Non-violence

A Study Guide

Based on Early Buddhist Teachings

compiled by

Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu

copyright 2018 ṭhānissaro bhikkhu

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Unported. To see a copy of this license visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. “Commercial” shall mean any sale, whether for commercial or non-profit purposes or entities.

questions about this book may be addressed to

Metta Forest Monastery

Valley Center, CA 92082-1409

U.S.A.

additional resources

More Dhamma talks, books and translations by Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu are available to download in digital audio and various ebook formats at dhammatalks.org.

printed copy

A paperback copy of this book is available free of charge. To request one, write to: Book Request, Metta Forest Monastery, PO Box 1409, Valley Center, CA 92082 USA.

Introduction

§1. When embraced,

the rod of violence

breeds danger & fear:

Look at people in strife.

I will tell of how

I experienced

terror:

Seeing people floundering

like fish in small puddles,

competing with one another—

as I saw this,

fear came into me.

The world was entirely

without substance.

All the directions

were knocked out of line.

Wanting a haven for myself,

I saw nothing that wasn’t laid claim to.

Seeing nothing in the end

but competition,

I felt discontent.

And then I saw

an arrow here,

so very hard to see,

embedded in the heart.

Overcome by this arrow

you run in all directions.

But simply on pulling it out

you don’t run,

you don’t sink.…

Whatever things are tied down in the world,

you shouldn’t be set on them.

Having totally penetrated

sensual pleasures,

sensual passions,

you should train for your own

unbinding [nibbāna]. — Sn 4:15

In this short passage, the Buddha describes his sense of dismay at the violence and conflict in the world, together with his important discovery: that the only escape from violence is to remove the causes of violence from your own heart. To remove these causes, you first have to restrain yourself from engaging in violence on the external level. That helps create the proper karmic context—more peaceful and honest—for extracting the causes of violence and conflict on the internal level. In other words, you have to stop engaging in violence before you can isolate and uproot the emotions and thoughts that would make you want to engage in violence to begin with.

The following passages from the Pāli Canon explain these two levels of the practice. They are divided into eight sections.

The first two sections deal with the first, external, level of practice. Section 1 details the drawbacks of engaging in violence, focusing on the long-term and immediate harm you do to yourself if you do so. To fully understand this section, it’s good to have some background on the Buddha’s teachings on kamma (karma). A good place to start would be the short booklet, Karma Q&A.

Passage §6 in this section makes the important point that the desire for power creates a vicious circle, in which you have to treat others violently in order to gain and maintain power, and then the fact that you’ve been violent makes you unwilling to listen to teachings that point out the dangers of violence. In this way, you close yourself off from realizing the damage you’re doing, making it harder to stop causing yourself even more harm.

Section 2 focuses on what it means to practice restraint, along with the benefits that come both from exercising restraint yourself and from getting others to exercise restraint, too. One of the implications of passage §13 in this section is that, from the perspective of kamma, you do harm to yourself when you engage in violence, and you do harm to others when you get them to engage in violence. And as passages §§18–20 clearly show, the Buddha taught that restraint against killing should be exercised in all situations, without exception. In other words, there are no grounds for justifying any act of killing, no matter how badly provoked. This means that there’s no room at all in the Buddha’s teachings for a theory of “just war.” The path to put an end to suffering requires that you be willing to sacrifice many things, but not the purity of your virtue. Passage §19 makes this point clear by stating that the forms of loss usually cited as excuses for breaking the precept against killing—loss of relatives, loss of wealth, loss of health—are nowhere near as serious as loss of virtue and loss of right view. Passage §20 illustrates this point with one of the most dramatic stories in the Pāli Canon, in which the hero of the story succeeds in exercising restraint in a situation where many a lesser person would succumb to the desire to get revenge.

Section 3, Overcoming the Causes of Violence, introduces the second, internal, level of practice. Passage §21 lists the character traits leading to violence—desire, anger, fear, and delusion. Read together with passage §22, this list exposes another vicious circle in the practice of violence: People kill and maim out of fear of death, but then the fact that they have done something cruel makes them fear death all the more. This means that they are likely to continue engaging in even more violence because of their fear.

