, occurs repeatedly in Canonical passages describing the attainment of the goal:

One attached is unreleased; one unattached is released. Should consciousness, when standing [still], stand attached to [a physical] form, supported by form [as its object], established on form, watered with delight, it would exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation. Should consciousness, when standing [still], stand attached to feeling… to perception… to mental processes… it would exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation. Were someone to say, ‘I will describe a coming, a going, a passing away, an arising, a growth, an increase, or a proliferation of consciousness apart from form, from feeling, from perception, from mental processes,’ that would be impossible.

If a monk abandons passion for the property of form… feeling… perception… mental processes… consciousness, then owing to the abandoning of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no base for consciousness. Consciousness, thus unestablished, not proliferating, not performing any function, is released. Owing to its release, it stands still. Owing to its stillness, it is contented. Owing to its contentment, it is not agitated. Not agitated, he [the monk] is totally ‘nibbana-ed’ right within. He discerns that ‘Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.’
— S XXII.53

This being the set of events — stillness, independence, unattachment — associated with the extinguishing of a fire and the attainment of the goal, it would appear that of all the etymologies offered to explain the word ‘nibbana,’ the one closest to its original connotations is that quoted by Buddhaghosa in The Path of Purification (VIII, 247). There he derives the word from the negative prefix ‘nir,’ plus ‘vana,’ or binding*: ‘Unbinding.’

Modern scholars have tended to scorn this derivation as fanciful, and they favor such hypotheses as ‘blowing out,’ ‘not blowing’ or ‘covering.’ But although these hypotheses may make sense in terms of modern Western ideas about fire, they are hardly relevant to the way nibbana is used in the Canon. Freedom, on the other hand, is more than relevant. It is central, both in the context of ancient Indian theories of fire and in the psychological context of attaining the goal: ‘Not agitated, he is totally unbound right within.’

So ‘Unbinding’ would seem to be the best equivalent for nibbana we have in English. What kind of unbinding? We have already gained some idea — liberation from dependency & limitations, from agitation & death — but it turns out that nibbana is not the only term the Buddha borrowed from the workings of fire to describe the workings of the mind. Upadana is another, and a survey of how he applied it to the mind will help to show what is loosed in the mind’s unbinding and how.

CHAPTER 3

Upadana carries both of its meanings — clinging & sustenance — when applied to the mind. It refers on the one hand both to mental clinging & to the object clung to, and on the other to both the act of taking mental sustenance & the sustenance itself. This, of course, raises the question, ‘Sustenance for what?’ In the description of dependent co-arising, upadana forms the condition for becoming and, through becoming, for birth, aging, death, and the entire mass of suffering & stress. Thus the answer: ‘Sustenance for becoming’ & its attendant ills.

Just as if a great mass of fire, of ten… twenty… thirty or forty cartloads of timber were burning, and into it a man would periodically throw dried grass, dried cow dung, & dried timber, so that the great mass of fire — thus nourished, thus sustained — would burn for a long, long time; even so, monks, in one who keeps focusing on the allure of those phenomena that offer sustenance (lit: ‘flammable phenomena’), craving develops; with craving as condition, sustenance; with sustenance as condition, becoming; with becoming as condition, birth; with birth as condition, aging, illness & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all come into play. Thus is the origin of this entire mass of suffering & stress.

Just as if a great mass of fire… were burning, into which a man simply would not periodically throw dried grass, dried cow dung, or dried timber, so that the great mass of fire — its original sustenance being consumed, and no other being offered — would, without nourishment, go out; even so, monks, in one who keeps focusing on the drawbacks of those phenomena that offer sustenance, craving stops. From the stopping of craving, sustenance stops. From the stopping of sustenance, becoming… birth… aging, illness & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all stop. Thus is the stopping of this entire mass of suffering & stress.
— S XIII.52

The Buddha made a distinction between phenomena that offer sustenance & the sustenance itself.

And what, monks, are phenomena that offer sustenance? What is sustenance? Form, monks, is a phenomenon offering sustenance. Any desire & passion related to it, is sustenance related to it. Feeling… Perception… Mental processes… Consciousness is a phenomenon offering sustenance. Any desire & passion related to it, is sustenance related to it.
— S XXII.121

Thus passion & desire are both the act of taking sustenance and the sustenance itself, while form, feeling, mental processes, & consciousness simply offer the opportunity for them to occur.
Alternatively, we can translate the distinction as one between clingable phenomena & the clinging itself.

And what, monks, are clingable phenomena? What is clinging? Form, monks, is a clingable phenomenon. Any desire & passion related to it, is clinging related to it. Feeling… Perception… Mental processes… Consciousness is a clingable phenomenon. Any desire & passion related to it, is clinging related to it.
— S XXII.121

In this case, passion & desire are the act of clinging and the object clung to, while form, feeling, & the rest simply offer the opportunity for them to occur.
Still, the two sides of this distinction are so closely interrelated that they are hardly distinct at all.

Visakha: Is it the case that clinging/sustenance is the same thing as the five aggregates for clinging/sustenance [form, feeling, perception, mental processes & consciousness], or is it something separate?
Sister Dhammadinna: Neither is clinging/sustenance the same thing as the five aggregates for clinging/sustenance, my friend, nor is it something separate. Whatever desire & passion there is with regard to the five aggregates for clinging/sustenance, that is the clinging/sustenance there.
— M 44

(The use of the word aggregate (khandha) here may relate to the fire image, as khandha can also mean the trunk of a tree.)
The desire & passion for these five aggregates can take any of four forms.
Monks, there are four [modes of] sustenance for becoming. Which four? Sensuality as a form of sustenance, views as a form of sustenance, precepts & practices as a form of sustenance, doctrines of the self as a form of sustenance.
— M 11

These four modes of sustenance act as the focus for many of the passages in the Canon describing the attainment of the goal. Because they are so closely related to the notion of nibbana — they are the binding loosened in the unbinding of the mind — each of them deserves to be considered in detail.

First, sensuality. The Buddha recommended relinquishing attachment to sensuality, not because sensual pleasures are in any way evil, but because the attachment itself is dangerous: both in terms of the pain experienced when a relished pleasure inevitably ends, and in terms of the detrimental influence such attachment can have on a person’s actions — and thus on his or her future condition.

It is with a cause, monks, that sensual thinking occurs, and not without a cause… And how is it, monks, that sensual thinking occurs with a cause and not without a cause? In dependence on the property of sensuality there occurs the perception of sensuality. In dependence on the perception of sensuality there occurs the consideration of sensuality… the desire for sensuality… the fever for sensuality… the quest for sensuality. Questing for sensuality, monks, an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person conducts himself wrongly through three means: through body, through speech, & through mind.

Just as if a man were to throw a burning firebrand into a dry, grassy wilderness and not quickly stamp it out with his hands & feet, and thus whatever animals inhabiting the grass & timber would come to ruin & loss; even so, monks, any contemplative or priest who does not quickly abandon, dispel, demolish, & wipe out of existence any wrong-headed, unwise perceptions once they have arisen, will dwell in stress in the present life — troubled, despairing, & feverish — and on the break-up of the body, after death, can expect a bad destination.
— S XIV.12

This is not to deny that sensual pleasures provide a certain form of happiness, but that happiness must be weighed against the greater pains & disappointments sensuality can bring.
Now what is the allure of sensuality? There are, monks, these five strings of sensuality. Which five? Forms cognizable via the eye — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. Sounds cognizable via the ear… Aromas cognizable via the nose… Flavors cognizable via the tongue… Tactile sensations cognizable via the body — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. Now whatever pleasure or joy arises in dependence on these five strings of sensuality, that is the allure of sensuality.

And what is the drawback of sensuality? There is the case where, on account of the occupation by which a clansman makes a living — whether checking or accounting or calculating or plowing or trading or cattle tending or archery or as a king’s man, or whatever the occupation may be — he faces cold, he faces heat, being harassed by mosquitoes & flies, wind & sun & creeping things, dying from hunger & thirst.

Now this drawback in the case of sensuality, this mass of stress visible here & now, has sensuality for its reason, sensuality for its source, sensuality for its cause, the reason being simply sensuality.

If the clansman gains no wealth while thus working & striving & making effort, he sorrows, grieves, & laments, beats his breast, becomes distraught: ‘My work is in vain, my efforts are fruitless!’ Now this drawback too in the case of sensuality, this mass of stress visible here & now, has sensuality for its reason…

If the clansman gains wealth while thus working & striving & making effort, he experiences pain & distress in protecting it: ‘How will neither kings nor thieves make off with my property, nor fire burn it, nor water sweep it away, nor hateful heirs make off with it?’ And as he thus guards and watches over his property, kings or thieves make off with it, or fire burns it, or water sweeps it away, or hateful heirs make off with it. And he sorrows, grieves, & laments, beats his breast, becomes distraught: ‘What was mine is no more!’ Now this drawback too in the case of sensuality, this mass of stress visible here & now, has sensuality for its reason…

Furthermore, it is with sensuality for the reason, sensuality for the source, sensuality for the cause, the reason being simply sensuality, that kings quarrel with kings, nobles with nobles, priests with priests, householders with householders, mother with child, child with mother, father with child, child with father, brother with brother, sister with sister, brother with sister, sister with brother, friend with friend. And then in their quarrels, brawls, & disputes, they attack one another with fists or with clods or with sticks or with knives, so that they incur death or deadly pain. Now this drawback too in the case of sensuality, this mass of stress visible here & now, has sensuality for its reason…

Furthermore, it is with sensuality for the reason, sensuality for the source… that (men), taking swords & shields and buckling on bows & quivers, charge into battle massed in double array while arrows & spears are flying and swords are flashing; and there they are wounded by arrows & spears, and their heads are cut off by swords, so that they incur death or deadly pain. Now this drawback too in the case of sensuality, this mass of stress visible here & now, has sensuality for its reason…

Furthermore, it is with sensuality for the reason, sensuality for the source… that (men), taking swords & shields and buckling on bows & quivers, charge slippery bastions while arrows & spears are flying and swords are flashing; and there they are splashed with boiling cow dung and crushed under heavy weights, and their heads are cut off by swords, so that they incur death or deadly pain. Now this drawback too in the case of sensuality, this mass of stress visible here & now, has sensuality for its reason, sensuality for its source, sensuality for its cause, the reason being simply sensuality.
— M 13

Sumedha to her fiancé:
In the face of the Deathless,
what worth are your sensual pleasures?
For all delights in sensuality are
burning & boiling,
aggravated, aglow…
A blazing grass firebrand,
held in the hand:
Those who let go
do not get burned.
Sensuality is like a firebrand.
It burns
those who
do not let go.
— Thig XVI.1

Even the more honorable emotions that can develop from sensual attraction — such as love & personal devotion — ultimately lead to suffering & stress when one is inevitably parted from the person one loves.

Once in this same Savatthi there was a certain man whose wife died. Owing to her death he went mad, out of his mind and — wandering from street to street, crossroads to crossroads — would say, ‘Have you seen my wife? Have you seen my wife?’ From this it may be realized how from a dear one, owing to a dear one, comes sorrow & lamentation, pain, distress, & despair.
Once in this same Savatthi there was a wife who went to her relatives’ home. Her relatives, having separated her from her husband, wanted to give her to another against her will. So she said to her husband, ‘These relatives of mine, having separated us, want to give me to another against my will,’ whereupon he cut her in two and slashed himself open, thinking, ‘Dead we will be together.’ And from this it may be realized how from a dear one, owing to a dear one, comes sorrow & lamentation, pain, distress, & despair.
— M 87

What do you think, monks: Which is greater, the tears you have shed while transmigrating & wandering this long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, from being separated from what is pleasing — or the water in the four great oceans?… This is the greater: The tears you have shed… Why is that? From an inconstruable beginning, monks, comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on. Long have you thus experienced stress, experienced pain, experienced loss, swelling the cemeteries — long enough to become disenchanted with all conditioned things, enough to become dispassionate, enough to be released.
— S XV.3

A theme recurrent throughout the Canon is that complete knowledge of any object does not end with an understanding of its allure & drawbacks, but goes on to comprehend what brings emancipation from the mental fetters based on both.
And what is the emancipation from sensuality? Whatever is the subduing of passion & desire, the abandoning of passion & desire for sensuality, that is the emancipation from sensuality.
— M 13

Sundara Samudda:
Ornamented, finely clothed
garlanded, adorned,
her feet stained red with lac,
she wore slippers:
a courtesan.
Stepping out of her slippers —
her hands raised before me
palm-to-palm over her heart —
she softly, tenderly,
in measured words
spoke to me first:
‘You are young, recluse.
Heed my message:
Partake of human sensuality.
I will give you luxury.
Truly I vow to you,
I will tend to you as to a fire.
When we are old,
both leaning on canes,
then we will both become contemplatives,
winning the benefits of both worlds.’
And seeing her before me —
a courtesan, ornamented, finely clothed,
hands palm-to-palm over her heart —
like a snare of death laid out,
apt attention arose in me,
the drawbacks appeared,
disenchantment stood at an even keel:
With that, my heart was released…
— Thag VII.1

Seeing a form unmindfully,
focusing on its pleasing features,
one knows with mind enflamed
and remains fastened to it.
(Notice how these lines draw directly on the image of burning as entrapment.)
Seeing a form
— mindfulness lapsed —
attending
to the theme of ‘endearing,’
impassioned in mind,
one feels
and remains fastened on it.
One’s feelings, born of the form,
grow numerous,
Greed & annoyance
injure one’s mind.
Thus amassing stress,
one is said to be far from Unbinding.
(And so on with the rest of the six senses.)
Not impassioned with forms
— seeing a form with mindfulness firm —
dispassioned in mind,
one knows
and doesn’t remain fastened there.
While one is seeing a form
— and even experiencing feeling —
it falls away and doesn’t accumulate.
Thus one fares mindfully.
Thus not amassing stress,
one is said to be
in the presence of Unbinding.
(And so on with the rest of the six senses.)
— S XXXV.95

There are forms, monks, cognizable via the eye — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. If a monk relishes them, welcomes them, & remains fastened to them, he is said to be a monk fettered by forms cognizable by the eye. He has gone over to Mara’s camp; he has come under Mara’s power. The Evil One can do with him as he wills.
(And so on with the rest of the six senses.)
— S XXXV.115

There are forms cognizable by the eye — agreeable… enticing. If a monk relishes them, welcomes them, & remains fastened to them, then… his consciousness is dependent on them, is sustained by them. With sustenance/clinging, the monk is not totally unbound…
If he does not relish them, welcome them, or remain fastened to them, then… his consciousness is not dependent on them, is not sustained by them. Without sustenance/clinging, the monk is totally unbound.
(And so on with the rest of the six senses.)
— S XXXV.118

Here again, we see the reciprocal nature of attachment: One is bound by what one relishes & latches onto — or rather, by the act of relishing & latching on, in and of itself.
[Citta:] Venerable sirs, it is just as if a black ox & a white ox were joined with a single collar or yoke. If someone were to say, ‘The black ox is the fetter of the white ox, the white ox is the fetter of the black’ — speaking this way, would he be speaking rightly?
[Some elder monks:] No, householder. The black ox is not the fetter of the white ox, nor is the white ox the fetter of the black. The single collar or yoke by which they are joined: That is the fetter there.

[Citta:] In the same way, the eye is not the fetter of forms, nor are forms the fetter of the eye. Whatever desire & passion arises in dependence on the two of them: That is the fetter there. The ear is not the fetter of sounds… The nose is not the fetter of aromas… The tongue is not the fetter of flavors… The body is not the fetter of tactile sensations… The intellect is not the fetter of ideas, nor are ideas the fetter of the intellect. Whatever desire & passion arises in dependence on the two of them: That is the fetter there.
— S XLI.1

In other words, neither the senses nor their objects are fetters for the mind. Beautiful sights, sounds, & so forth, do not entrap it, nor do the senses themselves. Instead, it is trapped by the act of desire & passion based on such things.
Monks, there are these five strings of sensuality. Which five? Forms cognizable via the eye — agreeable… enticing; sounds… aromas… flavors… tactile sensations cognizable via the body — agreeable… enticing. But these are not sensuality. They are called strings of sensuality in the discipline of the Noble Ones.

The passion for his resolves is a man’s sensuality,
not the beautiful sensual pleasures
found in the world.
The passion for his resolves is a man’s sensuality.
The beauties remain as they are in the world,
while the wise, in this regard
subdue their desire.
— A VI.63

Thus sensual pleasures, which belong to the realm of form, are the ‘clingable phenomena’ that offer sustenance for the bond of desire & passion. Or, to borrow an image from Ven. Rahula, they are the bait — as long as one is blind to their true nature — for falling into the trap of one’s own craving & heedlessness.

Rahula:
They [the unawakened]:
blinded by sensual pleasures,
covered by the net,
veiled with the veil of craving,
bound by the Kinsman of the Heedless,*
like fish in the mouth of a trap.
— Thag IV.8

For this reason, freedom from sensuality as a clinging/sustenance requires a two-pronged approach: to realize the true nature of the bait and to extricate oneself from the trap. The first step involves examining the unattractive side of the human body, for as the Buddha says,
Monks, I don’t know of even one other form that stays in a man’s mind and consumes it like the form of a woman… one other sound… smell… taste… touch that stays in a man’s mind and consumes it like the touch of a woman. The touch of a woman stays in a man’s mind and consumes it.

I don’t know of even one other form that stays in a woman’s mind and consumes it like the form of a man… one other sound… smell… taste… touch that stays in a woman’s mind and consumes it like the touch of a man. The touch of a man stays in a woman’s mind and consumes it.
— A I.1

Just as if a sack with openings at both ends were full of various kinds of grain — wheat, rice, mung beans, kidney beans, sesame seeds, husked rice — and a man with good eyesight, pouring it out, were to reflect, ‘This is wheat. This is rice. These are mung beans. These are kidney beans. These are sesame seeds. This is husked rice,’ in the same way, monks, a monk reflects on this very body from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things:

‘In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, membranes, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine’…

Or again, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground — one day, two days, three days dead — bloated, livid & festering, he applies it to this very body, ‘This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate’…

Or again, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground, picked at by crows, vultures, & hawks; by dogs, hyenas, & various other creatures… a skeleton smeared with flesh & blood, connected with tendons… a fleshless skeleton smeared with blood, connected with tendons… a skeleton without flesh or blood, connected with tendons… bones detached from their tendons, scattered in all directions — here a hand bone, there a foot bone, here a shin bone, there a thigh bone, here a hip bone, there a back bone, here a rib, there a breast bone, here a shoulder bone, there a neck bone, here a jaw bone, there a tooth, here a skull… the bones whitened, somewhat like the color of shells… piled up, more than a year old… decomposed into a powder, he applies it to this very body, ‘This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate.’ So he abides contemplating the body in & of itself, internally, externally or both internally & externally.
— D 22

The purpose of this contemplation is not to develop a morbid fascination with the grotesque, but simply to correct the distortion of perception that tries to deny the unattractive aspects of the body and to admit only ‘the sign of the beautiful’ — its attractive side. Now of course this contemplation has its dangers, for it can go overboard into states of aversion & depression, but these are not incurable. At several points in the Canon, where the Buddha sees that monks have let the contemplation of foulness adversely affect their minds, he recommends that they calm their aversion by focusing on the in & out breath as a companion meditation.

Ultimately, as a more balanced perception of the body develops, one may make use of the second prong of the approach: turning one’s attention from the object of the lust to the act of lust itself, seeing it as an act of mental fabrication — foolish, inconstant, & stressful — and so removing any sense of identification with it. This, in turn, can calm the mind to an even deeper level and lead on to its Unbinding.

Vangisa:
With sensual lust I burn.
My mind is on fire.
Please, Gotama, from compassion,
tell me how to put it out.
Ananda:
From distorted perception
your mind is on fire.
Shun the sign of the beautiful,
accompanied by lust.
See mental processes as other
as stress
as not-self.
Extinguish your great lust.
Do not keep burning again & again.
— Thag XXI.1

For one who keeps focusing on the foulness [of the body], any obsessions with lust for the property of beauty are abandoned. When mindfulness of breathing is internally well-established before one, there are no annoying inclinations to external thinking. For one who keeps focusing on the inconstancy of all processes, whatever is ignorance is abandoned; whatever is clear knowing arises.
Focusing on foulness
with regard to the body,
mindful
of in & out breathing,
seeing
the calming of all processes
— always ardent —
the right-seeing monk,
when released there,
is truly a master of direct knowledge.
Calm,
he is truly a sage
gone beyond bonds.
— Iti 85

Sister Nanda:
As I, heedful,
examined it aptly
[a vision of a beautiful person
growing sick, unclean & putrid]
this body — as it actually is —
was seen inside & out.
Then was I disenchanted with the body
and dispassionate within:
Heedful, detached,
calmed was I,
unbound.
— Thig V.4

Views are the second mode of clinging/sustenance. And, as with the abandoning of attachment to sensuality, the abandoning of attachment to views can lead to an experience of Unbinding.
‘This I maintain,’ does not occur
to one who would investigate
what is seized [as a view]
with reference to [actual] phenomena.
Looking for what is unseized
with reference to views,
and detecting inner peace,
I saw.
— Sn IV.9

Attachment to views can block an experience of Unbinding in any of three major ways. First, the content of the view itself may not be conducive to the arising of discernment and may even have a pernicious moral effect on one’s actions, leading to an unfavorable rebirth.
I have heard that once the Master was dwelling among the Koliyans… Then Punna the Koliyan, a bovine, and Seniya, a canine naked ascetic, approached the Master. On arrival, Punna the Koliyan bovine, saluting the Master, sat to one side, while Seniya, the canine naked ascetic, exchanged greetings with the Master, and having made agreeable polite conversation, sat to one side, curling up like a dog. Punna the Koliyan bovine, as he sat to one side, said to the Master, ‘Sir, Seniya, this naked ascetic, is a canine, a doer-of-hard-tasks. He eats food that is thrown on the ground. He has long undertaken & conformed to that dog-practice. What is his future destination, what is his future course?’
[The Buddha at first declines to answer, but on being pressed, finally responds:] ‘There is the case where a person develops the dog-practice fully & perfectly… Having developed the dog-practice fully & perfectly, having developed a dog’s virtue fully & perfectly, having developed a dog’s mind fully & perfectly, having developed a dog’s demeanor fully & perfectly, then on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of dogs. But if he is of such a view as, “By this virtue or practice or asceticism or holy life I will become a greater or lesser god,” that is his wrong view. Now, Punna, there are two destinations for one with wrong view, I say: purgatory or the animal womb. So the dog-practice, if perfected, leads him to the company of dogs; if defective, to purgatory.’
— M 57

Just as if in the last month of the hot season a maluva creeper pod were to burst open, and a maluva creeper seed were to fall at the foot of a sala tree. The deity living in the tree would become frightened, apprehensive, & anxious. Her friends & companions, relatives & kin — garden deities, forest deities, tree deities, deities living in herbs, grass, & forest monarchs — would gather together to console her: ‘Have no fear, have no fear. In all likelihood a peacock is sure to swallow this maluva creeper seed, or a deer will eat it, or a brush fire will burn it up, or woodsmen will pick it up, or termites will carry it off, and it probably isn’t really a seed.’
And then no peacock swallowed it, no deer ate it, no brush fire burned it up, no woodsmen picked it up, no termites carried it off, and it really was a seed. Watered by a rain-laden cloud, it sprouted in due course and curled its soft, tender, downy tendril around the sala tree.
The thought occurred to the deity living in the sala tree: ‘Now what future danger did my friends… foresee, that they gathered together to console me?… It’s pleasant, the touch of this maluva creeper’s soft, tender, downy tendril.’

Then the creeper, having enwrapped the sala tree, having made a canopy over it, & cascading down around it, caused the massive limbs of the sala tree to come crashing down. The thought occurred to the deity living in the tree: ‘This was the future danger my friends… foresaw, that they gathered together to console me… It’s because of that maluva creeper seed that I’m now experiencing sharp, burning pains.’

In the same way, monks, there are some priests & contemplatives who hold to a doctrine, a view like this: ‘There is no harm in sensual pleasures.’ Thus they meet with their downfall through sensual pleasures. They consort with women wanderers who wear their hair coiled and long.
The thought occurs to them: ‘Now what future danger do those [other] priests & contemplatives foresee that they teach the relinquishment & analysis of sensual pleasures? It’s pleasant, the touch of this woman wanderer’s soft, tender, downy arm.’

Thus they meet with their downfall through sensual pleasures. With the break-up of the body, after death, they will go to a bad bourn, destitution, the realm of the hungry shades, purgatory. There they will experience sharp, burning pains. The thought will occur to them: ‘This was the future danger those priests & contemplatives foresaw that they taught the relinquishment & analysis of sensual pleasures. It’s because of sensual pleasures, as a result of sensual pleasures, that we are now experiencing these sharp, burning pains.’
— M 45

Secondly, apart from the actual content of the views, a person attached to views is bound to get into disputes with those who hold opposing views, resulting in unwholesome mental states for the winners as well as the losers.
Engaged in disputation in the midst of an assembly,
— anxious, desiring praise —
the one defeated is staggered.
Shaken with criticism, he seeks for an opening.
he whose doctrine is [judged as] demolished,
defeated, by those judging the issue:
He laments, he grieves — the inferior exponent —
‘He beat me,’ he mourns.
These disputes have arisen among contemplatives.
In them are victory & defeat.
Seeing this, one would abstain from disputes,
for they have no other goal
than the gaining of praise.
He who is praised there
for expounding his doctrine
in the midst of the assembly,
laughs on that account and grows haughty,
attaining his heart’s desire.
That haughtiness will be his grounds for vexation,
he’ll speak in pride & conceit.
Seeing this, one should abstain from disputes.
No purity is attained by them, say the wise.
— Sn IV.8

Thirdly, and more profoundly, attachment to views implicitly involves attachment to a sense of ’superior’ & ‘inferior,’ and to the criteria used in measuring and making such evaluations. As we saw in Chapter I, any measure or criterion acts as a limitation or bond on the mind.
That, say the skilled, is a binding knot: that
in dependence on which
you see others as inferior.
— Sn IV.5

Whoever construes
‘equal’
’superior’ or
‘inferior,’
by that he’d dispute;
whereas to one unaffected by these three,
‘equal’
’superior’
do not occur.
Of what would the Brahman* say ‘true’ or ‘false,’
disputing with whom,
he in whom ‘equal’ & ‘unequal’ are not…
As the prickly lotus
is unsmeared by water & mud,
so the sage,
an exponent of peace,
without greed,
is unsmeared by sensuality &
the world.
An attainer-of-wisdom
isn’t measured
made proud
by views or by what is thought,
for he isn’t fashioned by them.
He wouldn’t be led by action, learning;
doesn’t reach a conclusion in settled attachments.
For one dispassionate toward perception
there are no ties;
for one released by discernment,
no delusions.
Those who seize at perceptions & views
go about disputing in the world.
— Sn IV.9