The next two passages in Section 3 introduce three of the basic character traits that have to be developed to break these vicious cycles by doing the inner work that eradicates the causes of violence.

The first trait is heedfulness: realizing that your actions will make the difference between suffering long-term pain and experiencing long-term pleasure. As a result, you want to be careful to avoid acting in ways that will lead to long-term pain, even if they entail pain in the short term.

The second trait is a sense of shame—not the debilitating shame that’s the opposite of pride, but the healthy shame that’s the opposite of shamelessness. You want to look good in the eyes of wise people, and you would be ashamed to behave in ways that they would criticize.

The third trait is compunction, which is the opposite of apathy: the mind state in which you don’t care about the long-term. When you develop compunction, you care about your long-term happiness, and so you develop a healthy fear of the consequences of behaving in unskillful ways.

The remaining passages in Section 3 focus on how the Buddha’s values reverse the values of the world that glorify war and other violence. True victory, in his eyes and the eyes of all the wise, is to conquer your own internal unskillful qualities, rather than to conquer other people. Many of the passages in this section illustrate this principle with similes of warriors and elephants in battle, in which the truly brave warrior stands for the person who overcomes his own anger, sensuality, and lack of endurance. Genuine strength lies, not in forcing your will on others, but in using your will and intelligence to overcome your slavery to your own anger and sensuality.

The next three sections form a set, dealing with techniques to solve the problem of anger. Section 4 contains passages that suggest lines of thought that can be used to overcome anger. Of these passages, §36 is especially interesting in that it recommends using a defilement—spite—to overcome the more serious defilement of anger. Other passages then recommend developing nobler and more far-sighted lines of thought—such as goodwill, equanimity, and a contemplation of the long-term results of kamma—to overcome both anger and spite.

Section 5 introduces a character trait that’s particularly useful for overcoming anger—endurance—and suggests lines of thought for developing it. Some of these lines of thought aim at depersonalizing unpleasant experiences by (1) showing that they are perfectly normal in the human realm and (2) learning how not to embroider unpleasant experiences beyond the stage of mere sensory contact. In other words, if you can say of unpleasant words or painful sensations simply that “an unpleasant object has made contact at the senses” and leave it at that, then it’s much easier to bear than if you allow the mind to reverberate with complaints and recriminations over that contact.

Passage §39 introduces another practice that helps to develop endurance, the development of goodwill, a topic discussed in more detail in Section 6. The end of passage §39 also presents another line of thought: Given how badly human beings can treat one another, it helps to remember, when they’re unkind, that at least they are not treating you as badly as they could. Passage §45 takes this line of thought even further, showing how to think so as not to suffer when people do treat you as badly as possible.

Section 6 goes into more detail on a meditation practice that’s good for fostering endurance: the development of unlimited goodwill for all beings. As passage §46 shows, this practice is particularly useful not only to prevent yourself from treating others with violence, but also to heal the emotional scars that can come when you remember ways in which you were violent in the past.

Section 7 discusses contemplations and concentration practices useful for overcoming sensuality—our fascination with thinking and planning sensual pleasures—which is another important cause of violence. The contemplations help you to see the drawbacks of sensuality; the practice of jhāna—strong absorption in a mental state free from sensuality—helps you to find a pleasure that weakens the desire to resort to sensuality even when you see its drawbacks. Passage §58 then acts as a segue from the practice of concentration to the type of insight that puts an end to the causes for violence once and for all.

Section 8 requires the most explanation, as it deals with a subtle topic: the contemplations that put an end to papañca, the type of thinking that lies at the root of violence and all conflict.

What type of thinking is papañca? In some Dhamma circles, this term means “mental proliferation,” suggesting that it’s simply thinking run riot. In other words, the problem is that you think too much in an uncontrollable way. However, the Canon shows that the problem with papañca is not so much the amount of thinking as it is the types of perceptions and categories that inform the thinking: how you think, rather than how much you think.