An important point to notice is that attachment to views must be abandoned through knowledge, and not through skepticism, agnosticism, ignorance, or a mindless openness to all views. This point is made clear in the Discourse of the Supreme Net. There the Buddha gives a list of 62 philosophical positions concerning the nature of the self, the cosmos, & the state of ultimate freedom in the immediate present. The list is intended to be exhaustive — the ‘net’ in the title of the discourse — covering all possible views & positions on these subjects divided into ten categories, one of the categories — equivocation — including cases of agnosticism.
There are, monks, some contemplatives & priests who, being asked questions regarding this or that, resort to verbal contortions, to eel-like wriggling, on four grounds… There is the case of a certain priest or contemplative who does not discern as it actually is that ‘This is skillful,’ or that ‘This is unskillful.’ The thought occurs to him: ‘I don’t discern as it actually is that “This is skillful,” or that “This is unskillful.” If I… were to declare that “This is skillful,” or that “This is unskillful,” desire, passion, aversion, or resistance would occur to me; that would be a falsehood for me. Whatever would be a falsehood for me would be a distress for me. Whatever would be a distress for me would be an obstacle for me.’ So, out of fear of falsehood, a loathing for falsehood, he does not declare that ‘This is skillful,’ or that ‘This is unskillful.” Being asked questions regarding this or that, he resorts to verbal contortions, to eel-like wriggling: ‘I don’t think so. I don’t think in that way. I don’t think otherwise. I don’t think not. I don’t think not not.’
The second case is virtually identical with the first, substituting ‘clinging’ for ‘falsehood.’
[The third case:] There is the case of a certain priest or contemplative who does not discern as it actually is that ‘This is skillful,’ or that ‘This is unskillful’… ‘If I, not discerning as it actually is that “This is skillful,” or that “This is unskillful,” were to declare that “This is skillful,” or that “This is unskillful” — There are priests and contemplatives who are pundits, subtle, skilled in debate, who prowl about like hair-splitting marksmen, as it were, shooting philosophical positions to pieces with their dialectic. They might cross-question me, press me for reasons, rebuke me. I might not be able to stand my ground, that would be a distress for me… an obstacle for me.’ So, out of a fear for questioning, a loathing for questioning… he resorts to verbal contortions, to eel-like wriggling…
[The fourth case:] There is the case of a certain priest or contemplative who is dull & exceedingly stupid. Out of dullness & exceeding stupidity, he — being asked questions regarding this or that — resorts to verbal contortions, to eel-like wriggling: ‘If you ask me if there exists another world [after death], if I thought that there exists another world, would I declare that to you? I don’t think so. I don’t think in that way. I don’t think otherwise. I don’t think not. I don’t think not not. If you asked me if there isn’t another world… both is & isn’t… neither is nor isn’t… if there are beings who transmigrate… if there aren’t… both are & aren’t… neither are nor aren’t… if the Tathagata exists after death… doesn’t… both… neither… I don’t think so. I don’t think in that way. I don’t think otherwise. I don’t think not. I don’t think not not.’
— D 1

Agnosticism, then, is not a way of abandoning standpoints but is simply another standpoint: Like all standpoints, it must be abandoned through knowledge. The type of knowledge called for — in which standpoints are regarded, not in terms of their content, but as events in a causal chain — is indicated by the refrain that follows each of the ten categories of the Supreme Net.
This, monks, the Tathagata discerns. And he discerns that these standpoints, thus seized, thus held to, lead to such & such a destination, to such & such a state in the world beyond. And he discerns what surpasses this. And yet discerning that, he does not hold to that act of discerning. And as he is not holding to it, Unbinding (nibbuti) is experienced right within. Knowing, for what they are, the origin, ending, allure, & drawbacks of feelings, along with the emancipation from feelings, the Tathagata, monks — through lack of sustenance/clinging — is released.
— D 1

Another list of speculative views — a set of ten positions summarizing the standard topics debated by the various schools of contemplatives in the Buddha’s time — recurs frequently in the Canon. Non-Buddhist debaters used it as a ready-made checklist for gauging an individual’s positions on the controversial issues of the day and they often put it to the Buddha. Invariably, he would reply that he did not hold to any of the ten positions.

‘Seeing what drawback, then, is the venerable Gotama thus entirely dissociated from each of these ten positions?’

‘Vaccha, the position that “the world is eternal” is a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. It is accompanied by suffering, distress, despair, & fever, and it does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, stopping; to calm, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding.

‘The position that “the world is not eternal”… ‘…”the world is finite”… ‘…”the world is infinite”… ‘…”the soul & the body are the same”… ‘…”the soul is one thing and the body another”… ‘…”after death a Tathagata exists”… ‘…”after death a Tathagata does not exist”… ‘…”after death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist”… ‘…”after death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist”… does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, stopping; to calm, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding.’

‘Does Master Gotama have any position at all?’
‘

A “position,” Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: “Such is form, such its origin, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origin, such its disappearance; such is perception… such are mental processes… such is consciousness, such its origin, such its disappearance.” Because of this, I say, a Tathagata,— with the ending, fading out, stopping, renunciation & relinquishment of all construings, all excogitations, all I-making & mine-making & obsession with conceit — is, through lack of sustenance/clinging, released.’
— M 72

The construings the Buddha relinquished include views not only in their fullblown form as specific positions, but also in their rudimentary form as the categories & relationships that the mind reads into experience. This is a point he makes in his instructions to Bahiya, which led immediately to the latter’s attaining the goal. When the mind imposes interpretations on its experience, it is engaging implicitly in system-building and all the limitations of location & relationship that system-building involves. Only when it can free itself of those interpretations and the fetters they place on it, can it gain true freedom.

Then, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bahiya, there is no you in terms of that. When there is no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress.
— Ud I.10
Precepts & practices. The Canon mentions a variety of precepts & practices — the third mode of clinging/sustenance. Prominent among them are Brahmanical rituals & Jain practices of self-torture, and according to the Commentary these are the precepts & practices referred to in this context. Yet although the goal will always remain out of reach as long as one remains attached to such practices, the abandonment of this attachment is never in & of itself sufficient for attaining the goal.

But there is another practice which, though a necessary part of the Buddhist path, can nevertheless offer sustenance for becoming; and which — as the object of attachment to be transcended — figures prominently in descriptions of the goal’s attainment. That practice is jhana, or meditative absorption. It might be argued that this is stretching the term, ‘practice’ (vata), a little far, but jhana does not fall under any of the other three sustenances for becoming at all, and yet it definitely does function as such a sustenance, so there seems to be little choice but to place it here.

Different passages in the Canon number the levels of jhana in different ways. The standard description gives four, although the pure mindfulness & equanimity attained on the fourth level may further be applied to four progressively more & more refined formless sensations — termed the ‘peaceful emancipations, formlessness beyond forms’ — that altogether give eight levels, often referred to as the eight attainments.

A number of objects can serve as the basis for jhana. The breath is one, and an analysis of the Canon’s description of the first stages of breath meditation will give an idea of what jhana involves.

The first step is simply being mindful of the breath in the present:
There is the case of a monk who, having gone to a forest, to the shade of a tree or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, & keeping mindfulness to the fore. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out.

Then comes evaluation: He begins to discern variations in the breath:
Breathing in long, he discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out long, he discerns that he is breathing out long. Or breathing in short, he discerns that he is breathing in short; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short.

The remaining steps are willed, or determined: He ‘trains himself,’ first by manipulating his sense of conscious awareness, making it sensitive to the body as a whole. (This accounts for the term ‘mahaggatam’ — enlarged or expanded — used to describe the mind in the state of jhana.)
He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body, and to breathe out sensitive to the entire body.

Now that he is aware of the body as a whole, he can begin to manipulate the physical sensations of which he is aware, calming them — i.e., calming the breath — so as to create a sense of rapture & ease.

He trains himself to breathe in calming the bodily processes, and to breathe out calming the bodily processes. He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to rapture, and to breathe out sensitive to rapture. He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to pleasure and breathe out sensitive to pleasure.

(As we will see below, he maximizes this sense of rapture & pleasure, making it suffuse the entire body.)

Now that bodily processes are stilled, mental processes become apparent as they occur. These too are calmed, leaving — as we will see below — a radiant awareness of the mind itself.
He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to mental processes, and to breathe out sensitive to mental processes. He trains himself to breathe in calming mental processes and to breathe out calming mental processes. He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to the mind, and to breathe out sensitive to the mind…
— M 118

The standard description of jhana, however, does not refer to any particular object as its basis, but simply divides it into four levels determined by the way the mind relates to the object as it becomes more & more absorbed in it.

Furthermore, monks, the monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities — enters and remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He permeates & pervades, suffuses & fills this very body with the rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, so that nothing of his entire body is unpervaded by rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal.

Just as a skilled bathman or bathman’s apprentice would pour bath powder into a brass basin and knead it together, sprinkling it again & again with water, so that his ball of bath powder — saturated, moisture-laden, permeated within & without — would nevertheless not drip; even so, monks, the monk permeates… this very body with the rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal. And as he remains thus earnest, ardent & intent, any longings related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers & settles inwardly, unified & composed. That is how a monk develops mindfulness immersed in the body.

And furthermore, with the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. He permeates & pervades, suffuses & fills this very body with the rapture & pleasure born of composure, so that nothing of his entire body is unpervaded by rapture & pleasure born of composure.

Just like a lake with spring-water welling up from within, having no inflow from east, west, north, or south, and with the skies periodically supplying abundant showers, so that the cool fount of water welling up from within the lake would permeate & pervade, suffuse & fill it with cool waters, there being no part of the lake unpervaded by the cool waters; even so monks, the monk permeates… this very body with the rapture & pleasure born of composure. And as he remains thus earnest, ardent & intent… he develops mindfulness immersed in the body.

And furthermore, with the fading of rapture, he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, ‘Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.’ He permeates & pervades, suffuses & fills this very body with the pleasure divested of rapture, so that nothing of his entire body is unpervaded by pleasure divested of rapture.

Just as in a blue-, white-, or red-lotus pond, there may be some of the blue, white, or red lotuses that, born & growing in the water, stay immersed in the water and flourish without standing up out of the water, so that they are permeated & pervaded, suffused & filled with cool water from their roots to their tips, there being nothing of those blue, white, or red lotuses unpervaded by cool water; even so, monks, the monk permeates… this very body with the pleasure divested of rapture. And as he remains thus earnest, ardent & intent… he develops mindfulness immersed in the body.

And furthermore, with the abandoning of pleasure & stress — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & sorrow — he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor stress. He sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness, so that nothing of his entire body is unpervaded by pure, bright awareness.
Just as if a man were sitting covered from head to foot with a white cloth so that there would be no part of his body to which the white cloth did not extend; even so, monks, the monk sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. And as he remains thus earnest, ardent & intent… he develops mindfulness immersed in the body.
— M 119

‘Directed thought’ mentioned in the reference to the first level of jhana corresponds, in the description of breath meditation, to the mindfulness directed to the breath in the present. ‘Evaluation’ corresponds to the discernment of variations in the breath, and to the manipulation of awareness & the breath so as to create a sense of rapture & pleasure throughout the body (the bathman kneading moisture throughout the ball of bath powder). The still waters in the simile for the third level of jhana, as opposed to the spring waters welling up in the second level, correspond to the stilling of mental processes. And the pure, bright awareness in the fourth level corresponds to the stage of breath meditation where the meditator is sensitive to the mind.
Thus as the mind progresses through the first four levels of jhana, it sheds the various mental activities surrounding its one object: Directed thought & evaluation are stilled, rapture fades, and pleasure is abandoned. After reaching a state of pure, bright, mindful, equanimous awareness in the fourth level of jhana, the mind can start shedding its perception (mental label) of the form of its object, the space around its object, itself, & the lack of activity within itself. This process takes four steps — the four formlessnesses beyond form — culminating in a state where perception is so refined that it can hardly be called perception at all.

With the complete transcending of perceptions of [physical] form, and the passing away of perceptions of resistance, and not heeding perceptions of diversity, thinking, ‘Infinite space,’ one enters & remains in the dimension of the infinitude of space…

With the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of space, thinking, ‘Infinite consciousness,’ one enters & remains in the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness…
With the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, thinking, ‘There is nothing,’ one enters & remains in the dimension of nothingness…

With the complete transcending of the dimension of nothingness, one enters & remains in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception.
— D 15

To abandon attachment to jhana as a sustenance for becoming means, not to stop practicing it, but rather to practice it without becoming engrossed in the sense of pleasure or equanimity it affords, so that one can discern its true nature for what it is.

When this had been said, the Venerable Ananda asked the Master: ‘In the case, Sir, where a monk has reached the point that —(thinking) “It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon” — he obtains equanimity. Would this monk be totally unbound, or not?’

‘A certain such monk might, Ananda, and another might not.’

‘What is the cause, what is the reason, whereby one might and another might not?’
‘There is the case, Ananda, where a monk has reached the point that —(thinking) “It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon” — he obtains equanimity. He relishes that equanimity, welcomes it, remains fastened to it. As he does so, his consciousness is dependent on it, sustained by it. With sustenance, Ananda, a monk is not totally unbound.’
‘Being sustained, where is that monk sustained?’
‘The dimension of neither perception nor non-perception.’
‘Then, indeed, being sustained, he is sustained by the supreme sustenance.’
‘Being sustained, Ananda, he is sustained by the supreme sustenance; for this — the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception — is the supreme sustenance. There is [however] the case where a monk… reaches equanimity. He does not relish that equanimity, does not welcome it, does not remain fastened to it. Such being the case, his consciousness is not dependent on it, is not sustained by it. Without sustenance, Ananda, a monk is totally unbound.’
— M 106

Once the mind can detach itself from the pleasure & equanimity offered by jhana, it can be inclined toward that which transcends jhana — the unconditioned quality of deathlessness.
There is the case, Ananda, where a monk… enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perceptions, mental processes, & consciousness as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a dissolution, a void, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena and, having done so, inclines it to the quality of deathlessness: ‘This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all mental processes; the relinquishment of all mental acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; stopping; Unbinding.’