Passage §65 states that the root of the categories of papañca is the perception, “I am the thinker.” This self-reflexive thought is what creates your sense of self as a being or object—which is why papañca is best translated as “objectification.” When you objectify yourself with the thought, “I am this,” a number of thought-categories grow from that thought to form the basis for how you relate to the world. These categories include the dichotomies of: being/not-being, me/not-me, mine/not-mine, doer/done-to. Also, when you identify your self with something that experiences, then based on the feelings arising from sensory contact, some feelings will seem appealing—worth getting for the self—and others will seem unappealing—worth pushing away. From this there grows desire, which comes into conflict with the desires of others who are also engaging in papañca.

This is because, once you take on the identity of a “being,” you need to feed—both physically and mentally. In fact, the need to subsist on food is the one thing that characterizes all beings (§60). As a being, your sense of who you are has to inhabit a world that can provide for the food you need. This applies both on the external, physical level and on the internal, psychological level. This is why the views and questions of objectification cover not only who you are, but also where you are, where you’ve come from, and where you’re going. (See passage §61.)

Externally, as a human being with human desires, you inhabit the same physical world—in the image of §1, the same puddle—as other human beings and common animals. When you think in terms of objectification and look for food in the human puddle, you inevitably run into conflict with other beings inhabiting the same puddle: those who you would like to take as food, those who would like to take you as food, and those looking for the same sort of food that you are. Thinking in terms of the categories of objectification spawns the desires that see your sources of food within that puddle as dear, and anyone who blocks those sources as not-dear. From this distinction come envy and stinginess, hostility, violence, rivalry, and ill will (§62). These attitudes, in turn, lead to the violence of “taking up rods & bladed weapons, of arguments, quarrels, disputes, accusations, divisive tale-bearing, & false speech” (§15).

This is how inner acts of objectification breed external contention.

(To help visualize the different ways in which the suttas describe the processes by which papañca leads to conflict and violence, Section 8 ends with a study-aid that maps out three of those descriptions.)

How can these processes be ended? Through a shift in perception, caused by the way you attend to feeling, using the categories of appropriate attention (see passage §61). As the Buddha states in passage §62, rather than viewing a feeling as an appealing or unappealing thing, you should look at it as part of a causal process: When a particular feeling is pursued, do skillful or unskillful qualities increase in the mind? If skillful qualities increase, you can pursue the feeling. If unskillful qualities increase, you shouldn’t. When comparing feelings that lead to skillful qualities, notice that those endowed with thinking (directed thought) and evaluation are less refined than those free of thinking and evaluation, as in the higher stages of mental absorption, or jhāna. When you see this, you can opt for the more refined feelings, and this cuts through the act of thinking that, according to passage §64, provides the basis for papañca.

In following this program, you avoid the notions of agent and victim, along with any self-reflexive thinking in general. There is simply the analysis of cause-effect processes. You’re still making use of dualities—distinguishing between unskillful and skillful actions, between suffering and stress on the one hand, and an end to suffering and stress on the other—but the distinction is between actions or processes, not things. In this way, your analysis avoids the type of thinking that, according to passage §62, depends on the perceptions and categories of papañca. This is how the vicious cycle in which thinking and papañca keep feeding each other is cut.

Ultimately, as you follow this program to greater and greater levels of refinement through the higher levels of mental absorption, you find less and less to relish and enjoy in the six senses and the mental processes based on them—and ultimately even in the action of mental absorption itself. With this sense of disenchantment, the processes of feeling and thought are stilled, and there’s a breakthrough to the cessation of the six sense spheres.

When these spheres cease, is there anything else left? Ven. Sāriputta, in passage §66 warns us not to ask, for to ask if there is, isn’t, both-is-and-isn’t, neither-is-nor-isn’t anything left in that dimension is to papañcize what is free from papañca. However, this dimension is not a total annihilation of experience (§67). It’s a type of experience that DN 11 calls consciousness without surface, “luminous all around, where water, earth, fire, & wind have no footing, where long/short, coarse/fine, fair/foul, name/form are all brought to an end.” This is the fruit of the path of arahantship—a path that makes use of dualities but leads to a fruit beyond them.