Having attained this point, he reaches the ending of the mental effluents. Or, if not, then — through passion & delight for this very phenomenon [the discernment inclining to deathlessness] and from the total ending of the first five of the Fetters*— he is due to be reborn [in the Pure Abodes], there to be totally unbound, never again to return from that world. (Similarly with the other levels of jhana.)
— M 64

The fact that the various levels of jhana are nurtured & willed, and thus dependent on conditions, is important: A realization of exactly how they are nurtured — a realization acquired only through practical experience with them — can give insight into the conditioned nature of all mental events and is one of the ways in which the attachment to jhana, as sustenance for becoming, can be abandoned.

An indication of how this happens is given in outline form in the Discourse on Mindfulness of In & Out Breathing. To take up the description of breath meditation where we left off: Once there is direct awareness of the mind itself, the various levels of jhana are reviewed. Now, however, primary attention is focused, not on the object, but on the mind as it relates to the object — the different ways in which it can be satisfied & steadied, and the different factors from which it can be released by taking it through the different levels (e.g., releasing it from directed thought & evaluation by taking it from the first to the second level, and so forth).

He trains himself to breathe in satisfying the mind, and out satisfying the mind. He trains himself to breathe in steadying the mind, and out steadying the mind. He trains himself to breathe in releasing the mind, and out releasing the mind.

The states of satisfaction, steadiness, & release experienced on these levels, though, are willed and therefore conditioned. The next step is to focus on the fact that these qualities, being conditioned, are inconstant. Once the mind sees directly that inconstancy is inherent both in the pleasure offered by jhana and in the act of will that brings it about, one becomes dispassionate toward it, stops craving it, and can relinquish any & all attachment to it.

He trains himself to breathe in focusing on inconstancy, and out focusing on inconstancy. He trains himself to breathe in focusing on dispassion, and out focusing on dispassion. He trains himself to breathe in focusing on stopping, and out focusing on stopping. He trains himself to breathe in focusing on relinquishment, and out focusing on relinquishment.
— M 118
At the conclusion to the discourse, the Buddha states that breath meditation, when practiced often & repeatedly in this way, results in the maturation of clear knowledge & release.
A more vivid description of how mastery of jhana can lead to the insight that transcends it, is given in the Discourse on the Exposition of the Properties:

[On attaining the fourth level of jhana] there remains only equanimity: pure & bright, pliant, malleable & luminous. Just as if a skilled goldsmith or goldsmith’s apprentice were to prepare a furnace, heat up a crucible, and, taking gold with a pair of tongs, place it in the crucible. He would blow on it periodically, sprinkle water on it periodically, examine it periodically, so that the gold would become refined, well-refined, thoroughly refined, flawless, free from dross, pliant, malleable & luminous. Then whatever sort of ornament he had in mind — whether a belt, an earring, a necklace, or a gold chain — it would serve his purpose. In the same way, there remains only equanimity: pure & bright, pliant, malleable & luminous. He [the meditator] discerns that ‘If I were to direct equanimity as pure & bright as this toward the dimension of the infinitude of space, I would develop the mind along those lines, and thus this equanimity of mine — thus supported, thus sustained — would last for a long time. (Similarly with the remaining formless states.)’

He discerns that ‘If I were to direct equanimity as pure & bright as this toward the dimension of the infinitude of space and to develop the mind along those lines, that would be fabricated. (Similarly with the remaining formless states.)’ He neither fabricates nor wills for the sake of becoming or un-becoming. This being the case, he is not sustained by anything in the world (does not cling to anything in the world). Unsustained, he is not agitated. Unagitated, he is totally unbound right within. He discerns that ‘Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.’
— M 140

Doctrines of the self form the fourth mode of clinging/sustenance. The Canon reports a wide variety of such doctrines current in the Buddha’s time, only to reject them out-of-hand for two major reasons. The first is that even the least articulated sense of self or self-identification inevitably leads to stress & suffering.

‘Monks, do you see any clinging/sustenance in the form of a doctrine of self which, in clinging to, there would not arise sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair?’
‘No, Lord.’
‘…Neither do I… What do you think, monks: If a person were to gather or burn or do as he likes with the grass, twigs, branches, & leaves here in Jeta’s Grove, would the thought occur to you, “It’s us that this person is gathering, burning, or doing with as he likes”?’
‘No, sir. Why is that? Because those things are not our self and do not pertain to our self.’
‘Even so, monks, whatever is not yours: Let go of it. Your letting go of it will be for your long-term happiness & benefit. And what is not yours? Form (body) is not yours…
Feeling is not yours… Perception… Mental processes… Consciousness is not yours. Let go of it. Your letting go of it will be for your long-term happiness & benefit.’
— M 22

The second reason for rejecting doctrines of the self is that, whatever form they take, they all contain inherent inconsistencies. The Buddha’s most systematic treatment of this point is in the Great Discourse on Causation, where he classifies all theories of the self into four major categories: those describing a self (a) possessed of form (a body) & finite; (b) possessed of form & infinite; (c) formless & finite; and (d) formless & infinite. The text gives no examples for the categories, but we might cite the following as illustrations: (a) theories that deny the existence of a soul, and identify the self with the body; (b) theories that identify the self with all being or with the universe; (c) theories of discrete souls in individual beings; (d) theories of a unitary soul or identity immanent in all things.

Discussing these various categories, the Buddha states that people who adhere to any of them will state that the self already is of such a nature, that it is destined to acquire such a nature after death, or that it can be made into such a nature by various practices. He then goes on to discuss the various ways people assume a self as defined in relation to feeling.
‘In what respect, Ananda, does one assume when assuming a self? Assuming feeling to be the self, one assumes that “Feeling is my self” [or] “Feeling is not my self: My self is oblivious [to feeling]” [or] “Neither is feeling my self, nor is my self oblivious to feeling, but rather my self feels, in that my self is subject to feeling.”
‘Now, one who says, “Feeling is my self,” should be addressed as follows: “There are these three feelings, my friend — feelings of pleasure, feelings of pain, & feelings of neither pleasure nor pain. Which of these three feelings do you assume to be the self? At a moment when a feeling of pleasure is sensed, no feeling of pain or of neither pleasure nor pain is sensed. Only a feeling of pleasure is sensed at that moment. At a moment when a feeling of pain is sensed, no feeling of pleasure or of neither pleasure nor pain is sensed. Only a feeling of pain is sensed at that moment. At a moment when a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain is sensed, no feeling of pleasure or of pain is sensed. Only a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain is sensed at that moment.

‘”Now, a feeling of pleasure is inconstant, compounded, dependent on conditions, subject to passing away, dissolution, fading, & stopping. A feeling of pain… A feeling of neither pleasure nor pain is inconstant… subject to stopping. Having sensed a feeling of pleasure as ‘my self,’ then with the stopping of one’s very own feeling of pleasure, ‘my self’ has perished. Having sensed a feeling of pain as ‘my self’… Having sensed a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain as ‘my self,’ then with the stopping of one’s very own feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, ‘my self’ has perished.”
‘Thus he assumes, assuming in the immediate present a self inconstant, entangled in pleasure & pain, subject to arising & passing away, he who says, “Feeling is my self.” Thus in this manner, Ananda, one does not see fit to assume feeling to be the self.

‘As for the person who says, “Feeling is not the self: My self is oblivious [to feeling],” he should be addressed as follows: “My friend, where nothing whatsoever is sensed (experienced) at all, would there be the thought, ‘I am’?”‘
‘No, sir.’
‘Thus in this manner, Ananda, one does not see fit to assume that “Feeling is not my self: My self is oblivious [to feeling].”
‘As for the person who says, “Neither is feeling my self, nor is my self oblivious to feeling, but rather my self feels, in that my self is subject to feeling,” he should be addressed as follows: “My friend, should feelings altogether and every way stop without remainder, then with feeling completely not existing, owing to the stopping of feeling, would there be the thought, ‘I am’?”‘
‘No, sir.’
‘Thus in this manner, Ananda, one does not see fit to assume that “Neither is feeling my self, nor is my self oblivious to feeling, but rather my self feels, in that my self is subject to feeling.”
‘Now, Ananda, in as far as a monk does not assume feeling to be the self, nor the self as oblivious, nor that “My self feels, in that my self is subject to feeling,” then, not assuming in this way, he is not sustained by anything in the world. Unsustained, he is not agitated. Unagitated, he is totally unbound right within. He discerns that “Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.”
‘If anyone were to say with regard to a monk whose mind is thus released that “The Tathagata exists after death,” is his view, that would be mistaken; that “The Tathagata does not exist after death”… that “The Tathagata both exists & does not exist after death”… that “The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death” is his view, that would be mistaken. Why? Having directly known the extent of designation and the extent of the objects of designation, the extent of expression and the extent of the objects of expression, the extent of description and the extent of the objects of description, the extent of discernment and the extent of the objects of discernment, the extent to which the cycle revolves: Having directly known that, the monk is released. [To say that,] “The monk released, having directly known that, does not see, does not know is his opinion,” that would be mistaken.’ (This last sentence means that the monk released is not an agnostic concerning what lies beyond the extent of designation, and so forth. He does know & see what lies beyond, even though — as Ven. Sariputta said to Ven. MahaKotthita — he cannot express it inasmuch as it lies beyond differentiation. See the discussion on pages 31-32.)
— D 15

Views of the self can center around not only feeling, but also physical form, perception, mental processes, & consciousness — the five aggregates for sustenance — which, according to another passage in the above discourse, cover the extent of what can be designated, expressed, & described, but none of which, on investigation, can rightfully be designated as self.
I have heard that on one occasion the Master was staying at Varanasi, in the Game Refuge at Isipatana. There he addressed the group of five monks:
‘Physical form, monks, is not the self. If physical form were the self, this body would not lend itself to dis-ease. One could get physical form to be like this and not be like that. But precisely because physical form is not the self, it lends itself to dis-ease. And one cannot get physical form to be like this and not be like that.
‘Feeling is not the self… Perception is not the self… Mental processes are not the self…
‘Consciousness is not the self. If consciousness were the self, this consciousness would not lend itself to dis-ease. One could get consciousness to be like this and not be like that. But precisely because consciousness is not the self, it lends itself to dis-ease. And one cannot get consciousness to be like this and not be like that.
‘What do you think, monks — Is physical form constant or inconstant?’ — ‘Inconstant, Lord.’ — ‘And whatever is inconstant: Is it easeful or stressful?’ — ‘Stressful, Lord.’ — ‘And is it right to assume with regard to whatever is inconstant, stressful, subject to change, that “This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am”?’ — ‘No, Lord.’
‘… Is feeling constant or inconstant?… Is perception constant or inconstant?… Are mental processes constant or inconstant?…
‘Is consciousness constant or inconstant?’ — ‘Inconstant, Lord.’ — ‘And whatever is inconstant: Is it easeful or stressful?’ — ‘Stressful, Lord.’ — ‘And is it right to assume with regard to whatever is inconstant, stressful, subject to change, that “This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am”?’ — ‘No, Lord.’
‘Thus, monks, any physical form whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle, common or sublime, far or near: every physical form — is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: “This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.”
‘Any feeling whatsoever… Any perception whatsoever… Any mental processes whatsoever…
‘Any consciousness whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle, common or sublime, far or near: every consciousness — is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: “This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.”
‘Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with mental processes, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he grows dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is released. With release, there is the knowledge, “Released.” He discerns that “Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.”‘
That is what the Master said. Gratified, the group of five monks delighted at his words. And while this explanation was being given, the hearts of the group of five monks, through not clinging (not being sustained), were released from the mental effluents.
— S XXII.59

On the surface, doctrines about the self would appear simply to be another variety of speculative view. They deserve separate treatment, though, because they all come down to a deeply rooted sense of ‘I am’ — a conceit coloring all perception at the most basic level.
Monks, whatever contemplatives or priests who assume in various ways when assuming a self, all assume the five aggregates for sustenance, or a certain one of them. Which five? There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person… assumes the body to be the self, or the self as possessing the body, the body as in the self, or the self as in the body. He assumes feeling to be the self… perception to be the self… mental processes to be the self… He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness.

Thus, both this assumption & the understanding, ‘I am,’ occur to him. And so it is with reference to the understanding ‘I am’ that there is the appearance of the five faculties — eye, ear, nose, tongue, & body (the senses of vision, hearing, smell, taste, & touch).
Now, there is the intellect, there are ideas (mental qualities), there is the property of ignorance. To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by experience born of the contact of ignorance, there occur [the thoughts]: ‘I am,’ ‘I am thus,’ ‘I will be,’ ‘I will not be,’ ‘I will be possessed of form,’ ‘I will be formless,’ ‘I will be percipient (conscious),’ ‘I will be non-percipient,’ or ‘I will be neither percipient nor non-percipient.’
The five faculties, monks, continue as they were. And with regard to them the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones abandons ignorance and gives rise to clear knowing. Owing to the fading of ignorance and the arising of clear knowing, [the thoughts]— ‘I am,’ ‘I am this,’… ‘I will be neither percipient nor non-percipient’ — do not occur to him.
— S XXII.47

The sense of ‘I am’ can prevent a person from reaching the goal, even when he feels that he has abandoned attachment to sensuality, speculative views, & the experience of jhana.
There is the case, monks, where a certain contemplative or priest, with the abandonment of speculations about the past and the abandonment of speculations about the future, from the thorough lack of resolve for the fetters of sensuality, and from the surmounting of the rapture of withdrawal [in the first level of jhana], of non-material pleasure, & of the feeling of neither pleasure nor pain [in the fourth level of jhana], thinks, ‘I am at peace, I am unbound, I am without clinging/sustenance!’

In this regard, the Tathagata perceives: ‘This venerable contemplative or priest, with the abandonment of speculations about the past… thinks, “I am at peace, I am unbound, I am without clinging/sustenance!’ To be sure, he affirms the practice conducive to Unbinding. Still, he clings, clinging to a speculative view about the past or… a speculative view about the future… or a fetter of sensuality… or the rapture of withdrawal… or non-material pleasure… or a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. And the fact that he thinks, “I am at peace, I am unbound, I am without clinging/sustenance!” — that in itself proclaims his clinging.’