It may come as cold comfort to realize that conflict can be totally overcome only with the realization of arahantship. However, as the earlier sections have shown, violence can be abandoned much earlier in the practice, and a lot of the suffering that comes from violence and conflict can be relieved by developing some very basic character traits: restraint, heedfulness, a healthy sense of shame and compunction, endurance, and goodwill. And even before you tackle papañca head-on, it’s possible to start using the approach recommended in passage §62: learning to question the ways in which you identify your “self,” and trying to view feelings not as things to consume for their own sake but as parts of a causal process affecting the qualities in the mind. In this way, the basis for papañca is gradually undercut, and there are fewer and fewer occasions for conflict. In following this path, you reap its increasing benefits—more peace, both within and without—all along the way.

For more on the topic of non-violence, see the essays, “Educating Compassion” and “Getting the Message.” On the topic of restraint, see the articles, “Trading Candy for Gold,” “Reconciliation: Right & Wrong,” “The Streams of Emotion,” and “All Winners, No Losers.” For more on the development of goodwill, see The Sublime Attitudes. For more on the topic of papañca, see the essay, “The Arrows of Thinking” and the discussion of papañca in Skill in Questions.

1 : The Drawbacks of Violence

§2. All

tremble at the rod,

all

are fearful of death.

Drawing the parallel to

yourself,

neither kill nor get others to kill.

All

tremble at the rod,

all

hold their life dear.

Drawing the parallel to

yourself,

neither kill nor get others to kill.

Whoever hits with a rod

beings desiring ease,

when he himself is looking for ease,

will meet with no ease after death.

Whoever doesn’t hit with a rod

beings desiring ease,

when he himself is looking for ease,

will meet with ease after death.

Speak harshly to no one,

or the words will be thrown

right back at you.

Contentious talk is painful,

for you get struck by rods in return.

If, like a flattened metal pot

you don’t resound,

you’ve attained an unbinding:

In you there’s found

no contention. — Dhp 129–134

§3. Beings are the owners of their actions (karma), heir to their actions, born of their actions, related through their actions, and have their actions as their arbitrator. Action is what creates distinctions among beings in terms of coarseness & refinement.…

“There is the case where a woman or man is a killer of living beings, brutal, bloody-handed, given to killing & slaying, showing no mercy to living beings. Through having adopted & carried out such actions, on the break-up of the body, after death, he/she reappears in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell. If, on the break-up of the body, after death—instead of reappearing in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell—he/she comes to the human state, then he/she is short-lived wherever reborn. This is the way leading to a short life: to be a killer of living beings, brutal, bloody-handed, given to killing & slaying, showing no mercy to living beings.

“But then there is the case where a woman or man, having abandoned the killing of living beings, abstains from killing living beings, and dwells with the rod laid down, the knife laid down, scrupulous, merciful, & sympathetic for the welfare of all living beings. Through having adopted & carried out such actions, on the break-up of the body, after death, he/she reappears in a good destination, a heavenly world. If, on the break-up of the body, after death—instead of reappearing in a good destination, a heavenly world—he/she comes to the human state, then he/she is long-lived wherever reborn. This is the way leading to a long life: to have abandoned the killing of living beings, to abstain from killing living beings, to dwell with one’s rod laid down, one’s knife laid down, scrupulous, merciful, & sympathetic for the welfare of all living beings.

“There is the case where a woman or man is one who harms beings with his/her fists, with clods, with sticks, or with knives. Through having adopted & carried out such actions, on the break-up of the body, after death, he/she reappears in a plane of deprivation… If instead he/she comes to the human state, then he/she is sickly wherever reborn. This is the way leading to sickliness: to be one who harms beings with one’s fists, with clods, with sticks, or with knives.