Now, with regard to that — conditioned, gross — there is still this: the stopping of mental processes. Knowing this, seeing the emancipation from it, the Tathagata has gone beyond it.
— M 102

Whereas the contemplative or priest under discussion in this passage reads an ‘I’ into what he is experiencing, the Buddha simply observes that ‘There is this…’ This unadorned observation — which simply sees what is present in an experience as present, and what is absent as absent — is treated in detail in the Lesser Discourse on Voidness. There the Buddha describes how to develop it methodically, in ascending stages passing through the levels of jhana — in this case based on the object ‘earth,’ or solidity — and leading ultimately to Awakening.

Ananda, just as this palace of Migara’s mother [in the monastery constructed by Lady Visakha near Savatthi] is devoid of elephants, cattle, & mares, devoid of gold & silver, devoid of assemblies of women & men, and there is only this non-voidness — the singleness based on the community of monks; even so, Ananda, a monk — not attending to the perception (mental note) of village, not attending to the perception of human being — attends to the singleness based on the perception of wilderness. His mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, settles, & indulges in its perception of wilderness.

He discerns that ‘Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of village… that would exist based on the perception of human being, are not present. There is only this modicum of disturbance: the singleness based on the perception of wilderness.’ He discerns that ‘This mode of perception is void of the perception of village. This mode of perception is void of the perception of human being. There is only this non-voidness: the singleness based on the perception of wilderness.’ Thus he regards it as void of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: ‘There is this.’ And so this, his entry into voidness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, & pure.

Further, Ananda, the monk — not attending to the perception of human being, not attending to the perception of wilderness — attends to the singleness based on the perception of earth. His mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, settles, & indulges in its perception of earth. Just as a bull’s hide is stretched free from wrinkles with a hundred stakes, even so — without attending to all the ridges & hollows, the river ravines, the tracts of stumps & thorns, the craggy irregularities of this earth — he attends to the singleness based on the perception of earth. His mind… settles & indulges in its perception of earth.

He discerns that ‘Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of human being… that would exist based on the perception of wilderness, are not present. There is only this modicum of disturbance: the singleness based on the perception of earth.’ He discerns that ‘This mode of perception is void of the perception of human being… void of the perception of wilderness. There is only this non-voidness: the singleness based on the perception of earth.’ Thus he regards it as void of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: ‘There is this.’ And so this, his entry into voidness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, & pure.

Further, Ananda, the monk — not attending to the perception of wilderness, not attending to the perception of earth — attends to the singleness based on the perception of the dimension of the infinitude of space… (and so on through the four levels of formless jhana. Then:)
Further, Ananda, the monk — not attending to the perception of the dimension of nothingness, not attending to the perception of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception — attends to the singleness based on the signless concentration of awareness. His mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, settles, & indulges in its signless concentration of awareness.
He discerns that ‘Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of the dimension of nothingness… that would exist based on the perception of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, are not present. And there is only this modicum of disturbance: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition.’ He discerns that ‘This mode of perception is void… (etc.)’

Further, Ananda, the monk — not attending to the perception of the dimension of nothingness, not attending to the perception of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception — attends to the singleness based on the signless concentration of awareness. His mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, settles, & indulges in its signless concentration of awareness.
He discerns that ‘This signless concentration of awareness is fabricated & mentally fashioned.’ And he discerns that ‘Whatever is fabricated & mentally fashioned is inconstant & subject to stopping.’ For him — thus knowing, thus seeing — the mind is released from the effluent of sensuality, the effluent of becoming, the effluent of ignorance. With release, there is the knowledge, ‘Released.’ He discerns that ‘Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.’

He discerns that ‘Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the effluent of sensuality… the effluent of becoming… the effluent of ignorance, are not present. And there is only this modicum of disturbance: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition.’ He discerns that ‘This mode of perception is void of the effluent of sensuality… becoming… ignorance. And there is just this non-voidness: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition.’ Thus he regards it as void of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: ‘There is this.’ And so this, his entry into voidness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, pure —
superior & unsurpassed.
— M 121

Ananda: It is said that the world is empty, the world is empty, lord. In what respect is it said that the world is empty?
The Buddha: Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self: Thus it is said that the world is empty. And what is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self? The eye is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. Forms… Visual consciousness… Visual contact is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self.
The ear… The nose… The tongue… The body…
The intellect is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. Ideas… Mental consciousness… Mental contact is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. Thus it is said that the world is empty.
— S XXXV.85

In abandoning the notion of self with regard to the world — here defined in the same terms as the ‘All’ (page 31, above)— the Buddha did not, however, hold to a theory that there is no self.
Having taken a seat to one side, Vacchagotta the wanderer said to the Master, ‘Now then, Venerable Gotama, is there a self?’ When this was said, the Master was silent.
‘Then is there no self?’ Again, the Master was silent.
Then Vacchagotta the wanderer got up from his seat and left.
Then, not long after Vacchagotta the wanderer had left, the Venerable Ananda said to the Master, ‘Why, sir, did the Master not answer when asked a question by Vacchagotta the wanderer?’
‘Ananda, if I, being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is a self, were to answer that there is a self, that would be conforming with those priests & contemplatives who are exponents of eternalism [i.e., the view that there is an eternal soul]. And if I… were to answer that there is no self, that would be conforming with those priests & contemplatives who are exponents of annihilationism [i.e., that death is the annihilation of consciousness]. If I… were to answer that there is a self, would that be in keeping with the arising of knowledge that all phenomena are not-self?
‘No, Lord.’
‘And if I… were to answer that there is no self, the bewildered Vacchagotta would become even more bewildered: “Does the self that I used to have, now not exist?”‘
— S XLIV.10

This dialogue is one of the most controversial in the Canon. Those who hold that the Buddha took a position one way or the other on the question of whether or not there is a self have to explain away the Buddha’s silence, and usually do so by focusing on his final statement to Ananda. If someone else more spiritually mature than Vacchagotta had asked the question, they say, the Buddha would have revealed his true position.

This interpretation, though, ignores the fact that of the Buddha’s four express reasons for not answering the question, only the last is specific to Vacchagotta. The first two hold true no matter who is asking the question: To say that there is or is not a self would be to fall into one of two philosophical positions that the Buddha frequently attacked as incompatible with his teaching. As for his third reason, the Buddha wanted to be consistent with ‘the arising of knowledge that all phenomena are not-self,’ not because he felt that this knowledge was worth holding onto in & of itself (cf. his statement to Upasiva, on page 28, that in the experience of the goal all phenomena are done away with), but because he saw that the arising of such knowledge could, through causing the mind to let go of all forms of clinging/sustenance, lead to liberation.

This point becomes clear when we compare the exchange with Vacchagotta, given above, to this one with Mogharaja:

Mogharaja:
How does one view the world
so as not to be seen by Death’s king?
The Buddha:
View the world, Mogharaja,
as empty —
always mindful,
to have removed any view in terms of self.
This way one is above & beyond death.
This is how one views the world
so as not to be seen by Death’s king.
— Sn V.16

The fundamental difference between this dialogue & the preceding one lies in the questions asked: In the first, Vacchagotta asks the Buddha to take a position on the metaphysical question of whether or not there is a self, and the Buddha remains silent. In the second, Mogharaja asks for a way to view the world so that one can go beyond death, and the Buddha speaks, teaching him to view the world without reference to the notion of self.

This suggests that, instead of being a metaphysical assertion that there is no self, the teaching on not-self is more a strategy, a technique of perception aimed at leading beyond death to Unbinding — a way of perceiving things that involves no self-identification, no sense that ‘I am,’ no attachment to ‘I’ or ‘mine.’ And this would be in keeping with the discernment the Buddha recommends in the Discourse on the Supreme Net (see page 64): one that judges views not in terms of their content, but in terms of where they come from and where they lead.

If a person aiming at Unbinding is not to view the world in terms of self, then in what terms should he or she view it? The Buddha’s comment to Anuradha (page 25)— ‘It is only stress that I describe, and the stopping of stress’ — suggests an answer, and this answer is borne out by a series of other passages in the Canon.

‘Lord, “Right view, right view,” it is said. In what respect is there right view?’
‘By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origin of the world as it actually is with right discernment, “non-existence” with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the stopping of the world as it actually is with right discernment, “existence” with reference to the world does not occur to one.

‘By & large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), & biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is one resolved on “my self.” One has no uncertainty or doubt that, when there is arising, only stress is arising; and that when there is passing away, stress is passing away. In this, one’s knowledge is independent of others. It is in this respect, Kaccayana, that there is right view.’
— S XII.15

There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person… does not discern what ideas are fit for attention, or what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he does not attend to ideas fit for attention, and attends [instead] to ideas unfit for attention… This is how he attends inappropriately: ‘Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Will I be in the future? Will I not be in the future? What will I be in the future? How will I be in the future? Having been what, what will I be in the future?’ Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: ‘Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?’

As this person attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self… or the view It is precisely because of self that I perceive self… or the view It is precisely because of self that I perceive not-self… or the view It is precisely because of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self of mine — the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions — is the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will endure as long as eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not freed from stress, I say.

The well-taught disciple of the noble ones… discerns what ideas are fit for attention, and what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he does not attend to ideas unfit for attention, and attends (instead) to ideas fit for attention… He attends appropriately, This is stress… This is the origin of stress… This is the stopping of stress… This is the way leading to the stopping of stress. As he attends appropriately in this way, three fetters are abandoned in him: identity-view, doubt, and grasping at precepts & practices.
— M 2

Now this, monks, is the noble truth of stress: Birth is stressful, aging is stressful, death is stressful; sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are stressful; association with the unbeloved is stressful, separation from the loved is stressful, not getting what is wanted is stressful. In short, the five aggregates for sustenance are stressful.

And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming.

And this, monks, is the noble truth of the stopping of stress: the remainderless fading & stopping, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving.

And this, monks, is the noble truth of the way leading to the stopping of stress: precisely this Noble Eightfold Path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.

Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: ‘This is the noble truth of stress’… ‘This noble truth of stress is to be comprehended’… ‘This noble truth of stress has been comprehended’… ‘This is the noble truth of the origination of stress’… ‘This noble truth of the origination of stress is to be abandoned’… ‘This noble truth of the origination of stress has been abandoned’… ‘This is the noble truth of the stopping of stress’… ‘This noble truth of the stopping of stress is to be directly experienced’… ‘This noble truth of the stopping of stress has been directly experienced’… ‘This is the noble truth of the way leading to the stopping of stress’… ‘This noble truth of the way leading to the stopping of stress is to be developed’… ‘This noble truth of the way leading to the stopping of stress has been developed.’

And, monks, as long as this knowledge & vision of mine — with its three rounds and twelve permutations concerning these four noble truths as they actually are — was not pure, I did not claim to have directly awakened to the unexcelled right self-awakening… But as soon as this knowledge & vision of mine — with its three rounds and twelve permutations concerning these four noble truths as they actually are — was truly pure, then did I claim to have directly awakened to the unexcelled right self-awakening… The knowledge & vision arose in me: ‘Unprovoked is my release. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.’
— S LVI.11

Just as if there were a pool of water in a mountain glen — clear, limpid, & unsullied — where a man with good eyes standing on the bank could see shells, gravel, & pebbles, and also shoals of fish swimming about & resting, and it would occur to him, ‘This pool of water is clear, limpid & unsullied. Here are these shells, gravel & pebbles, and also these shoals of fish swimming about & resting.’ So too, the monk discerns as it actually is, that ‘This is stress… This is the origination of stress… This is the stopping of stress… This is the way leading to the stopping of stress… These are mental effluents… This is the origination of mental effluents… This is the stopping of mental effluents… This is the way leading to the stopping of mental effluents.’ His heart, thus knowing, thus seeing, is released from the effluent of sensuality, released from the effluent of becoming, released from the effluent of ignorance. With release, there is the knowledge, ‘Released.’ He discerns that ‘Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.’

This, great king, is a fruit of the contemplative life, visible here & now, more excellent than the previous ones and more sublime. And as for another visible fruit of the contemplative life, higher & more sublime than this, there is none.
— D 2

Thus for the person who aims at Unbinding, the Buddha recommends a technique of perception that regards things simply in terms of the four truths concerning stress, with no self-identification, no sense that ‘I am,’ no attachment to ‘I’ or ‘mine’ involved. Although, as the following passage states, there may be a temporary, functional identity to one’s range of perception, this ‘identity’ goes no further than that. One recognizes it for what it is: inconstant & conditioned, and thus not worthy of being taken as a self — for in transcending attachment to it, there is the realization of deathlessness.

Ananda: ‘It is wonderful, sir; it is marvelous. For truly, the Master has pointed out the way to cross over the flood by going from one support to the next. But what then, sir, is the Noble Liberation?’

The Buddha: ‘There is the case, Ananda, where a disciple of the noble ones considers that “Sensual pleasure here & now and in lives to come; form here & now and in lives to come; perceptions of form here & now and in lives to come; perceptions of imperturbability, perceptions of the dimension of nothingness, perceptions of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception: [All] that is an identity, to the extent that there is identity. [But] this is deathless: the liberation of the mind through lack of clinging/sustenance.”‘
— M 106

Once the sense of self is transcended, its polar opposite — the sense of something standing in contradistinction to a self — is transcended as well. In the Discourse at Kalaka’s Park, the Buddha expresses this lack of a self/non-self polarity directly in terms of sensory experience. For a person who has attained the goal, experience occurs with no ’subject’ or ‘object’ superimposed on it, no construing of experience or thing experienced. There is simply the experience in & of itself.