“But then there is the case where a woman or man is not one who harms beings with his/her fists, with clods, with sticks, or with knives. Through having adopted & carried out such actions, on the break-up of the body, after death, he/she reappears in a good destination… If instead he/she comes to the human state, then he/she is healthy wherever reborn. This is the way leading to health: not to be one who harms beings with one’s fists, with clods, with sticks, or with knives.” — MN 135

§4. On one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Nāḷandā in the Pāvārika Mango Grove. Then Asibandhakaputta the headman went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: “The brahmans of the Western lands, lord—those who carry water pots, wear garlands of water plants, purify with water, & worship fire—can take (the spirit of) a dead person, lift it out, instruct it, & send it to heaven. But the Blessed One, worthy & rightly self-awakened, can arrange it so that all the world, at the break-up of the body, after death, reappears in a good destination, a heavenly world.”

“Very well, then, headman, I will question you on this matter. Answer as you see fit. What do you think? There is the case where a man is one who takes life, steals, indulges in illicit sex; is a liar, one who speaks divisive speech, harsh speech, & idle chatter; is greedy, bears thoughts of ill-will, & holds to wrong views. Then a great crowd of people, gathering & congregating, would pray, praise, & circumambulate with their hands palm-to-palm over the heart (saying,) ‘May this man, at the break-up of the body, after death, reappear in a good destination, the heavenly world!’ What do you think? Would that man—because of the prayers, praise, & circumambulation of that great crowd of people—at the break-up of the body, after death, reappear in a good destination, a heavenly world?”

“No, lord.”

“Suppose a man were to throw a large boulder into a deep lake of water, and a great crowd of people, gathering & congregating, would pray, praise, & circumambulate with their hands palm-to-palm over the heart (saying,) ‘Rise up, O boulder! Come floating up, O boulder! Come float to the shore, O boulder!’ What do you think? Would that boulder—because of the prayers, praise, & circumambulation of that great crowd of people—rise up, come floating up, or come float to the shore?”

“No, lord.”

“So it is with any man who takes life, steals, indulges in illicit sex; is a liar, one who speaks divisive speech, harsh speech, & idle chatter; is greedy, bears thoughts of ill-will, & holds to wrong views. Even though a great crowd of people, gathering & congregating, would pray, praise, & circumambulate with their hands palm-to-palm over the heart—(saying,) ‘May this man, at the break-up of the body, after death, reappear in a good destination, a heavenly world!’—still, at the break-up of the body, after death, he would reappear in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell.” — SN 42:6

§5. A man may plunder

as long as it serves his ends,

but when others are plundered,

he who has plundered

gets plundered in turn.

A fool thinks,

‘Now’s my chance,’

as long as his evil

has yet to ripen.

But when it ripens,

the fool falls into pain.

Killing, you gain

your killer.

Conquering, you gain one

who will conquer you;

insulting,     insult;

harassing,     harassment.

And so, through the cycle of action,

he who has plundered

gets plundered in turn. — SN 3:15

§6. “Monks, there are these three roots of what is unskillful. Which three? Greed is a root of what is unskillful, aversion is a root of what is unskillful, delusion is a root of what is unskillful.

“Greed itself is unskillful. Whatever a greedy person fabricates by means of body, speech, or intellect, that too is unskillful. Whatever suffering a greedy person—his mind overcome with greed, his mind consumed—wrongly inflicts on another person through beating or imprisonment or confiscation or placing blame or banishment, (with the thought,) ‘I have power. I want power,’ that too is unskillful. Thus it is that many evil, unskillful qualities/events—born of greed, caused by greed, originated through greed, conditioned by greed—come into play.

“Aversion itself is unskillful. Whatever an aversive person fabricates by means of body, speech, or intellect, that too is unskillful. Whatever suffering an aversive person—his mind overcome with aversion, his mind consumed—wrongly inflicts on another person through beating or imprisonment or confiscation or placing blame or banishment, (with the thought,) ‘I have power. I want power,’ that too is unskillful. Thus it is that many evil, unskillful qualities—born of aversion, caused by aversion, originated through aversion, conditioned by aversion—come into play.