Monks, whatever in this world — with its devas, Maras & Brahmas, its generations complete with contemplatives & priests, princes & men — is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That do I know. Whatever in this world… is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That I directly know. That is known by the Tathagata, but the Tathagata has not been obsessed with it…
Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, does not construe an [object as] seen. He does not construe an unseen. He does not construe an [object] to-be-seen. He does not construe a seer.

When hearing… When sensing…
When cognizing what is to be cognized, he does not construe an [object as] cognized. He does not construe an uncognized. He does not construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He does not construe a cognizer.

Thus, monks, the Tathagata — being such-like with regard to all phenomena that can be seen, heard, sensed, & cognized — is ‘Such.’ And I tell you: There is no other ‘Such’ higher or more sublime.

Whatever is seen or heard or sensed
and fastened onto as true by others,

One who is Such — among those who are self-bound —
would not further assume to be true or even false.
Having seen well in advance that arrow
where generations are fastened & hung
— ‘I know, I see, that’s just how it is!’ —
there is nothing of the Tathagata fastened.
— A IV.24

A view is true or false only when one is judging how accurately it refers to something else. If one is regarding it simply as an event in & of itself, true & false no longer apply. Thus for the Tathagata — who no longer needs to impose notions of subject or object on experience, and can regard sights, sounds, feelings, & thoughts purely in & of themselves — views are not necessarily true or false, but can simply serve as phenomena to be experienced. With no notion of subject, there is no grounds for ‘I know, I see;’ with no notion of object, no grounds for ‘That’s just how it is.’ So — although a Tathagata may continue using ‘true’ & ‘false’ in the course of teaching others, and may continue reflecting on right view as a means of abiding mindfully & comfortably in the present — notions of true, false, self, & not self have lost all their holding power over the mind. As a result, the mind can see conditioned events in their suchness — ’such are the aggregates, such their origin, such their disappearance’ — and is left free to its own Suchness: unrestrained, uninfluenced by anything of any sort.

This concludes our survey of the four modes of clinging/sustenance — passion & delight for sensuality, for views, for precepts & practices, and for doctrines of the self — and should be enough to give a sense of what is loosed in the Unbinding of the mind. All that remains now is the question of how.

Many of the passages we have considered seem to suggest that total Unbinding may be realized by letting go of any one of these four modes of sustenance. What most likely happens in such cases, though, is that the abandoning of one mode immediately triggers an abandoning of the remaining three, for there are other cases reported in the Canon where the experience of Unbinding comes in stages spread over time: the arising of the eye of Dhamma, which frees one from passion & delight for doubt, self-identity views, and grasping at precepts & practices; the attainment of nonreturning, which frees one from passion & delight for sensuality; and the attainment of arahantship, which frees one from passion & delight for all views, the practice of jhana, & the conceit ‘I am.’ Why these stages happen in this order, and how they relate to the practices meant to induce them, is what we will take up next.

CHAPTER 4

A theme recurrent in the passages we have been considering is that the abandonment of clinging/sustenance is effected through knowledge.
These four [modes of] sustenance have what as their cause, what as their origin, from what are they born, from what do they arise? These four [modes of] sustenance have craving as their cause, craving as their origin, are born from craving, and arise from craving.
And what does craving have as its cause…?… feeling… And what does feeling have as its cause…?… contact… And what does contact have as its cause…?… the six sense spheres… And what do the six sense spheres have as their cause…?… name & form… And what do name & form have as their cause…?… consciousness… And what does consciousness have as its cause…?… processes… And what do processes have as their cause…?… ignorance…
And, monks, as soon as ignorance is abandoned in a monk, and clear knowing arises, he — from the fading of ignorance and the arising of clear knowing — clings neither to sensual pleasures as sustenance, nor to views as sustenance, nor to precepts & practices as sustenance, nor to doctrines of the self as sustenance. Not clinging (unsustained), he is not agitated. Unagitated, he is totally unbound right within. He discerns that ‘Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.’
— M 11
The word ‘vijja’ — translated here as clear knowing — also means ’science.’ And just as science implies a method, there is a method — a discipline — underlying the knowledge that leads to Unbinding. That method is described from a number of perspectives in the Canon, each description stressing different aspects of the steps involved. The standard formula, though, is the Noble Eightfold Path, also known as the middle way.
There are these two extremes that one who has gone forth is not to indulge in. Which two? That which is devoted to sensual pleasure with reference to sensual objects: base, vulgar, common, ignoble, unprofitable; and that which is devoted to self-affliction: painful, ignoble, unprofitable. Avoiding both of these extremes, the middle way realized by the Tathagata — producing vision, producing knowledge — leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding.
And what is the middle way realized by the Tathagata that — producing vision, producing knowledge — leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding? Precisely this Noble Eightfold Path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.
— S LVI.11
The eight factors of the path fall under three headings, the first two factors coming under discernment, the next three under virtue, and the final three under concentration. These three headings are called the Threefold Training; the dynamic among them, leading to the knowledge & vision of release, is one of natural cause & effect.
It is natural that in a virtuous person, one of consummate virtue, freedom from remorse will arise… It is natural that in a person free from remorse gladness will arise… that in a glad person rapture will arise… that for an enraptured person the body will be calmed… that a person of calmed body will feel pleasure… that the mind of a person feeling pleasure will become concentrated… that a person whose mind is concentrated will see things as they actually are… that a person seeing things as they actually are will grow disenchanted… that a disenchanted person will grow dispassionate… that a dispassionate person will realize the knowledge & vision of release.
— A XI.2
According to the standard description of the Eightfold Path, the heading of discernment includes seeing things in terms of the four noble truths about stress, and maintaining the resolve to release oneself from sensuality, to abandon ill will, and to avoid doing harm. Virtue includes abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from harsh speech, & from idle chatter; from killing, stealing, & having illicit sex; and from engaging in dishonest or abusive forms of making a living, such as dealing in poison, slaves, weapons, intoxicants, or animal flesh.
The factors that go into concentration, though, are somewhat more complex.
And what, monks is right effort? There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen… for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen… for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen… (and) for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen. This, monks, is right effort.
And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting away greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves… He remains focused on the mind in & of itself… He remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting away greed & distress with reference to the world.
Thus either internally he remains focused on the body in & of itself, or externally… or both internally & externally… or else he remains focused on the phenomenon of arising with reference to the body… or the phenomenon of passing away with reference to the body… or the phenomenon of arising & passing away with reference to the body. Or his mindfulness that ‘There is a body,’ is maintained just to the extent of knowledge & recollection. And he remains independent, not sustained by (clinging to) anything in the world. (Similarly with feelings, mind & mental qualities.)
— D 22
(See page 66 above, instructions to Bahiya.)
Right concentration is the practice of the four basic levels of jhana.

These three factors are component parts of a single whole. In fact, their balanced inter-relatedness is what makes them ‘right.’ The first level of jhana requires the abandoning of unskillful mental qualities (the Hindrances*), which is part of the duty of right effort; and, as we saw in the description of breath meditation, jhana begins with mindfulness of the present. As jhana is practiced & mastered, skillful qualities (such as the Factors for Awakening*) are fostered & maintained; physical processes are stilled so that mental qualities may become clearly apparent as they occur; mindfulness is made pure on the attainment of the fourth level of jhana; and all four of the Applications of Mindfulness are developed.

On whatever occasion, monks, a monk breathing in long discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out long, discerns that he is breathing out long; or breathing in short discerns that he is breathing in short; or breathing out short, discerns that he is breathing out short; trains himself to breathe in… &… out sensitive to the entire body; trains himself to breathe in… &… out calming the bodily processes: On that occasion, monks, the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — subduing greed & distress with reference to the world…
On whatever occasion a monk trains himself to breathe in… &… out sensitive to rapture; trains himself to breathe in… &… out sensitive to pleasure; trains himself to breathe in… &… out sensitive to mental processes; trains himself to breathe in… &… out calming mental processes: On that occasion the monk remains focused on feelings in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — subduing greed & distress with reference to the world…

On whatever occasion a monk trains himself to breathe in… &… out sensitive to the mind; trains himself to breathe in… &… out satisfying the mind; trains himself to breathe in… &… out steadying the mind; trains himself to breathe in… &… out releasing the mind: On that occasion the monk remains focused on the mind in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — subduing greed & distress with reference to the world…

On whatever occasion a monk trains himself to breathe in… &… out focusing on inconstancy; trains himself to breathe in… &… out focusing on dispassion; trains himself to breathe in… &… out focusing on stopping; trains himself to breathe in… &… out focusing on relinquishment: On that occasion the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — subduing greed & distress with reference to the world.
— M 118

In the Great Discourse on the Applications of Mindfulness, the Buddha describes mindfulness of mental qualities in & of themselves, in part, in terms of the Hindrances and the Factors for Awakening, qualities that are respectively set aside & fostered in the practice of jhana.

And how does a monk remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five Hindrances? There is the case where, there being sensual desire present within, a monk discerns that ‘There is sensual desire present within me.’ Or, there being no sensual desire present within, he discerns that ‘There is no sensual desire present within me.’ He discerns how there is the arising of unarisen sensual desire. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of sensual desire once it has arisen. And he discerns how there is no further appearance in the future of sensual desire that has been abandoned. (The same formula is repeated for the remaining Hindrances: ill will, sloth & drowsiness, restlessness & anxiety, and uncertainty.)…
And how does a monk remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the seven Factors for Awakening? There is the case where, there being mindfulness as a Factor for Awakening present within, a monk discerns that ‘Mindfulness as a Factor for Awakening is present within me.’ Or, there being no mindfulness as a Factor for Awakening present within, a monk discerns that ‘Mindfulness as a Factor for Awakening is not present within me.’ He discerns how there is the arising of unarisen mindfulness as a Factor for Awakening. And he discerns how there is the development & consummation of mindfulness as a Factor for Awakening once it has arisen. (The same formula is repeated for the remaining Factors for Awakening: investigation of phenomena, persistence, rapture, serenity, concentration & equanimity.)
— D 22

Thus the practice of right mindfulness does not repress undesirable mental qualities — i.e., it does not deny their presence. Rather, it notices them as they occur so that the phenomenon of their occurrence can be understood. Once they are understood for what they are as phenomena, they lose their power and can be abandoned.

However, the practice of right mindfulness focuses, not on the haphazard occurrence of mental qualities, but on the elimination of undesirable qualities — the Hindrances — that obstruct jhana, and on the development of desirable qualities — the Factors for Awakening — that jhana fosters. As these factors are strengthened through the continued practice of jhana, they make possible a clearer awareness of sensory processes as they occur. The factors of rapture, serenity, & equanimity, existing independently of the input of the five senses, make the mind less involved in sensory pleasures, less inclined to search for emotional satisfaction from them; the factors of mindfulness, investigation of phenomena, persistence, & concentration enable clear insight into the events that make up sensory perception.

To see events in the body & mind simply as that — events, conditioned, arising & passing away — creates a further sense of distance, disenchantment, & de-identification.
Knowing & seeing the eye as it actually is, knowing & seeing forms… visual consciousness… visual contact as they actually are, knowing & seeing whatever arises conditioned by visual contact — experienced as pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain — as it actually is, one is not infatuated with the eye… forms… visual consciousness… visual contact… whatever arises conditioned by visual contact and is experienced as pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain…
Knowing & seeing the ear… Knowing & seeing the nose… Knowing & seeing the tongue… Knowing & seeing the body…

Knowing & seeing the intellect as it actually is, knowing & seeing ideas… mental consciousness… mental contact as they actually are, knowing & seeing whatever arises conditioned by mental contact — experienced as pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain — as it actually occurs, one is not infatuated with the intellect… ideas… mental consciousness… mental contact… whatever arises conditioned by mental contact and is experienced as pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain.

For him — remaining uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused — the five aggregates for sustenance head toward future diminution. The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now this & now that — is abandoned by him. His bodily disturbances & mental disturbances are abandoned. His bodily torments & mental torments are abandoned. His bodily distresses & mental distresses are abandoned. He is sensitive both to ease of body & ease of awareness.

Any view belonging to one who has come to be like this is his right view. Any resolve, his right resolve. Any effort, his right effort. Any mindfulness, his right mindfulness. Any concentration, his right concentration: just as earlier his actions, speech, & livelihood were already well-purified. Thus for him the Noble Eightfold Path goes to the culmination of its development… the four Applications of Mindfulness go to the culmination of their development… the seven Factors for Awakening go to the culmination of their development. [And] for him these two qualities occur in concert: tranquillity & insight.
— M 149

With the union of tranquillity & insight at the culmination of the path, Awakening occurs. The Canon records many instances where Awakening is sudden & total, and many where it occurs in stages: The reason for the difference isn’t stated, but perhaps in sudden Awakening the mind goes through the various stages in quick succession. At any rate, a brief look at the stages will give something of an idea of the dynamics of the mind’s Unbinding.

The standard list of the stages gives four, and describes them in terms of how many of the ten Fetters the mind sheds: (1) self-identity views, (2) grasping at precepts and practices, (3) doubt, (4) sensual passion, (5) resistance, (6) passion for form, (7) passion for formlessness, (8) conceit, (9) restlessness, & (10) ignorance.

There are in this community of monks, monks who, with the total ending of [the first] three Fetters, are stream-winners, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening…

There are… monks who, with the total ending of [the first] three fetters and the thinning out of passion, aversion, & delusion, are once-returners. After returning only once to this world they will put an end to stress…

There are… monks who, with the total ending of the first five of the Fetters, are due to be reborn [in the Pure Abodes], there to be totally unbound, never again to return from that world…

There are… monks who are arahants, whose mental effluents are ended, who have reached fulfillment, done the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, totally destroyed the fetter of becoming, and who are released through right gnosis.
— M 118
An alternative way of classifying the stages lists three:

There is the case of the monk who has attained full accomplishment with regard to virtue, a modicum of accomplishment with regard to concentration, and a modicum with regard to discernment…

There is the case of the monk who has attained full accomplishment with regard to virtue, full accomplishment with regard to concentration, and a modicum of accomplishment with regard to discernment…

There is the case of the monk who has attained full accomplishment with regard to virtue, full accomplishment with regard to concentration, and full accomplishment with regard to discernment. With the ending of the mental effluents, he remains in the effluentless awareness-release & discernment-release, having known and made them manifest for himself right in the present.
— A III.88

As the text makes clear, stream-winners and once-returners are those who have fully developed virtue, nonreturners are those who have fully developed virtue & concentration, and arahants are those who have fully developed all three parts of the path: virtue, concentration, & discernment.

This is not to say, however, that stream-winners have not developed discernment to a fairly high degree. In fact, the unvarying definition of stream-winners is that they have ’seen with discernment,’ and their level of Awakening is called the arising of the Dhamma eye. What they see with this Dhamma eye is always expressed in the same terms:

Then Ven. Assaji gave this exposition of Dhamma to Sariputta the Wanderer:
‘Whatever phenomena arise from a cause:
Their cause
& their cessation.
Such is the teaching of the Tathagata
the Great Contemplative.’
Then to Sariputta the Wanderer, as he heard this exposition of Dhamma, there arose the dustless, stainless Dhamma eye: Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to cessation.
— Mv I.23.5

For this realization to occur, it must follow on a glimpse of what stands in opposition to ‘all that is subject to origination,’ i.e., a glimpse of the Unconditioned — deathlessness.
[Immediately after winning to the Stream] Sariputta the Wanderer went to where Moggallana the Wanderer was staying. Moggallana the Wanderer saw him coming from afar and, on seeing him, said, ‘Your faculties are bright, my friend; your complexion pure & clear. Could it be that you have attained the Deathless?’
‘Yes, my friend, I have…’
— Mv I.23.5

Although their Awakening is not yet complete, stream-winners see enough of the Deathless to remove all doubt in the Buddha’s teachings.
To Upali the householder, as he was sitting right there, there arose the dustless, stainless Dhamma eye: Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to cessation. Then — having seen the Dhamma, having reached the Dhamma, known the Dhamma, gained a footing in the Dhamma, having crossed over & beyond doubt, having had no more questioning — Upali the householder gained fearlessness and was independent of others with regard to the Teacher’s message.
— M 56

Their glimpse of deathlessness is also enough to convince stream-winners of the worthlessness of self-identity views that center on the five aggregates of sustenance, all of which come under the category of ‘all that is subject to origination.’
Magandiya, it is just as if there were a blind man who couldn’t see black objects… white… blue… yellow… red… the sun or the moon. Now suppose that a certain man were to take a grimy, oil-stained rag and fool him, saying, ‘Here, my good man, is a white cloth — beautiful, spotless, & clean.’ The blind man would take it and wear it.

Then suppose his friends, companions, & relatives took him to a doctor, and the doctor treated him with medicine: purges from above & purges from below, ointments & counter-ointments, and treatments through the nose. And thanks to the medicine his eyesight would appear & grow clear. Then together with the arising of his eyesight, he would abandon whatever passion & delight he felt for that grimy, oil-stained rag. And he would regard that man as an enemy & no friend at all, and think that he deserved to be killed. ‘My gosh, how long have I been fooled, cheated, & deceived by that man & his grimy, oil-stained rag!— “Here, my good man, is a white cloth — beautiful, spotless, & clean.”‘

In the same way, Magandiya, if I were to teach you the Dhamma — this freedom from Disease, this Unbinding — and you on your part were to understand that freedom from Disease and see that Unbinding, then together with the arising of your eyesight, you would abandon whatever passion & delight you felt with regard for the five aggregates for sustenance. And it would occur to you, ‘My gosh, how long have I been fooled, cheated, & deceived by this mind! For in clinging, it was just form that I was clinging to… it was just feeling… just perception… just mental processes… just consciousness that I was clinging to. With my clinging as condition, there is becoming… birth… aging & death… sorrow, lamentation, pains, distresses, & despairs all come into play. And thus is the origination of this entire mass of stress.’
— M 75
Because they realize that their glimpse of the goal came through an act of discernment, stream-winners no longer grasp at precepts & practices. What this means is that they no longer view mere adherence to precepts & practices as a sufficient means to the goal in & of itself, although they continue to abide by the precepts of right speech, action, & livelihood and by the practice of jhana that fostered their discernment to begin with. Having seen the efficacy of their own actions, they will never intentionally do evil again. This is what perfects their virtue. Still, they have yet to fully comprehend the practice of jhana, and so their minds remain attached to the phenomena — with & without form — on which that practice is based. As the texts say, they are bound by their incomplete mastery of concentration & discernment, and by seven remaining Fetters to the cycle of birth & death.

As for nonreturners, they have mastered jhana to the extent that they can use it as a vantage point for watching the arising & passing away that occurs in reference to the five senses, while the pleasure, rapture, & equanimity it offers serve them as a fulcrum point for uprooting any desire for the pleasures of those five senses, together with all feelings of resistance that come when such desires are not met.

They, too, have seen the Deathless, but as with stream-winners, their discernment is not yet fully comprehensive: They have yet to turn it on the act of seeing: the tools — tranquillity & insight — that lead to that discernment, and the subtle levels of passion & delight that accompany it.

The texts express this point in a variety of ways. Some passages simply list the Fetters that nonreturners have yet to abandon: passion for form, passion for formlessness, conceit, restlessness, & ignorance. Others give more experiential accounts of what is happening in a nonreturner’s mind. From reading these latter accounts it is possible to see how the five Fetters in the list are interconnected: Although nonreturners shed attachment to self-identity views back when they attained stream-entry, they still have a lingering sense of the conceit ‘I am,’ associated with the five aggregates for sustenance — possessing form & formless — as they function subtly in the arising of tranquillity & insight as a process of becoming. And while they have gained enough insight into the five senses to let go of any attachment to them, they still suffer from a certain amount of ignorance concerning the subtler level of becoming inherent in that conceit. This leads to refined forms of passion & delight that keep them restless & bound to the sixth sense: the mind.

There is the case, Ananda, where a monk… enters & remains in the first jhana: refreshment & pleasure born of withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form (body), feeling, perceptions, mental processes, & consciousness as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a dissolution, a void, not self.

He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the quality of deathlessness: ‘This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all mental processes; the relinquishment of all mental acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; stopping; Unbinding.’ Having attained this point, he reaches the ending of the mental effluents. Or, if not, then — through passion & delight for this very phenomenon [the discernment inclining to deathlessness] and from the total ending of the first five of the Fetters — he is due to be reborn [in the Pure Abodes], there to be totally unbound, never again to return from that world. (Similarly with each of the remaining levels of jhana.)
— M 64

Several strands of our discussion converge at this passage. To begin with, the act of discernment described here — inclining the mind to the Deathless — is identical with the object of concentration described by the Buddha at A X.6 (see page 35). This would thus be an instance of tranquillity occurring in concert with insight (see page 102).

Secondly, as the passage points out, the crucial difference between arahants and nonreturners is whether or not the mind feels passion & delight for this act of discernment. Here the distinctions concerning sustenance & clinging raised at the beginning of Chapter III (see page 44) come subtly into play. Any act of discernment, even on this level, comes under the five aggregates for sustenance, as composed of perception, mental processes, & consciousness. If not fully seen for what it is, it can thus act as a phenomenon offering sustenance (or as a clingable phenomenon). Any passion & delight for it — and these themselves are perceptions & mental processes — function as refined sustenance/clinging in the modes of views (of inferior/superior), mental absorption, & a sense of ‘I am’ involved in the act of discerning. Thus the mind still contains the conditions for becoming on a refined level, and this stands in the way of its total freedom.

Bound by both
the yoke of sensuality
& the yoke of becoming,
beings continue in transmigration,
returning to birth & death.
Those who have abandoned sensuality
without reaching the ending of the effluents,
are bound by the yoke of becoming:
nonreturners they are called.
While those who have cut off doubt
have no more conceit
or renewal of becoming.
They who have reached
the ending of the effluents,
while in the world,
have gone beyond.
— Iti 96

[Ven. Khemaka, a nonreturner, speaks shortly before attaining arahantship:] ‘It’s just like the scent of a blue, red, or white lotus: If someone were to call it the scent of a petal or the scent of the color or the scent of a filament, would he be speaking correctly?’
‘No, friend.’
‘Then how would he describe it if he were describing it correctly?’
‘As the scent of the flower: That’s how he would describe it if he were describing it correctly?’
‘In the same way, friends, it’s not that I say “I am form,” nor do I say “I am other than form.” It’s not that I say, “I am feeling… perception… fabrications… consciousness,” nor do I say, “I am something other than consciousness.” With regard to these five aggregates of sustenance, “I am” has not been overcome, although I don’t assume that “I am this”…
‘Just like a cloth, dirty & stained: Its owners give it over to a washerman, who scrubs it with salt earth or lye or cow-dung and then rinses it in clear water. Now even though the cloth is clean and spotless, it still has a lingering residual scent of salt earth or lye or cow-dung. The washerman gives it to the owners, the owners put it away in a scent-infused wicker hamper, and its lingering residual scent of salt earth, lye, or cow-dung is fully obliterated.
‘In the same way, friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, he still has with regard to the five aggregates of sustenance a lingering residual “I am” conceit, an “I am” desire, an “I am” obsession. But at a later time he keeps focusing on the phenomena of arising & passing away with regard to the five aggregates of sustenance: “Such is form, such its origin, such its disappearance. Such is feeling… Such is perception… Such are mental processes… Such is consciousness, such its origin, such its disappearance.” As he keeps focusing on the arising & passing away of these five aggregates of sustenance, the lingering residual “I am” conceit, “I am” desire, “I am” obsession is fully obliterated.’
— S XXII.89

Only when discernment is so fully developed & totally comprehensive that it has no lingering conceits, desires, or tendencies for anything — not even for the mental processes of passion & delight that condition subtle levels of becoming around the act of discerning — can it complete its emancipation from the six spheres of sensory contact that make up the All.
[Moggallana (shortly before becoming an arahant):] Briefly, sir, in what respect is a monk — released through the ending of craving — utterly complete, utterly free from bonds, a follower of the utterly holy life, utterly consummate: foremost among human & heavenly beings?
The Buddha: There is the case, Moggallana, of the monk who has heard, ‘All phenomena are unworthy of attachment.’ Having heard that all phenomena are unworthy of attachment, he fully knows every thing. Fully knowing every thing, he fully comprehends every thing. Fully comprehending every thing, then whatever feeling he experiences — pleasure, pain, neither pleasure nor pain — he keeps focusing on inconstancy with regard to it, keeps focusing on dispassion, focusing on stopping, focusing on relinquishing. As he keeps focusing on inconstancy… dispassion… stopping… relinquishing with regard to that feeling, he is unsustained by (does not cling to) anything in the world. Unsustained, he is not agitated. Unagitated, he is unbound right within. He discerns: ‘Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.’
It is in this respect, Moggallana, that a monk, in brief, is released through the ending of craving, utterly complete, utterly free from bonds, a follower of the utterly holy life, utterly consummate: foremost among human & heavenly beings.
— A VII.58

One who knows the All
from all around,
who is not aroused
by anything at all,
having totally comprehended
the All,
has overcome
all stress.
— Iti 7

Now when a monk discerns — as they actually are — the origin & passing away of the six spheres of (sensory) contact, their allure, their drawbacks, & the emancipation from them, then he discerns what is superior to all these things.
— D 1

With ignorance as condition, there occur processes; with processes as condition, [sensory] consciousness; with [sensory] consciousness as condition, name & form; with name & form as condition, the six sense spheres…

But with the remainderless fading & stopping of ignorance, processes stop. With the stopping of processes, [sensory] consciousness stops. With the stopping of [sensory] consciousness, name & form… the six sense spheres… contact… feeling… craving… clinging… becoming… birth stops. With the stopping of birth — aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, & distress all stop. Thus is the stopping of this entire mass of stress.
— M 115

That which arises in dependence on the eye as pleasure or joy, that is the allure of the eye. Whatever aspects of the eye are inconstant, stressful, & subject to change, that is the drawback of the eye. Whatever is the subduing of passion & desire, the abandoning of passion & desire for the eye, that is the emancipation from the eye. (Similarly with the ear, nose, tongue, body, & intellect, and with forms, sounds, aromas, flavors, tactile sensations, & ideas.)
— S XXXV.13-14

This, the unsurpassed, foremost state of peace, has been realized by the Tathagata: liberation, through lack of clinging/sustenance, having known, as they actually are, the origin, the passing away, the allure, the drawbacks of — and the emancipation from — the six spheres of [sensory] contact.
— M 102

This unsurpassed, foremost state of peace that comes as the mind realizes emancipation from the All, is totally Unconditioned.
There is, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — uncompounded. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — uncompounded, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born — become — made — compounded would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — uncompounded, emancipation from the born — become — made — compounded is thus discerned.
— Ud VIII.3

Where water, earth, fire and wind have no footing
There the stars do not shine
the sun is not visible
the moon does not appear
darkness is not found.
And when a sage, a Brahman through sagacity
has known [this] for himself,
then from form & formless,
from pleasure & pain,
he is freed.
— Ud II.10

Having fully realized the Unconditioned, the mind no longer falls under the sway of stress & inconstancy. No longer engrossed, it finds that its sense of participation & engagement in all the processes of experience disbands once & for all.
[Nandaka:] ‘Sisters, it is just as if a skilled butcher or butcher’s apprentice, having killed a cow, were to carve it up with a sharp carving knife so that — without damaging the substance of the inner flesh, without damaging the substance of the outer hide — he would cut, sever, & detach only the skin muscles, connective tissues, & attachments in between; and having cut, severed, & detached the outer skin, and then covering the cow again with that very skin, he were to say that the cow was actually joined to the skin: Would he be speaking rightly?’
‘No, sir. Why is that?… because no matter how much he might say that the cow was actually joined to the skin, the cow would still be disjoined from the skin.’
‘This simile, sisters, I have given to convey a message. The message is this: The substance of the inner flesh stands for the six inner sense spheres (the senses); the substance of the outer hide stands for the six outer sense spheres (their objects). The skin muscles, connective tissues, & attachments in between stand for passion & delight. And the sharp knife stands for noble discernment, which cuts, severs, & detaches the defilements, fetters, & attachments in between.’
— M 146
Although the senses & their objects are there just as before, the fundamental affective link that ties the mind to sensations has been cut. And its cutting means unconditional freedom for the mind.
[MahaKaccana:] ‘Concerning the brief statement the Master made, after which he entered his dwelling without expounding the detailed meaning — i.e., “A monk should investigate in such a way that, his consciousness neither externally scattered & diffused, nor internally positioned, he would from lack of clinging/sustenance be unagitated. When… from lack of clinging/sustenance he would be unagitated, there is no seed for the conditions of future birth, aging, death, or stress” — I understand the detailed meaning of this statement to be this:
‘How is consciousness said to be scattered & diffused? There is the case where a form is seen with the eye, and consciousness follows the drift of (lit.: ‘flows after’) the image of the form, is tied to the attraction of the image of the form, is chained to the attraction of the image of the form, is fettered & joined to the attraction of the image of the form: Consciousness is said to be externally scattered & diffused. (Similarly with the remaining senses.)
‘And how is consciousness said not to be externally scattered & diffused? There is the case where a form is seen with the eye, and consciousness does not follow the drift of the image of the form, is not tied to… chained to… fettered, or joined to the attraction of the image of the form: Consciousness is said not to be externally scattered & diffused. (Similarly with the remaining senses.)

‘And how is the mind said to be internally positioned? There is the case where a monk… enters & remains in the first jhana. His consciousness follows the drift of the rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal, is tied to… chained… fettered, & joined to the attraction of the rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal. Or further… he enters & remains in the second jhana. His consciousness follows the drift of the rapture & pleasure born of composure, is tied to… chained… fettered, & joined to the attraction of the rapture & pleasure born of composure. Or further… he enters & remains in the third jhana… His consciousness follows the drift of the equanimity & pleasure… Or further… he enters & remains in the fourth jhana. His consciousness follows the drift of the neither pleasure nor pain, is tied to… chained to… fettered, & joined to the attraction of the neither pleasure nor pain: The mind is said to be internally positioned.
‘And how is the mind said not to be internally positioned? There is the case where a monk… enters & remains in the first jhana. His consciousness does not follow the drift of the rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal, is not tied to… chained to… fettered, or joined to the rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal. (And similarly with the remaining levels of jhana.)
‘And how is agitation caused by clinging/sustenance? There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. His form changes & is unstable. Because of the change & instability of form, his consciousness alters in accordance with the change in form. With the agitations born from the alteration in accordance with the change in form and coming from the co-arising of (unskillful mental) qualities, his mind stays consumed. And because of the consumption of awareness, he feels fearful, threatened, & solicitous. (And similarly with feeling, perception, mental processes & consciousness.)

‘And how is non-agitation caused by lack of clinging/ sustenance? There is the case where an instructed disciple of the noble ones — who has regard for nobles ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma — doesn’t assume form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. His form changes & is unstable, but his consciousness doesn’t — because of the change & instability of form — alter in accordance with the change in form. His mind is not consumed with any agitations born from an alteration in accordance with the change in form or coming from the co-arising of (unskillful mental) qualities. And because his awareness is not consumed, he feels neither fearful, threatened, nor solicitous. It is thus, friends, that non-agitation is caused by lack of clinging/sustenance. (And similarly with feeling, perception, mental processes & consciousness.)’
— M 138

One who is dependent has wavering. One who is independent has no wavering. There being no wavering, there is calm. There being calm, there is no desire. There being no desire, there is no coming or going. There being no coming or going, there is no passing away or arising. There being no passing away or arising, there is neither a here nor a there nor a between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of stress.
— Ud VIII.4

Sensing a feeling of pleasure, he (a person who has reached the goal: This is the continuation of the passage on pages 74-75) discerns that it is fleeting, not grasped at, not relished. Sensing a feeling of pain… Sensing a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, he discerns that it is fleeting, not grasped at, not relished. Sensing a feeling of pleasure, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of pain… Sensing a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, he senses it disjoined from it. When sensing a feeling limited to the body, he discerns that ‘I am sensing a feeling limited to the body.’ When sensing a feeling limited to life, he discerns that ‘I am sensing a feeling limited to life.’ He discerns that ‘With the break-up of the body, after the termination of life, all that is sensed, not being relished, will grow cold right here.’

Just as an oil lamp burns in dependence on oil & wick; and from the termination of the oil & wick — and from not being provided any other sustenance — it goes out unnourished; even so, when sensing a feeling limited to the body, he discerns that ‘I am sensing a feeling limited to the body.’ When sensing a feeling limited to life, he discerns that ‘I am sensing a feeling limited to life.’ He discerns that ‘With the break-up of the body, after the termination of life, all that is sensed, not being relished, will grow cold right here.’

Thus a monk so endowed is endowed with the highest resolve for discernment, for this — the knowledge of the passing away of all stress — is the highest noble discernment.
His release, being founded on truth, does not fluctuate, for whatever is deceptive is false; Unbinding — the undeceptive — is true. Thus a monk so endowed is endowed with the highest resolve for truth, for this — Unbinding, the undeceptive — is the highest noble truth.
Whereas formerly he foolishly had taken on & brought to completion mental acquisitions, he has now abandoned them, their root destroyed, like an uprooted palm tree, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Thus a monk so endowed is endowed with the highest resolve for relinquishment, for this — the renunciation of all mental acquisitions — is the highest noble relinquishment.

Whereas formerly he foolishly had greed — as well as desire & infatuation — he has now abandoned them, their root destroyed… not destined for future arising. Whereas formerly he foolishly had malice — as well as ill-will & hatred — he has now abandoned them… Whereas formerly he foolishly had ignorance — as well as delusion & confusion — he has now abandoned them, their root destroyed like an uprooted palm tree, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Thus a monk so endowed is endowed with the highest resolve for calm, for this — the calming of passions, aversions, & delusions — is the highest noble calm. ‘One should not be negligent of discernment, should guard the truth, be devoted to relinquishment, and train only for calm.’ Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said.

‘He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace:’ Thus it has been said. With reference to what was it said? ‘I am’ is a construing. ‘I am this’ is a construing. ‘I will be’ is a construing. ‘I will not be’… ‘I will be possessed of form’… ‘I will not be possessed of form’… ‘I will be percipient’… ‘I will not be percipient’… ‘I will be neither percipient nor non-percipient’ is a construing. Construing is a disease, construing is a cancer, construing is an arrow. By going beyond all construing, he is called a sage at peace.

Furthermore, a sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die, is unagitated and free from longing. He does not have anything whereby he would be born. Not being born, will he age? Not aging, will he die? Not dying, will he be agitated? Not being agitated, for what will he long? It was in reference to this that it was said, ‘He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace.’
— M 140

Sariputta: And how, my friend, is a monk’s mind well-composed by means of awareness? ‘My mind is without passion’ — his mind is well-composed by means of awareness. ‘My mind is without aversion’… ‘My mind is without delusion’… ‘My mind is not subject to passion’… ‘to aversion’… ‘to delusion’ — his mind is well-composed by means of awareness. ‘My mind is destined not to return to states of sensuality’… ‘to states of form’… ‘to formless states’ — his mind is well-composed by means of awareness.

Even if powerful forms cognizable by the eye come into the visual range of a monk whose mind is thus rightly released, his mind is neither overpowered nor even engaged. Being still, having reached imperturbability, he focuses on their passing away. And even if powerful sounds… aromas… flavors… tactile sensations… Even if powerful ideas cognizable by the intellect come into the mental range of a monk whose mind is thus rightly released, his mind is neither overpowered nor even engaged. Being still, having reached imperturbability, he focuses on their passing away.

Just as if there were a stone column, sixteen spans tall, of which eight spans were rooted below ground, and then from the east there were to come a powerful wind storm: The column would not shiver nor quiver nor quake. And then from the west… the north… the south there were to some a powerful wind storm: The column would not shiver nor quiver nor quake. Why? Because of the depth of the root and the well-buriedness of the stone column. In the same way, my friend, even if powerful forms cognizable by the eye come into the visual range of a monk whose mind is thus rightly released… etc… his mind is neither overpowered nor even engaged.
— A IX.26

Everywhere
the sage
independent
holds nothing dear or undear.
In him
lamentation & selfishness
like water on a white lotus
do not adhere.
As a water bead on a lotus leaf,
as water on a red lily,
does not adhere,
so the sage
does not adhere
to the seen, the heard or the sensed;
for, cleansed,
he does not construe
by means of the seen, the heard or the sensed.
In no other way
does he ask for purity,
for neither impassioned
nor dispassioned
is he.
— Sn IV.6

This radical freedom — unattached to sensation, untouched by the power of passion, aversion, & delusion — is the Unbinding experienced in the present life.
Sister Patacara:
Washing my feet, I noticed
the
water.
And in watching it flow from high
to
low,
my heart was composed
like a fine thoroughbred steed.
Then taking a lamp, I entered the hut,
checked the bedding,
sat down on the bed.
And taking a pin, I pulled out the wick:
Like the flame’s unbinding
was the liberation
of awareness.
— Thig V.10

Glossary

• Blair, Chauncey J. Heat in the Rig Veda and Atharva Veda. (New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1961.)
• Buddhaghosa, Bhadantacariya. The Path of Purification, trans. by Bhikkhu Ñanamoli. (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1975.)
• Collins, Steven. Selfless Persons: Imagery and Thought in Theravada Buddhism. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.)
• Ergardt, Jan T. Faith and Knowledge in Early Buddhism. (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977.)
• Gonda, Jan. Some Observations on the Relations between ‘Gods’ and ‘Powers’ in the Veda, a propos of the Phrase, sunuh sahasah. (s’Gravenhage: Mouton & Co., 1957.)
• Griffith, Ralph (trans.). The Hymns of the Rig Veda. (Varanasi: The Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office, 1963.)
• Jayatilleke, K. N. Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge. (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1963.)
• Johansson, Rune E. A. The Psychology of Nirvana. (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1969.)
• Knipe, David M. In the Image of Fire: The Vedic Experiences of Heat. (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1975.)
• Ñanananda, Bhikkhu. Concept and Reality in Early Buddhist Thought. (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1971.)
  __________. The Magic of the Mind: An Exposition of the Kalakarama Sutta. (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1974.)
• Nyanaponika Thera. Anatta and Nibbana: Egolessness and Deliverance. (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1971.)
• O’Flaherty, Wendy Doniger. The Rig Veda: An Anthology. (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Ltd., 1984.)
• Pali Text Society’s Pali-English Dictionary. Ed. T. W. Rhys Davids and W. Stede. (London:Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1972.)
• Panikkar, Raimundo. The Vedic Experience. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977.)
• Radhakrishnan, S. (ed. & trans.). The Principal Upanisads. (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1953.)
• Warder, A. K. Outline of Indian Philosophy. (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1971.)

TCS – November 2005

Finally! Sheesh. Darn web server got all filled up and I was unable to get any of the files moved EXCEPT for the index page file, which I accidentally uploaded as a blank white page.
Must be a part of my Zen practice manifesting itself in my otherwise black web site.

Form is emptiness …emptiness is form.

But now it’s back. The semester in school is almost finished. My minor in psychology will be complete and hopefully graduate school will be on the horizon. I’ve wanted my masters degree for 8 years now. Maybe my time is drawing near.

I’m also in the middle of my current work contract. I’ve had a death of someone connected to me in a strange way. I got the priviledge of opening my house to someone displaced from Hurricane Katrina. A former beau from my crazy days sent me a nice package and letter, out of the blue. I’ve just written a letter to a sister I never knew I had and I’ve (again) had to reiterate some boundaries with some people who lack character and ethics.

My main blog is found on the 360Yahoo site, with RSS feeds from HumidCity and my BLOGspot blog as well. You can also keep up with photos of my strange little family and group affiliation.
For those who are new to the whole thumbprint thing. I’m China. I’m a red-headed square peg in a round hold world and I wouldn’t have it any other way. I have struggled for most of my life with my perception of myself and the world around me, and questioned my purpose in it. Recent years have offered me some trying and painful lessons and from those experiences I have been able to heal and grow and discover my own inner strength, fortitude and peace.

This site is dedicated to the art, writings and work that has revolved around that discovery process. It involves; recovery, addiction, SILA, AA, NA, yoga, meditation, zen, zazen, DharmaPunx, Noah Levine, mindfulness, forgiveness, amends, stepwork, parenting, loving, learning, laughing and living. Yes, living. Right here and now.

As TOOL says:

“I embrace my desire tofeel the rhythm, to feel connectedenough
to step aside and weep like a widowto feel inspired, to fathom the power,to
witness the beauty, to bathe in the fountain,to swing on the spiralof our
divinity and still be a human.”

The Divinity in my salutes the Divinity in you.

021005 – Durability

021005

My creative appetite is voracious.  I love to exceed.  I love learning, loving, looking and leaping.  Yes, I love leaping, but my back won’t tolerate it much anymore.  One word my character has stuck by:  INTEGRITY.  I’ve made decisions for my life, some good, and some bad, some with tragic consequences.  I have believed in each of those choices.  I have experienced the consequences of those choices and remain accountable for those choices, even if I made them in the way-back past.  Durable, is the word I could choose to summarize my life thus far.  I’m not that old, but this chassis carries some high mileage.  I rarely used the interstate freeways and always kept my soul wide open on the road less traveled.