“Delusion itself is unskillful. Whatever a deluded person fabricates by means of body, speech, or intellect, that too is unskillful. Whatever suffering a deluded person—his mind overcome with delusion, his mind consumed—wrongly inflicts on another person through beating or imprisonment or confiscation or placing blame or banishment, (with the thought,) ‘I have power. I want power,’ that too is unskillful. Thus it is that many evil, unskillful qualities—born of delusion, caused by delusion, originated through delusion, conditioned by delusion—come into play.

“And a person like this is called one who speaks at the wrong time, speaks what is unfactual, speaks what is irrelevant, speaks contrary to the Dhamma, speaks contrary to the Vinaya. Why…? Because of having wrongly inflicted suffering on another person through beating or imprisonment or confiscation or placing blame or banishment, (with the thought,) ‘I have power. I want power.’ When told what is factual, he denies it and doesn’t acknowledge it. When told what is unfactual, he doesn’t make an ardent effort to untangle it (to see), ‘This is unfactual. This is baseless.’ That’s why a person like this is called one who speaks at the wrong time, speaks what is unfactual, speaks what is irrelevant, speaks contrary to the Dhamma, speaks contrary to the Vinaya.

“A person like this—his mind overcome with evil, unskillful qualities born of greed… born of aversion… born of delusion, his mind consumed—dwells in suffering right in the here & now—feeling threatened, turbulent, feverish—and at the break-up of the body, after death, can expect a bad destination.

“Just as a sal tree, a birch, or an aspen, when smothered & surrounded by three parasitic vines, falls into misfortune, falls into disaster, falls into misfortune & disaster, in the same way, a person like this—his mind overcome with evil, unskillful qualities born of greed… born of aversion… born of delusion, his mind consumed—dwells in suffering right in the here & now—feeling threatened, turbulent, feverish—and at the break-up of the body, after death, can expect a bad destination.” — AN 3:70

§7. Then Yodhājīva (Professional Warrior) the headman went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: “Venerable sir, I have heard that it has been passed down by the ancient teaching lineage of professional warriors that ‘When a professional warrior strives & exerts himself in battle, if others then strike him down & slay him while he is striving & exerting himself in battle, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of devas slain in battle.’ What does the Blessed One have to say about that?”

“Enough, headman, put that aside. Don’t ask me that.”

A second time… A third time Yodhājīva the headman said: “Venerable sir, I have heard that it has been passed down by the ancient teaching lineage of professional warriors that ‘When a professional warrior strives & exerts himself in battle, if others then strike him down & slay him while he is striving & exerting himself in battle, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of devas slain in battle.’ What does the Blessed One have to say about that?”

“Apparently, headman, I haven’t been able to get past you by saying, ‘Enough, headman, put that aside. Don’t ask me that.’ So I will simply answer you. When a professional warrior strives & exerts himself in battle, his mind is already seized, debased, & misdirected by the thought: ‘May these beings be struck down or slaughtered or annihilated or destroyed. May they not exist.’ If others then strike him down & slay him while he is thus striving & exerting himself in battle, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the hell called the realm of those slain in battle. But if he holds such a view as this: ‘When a professional warrior strives & exerts himself in battle, if others then strike him down & slay him while he is striving & exerting himself in battle, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of devas slain in battle,’ that is his wrong view. Now, there are two destinations for a person with wrong view, I tell you: either hell or the animal womb.”

When this was said, Yodhājīva the headman sobbed & burst into tears. (The Blessed One said:) “That is what I couldn’t get past you by saying, ‘Enough, headman, put that aside. Don’t ask me that.’”

“I’m not crying, venerable sir, because of what the Blessed One said to me, but simply because I have been deceived, cheated, & fooled for a long time by that ancient teaching lineage of professional warriors who said: ‘When a professional warrior strives & exerts himself in battle, if others then strike him down & slay him while he is striving & exerting himself in battle, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of devas slain in battle.’

“Magnificent, venerable sir! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has the Blessed One—through many lines of reasoning—made the Dhamma clear. I go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Saṅgha of monks. May the Blessed One remember me as a lay follower who has gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life.” — SN 42:3

§8. As he was sitting to one side, King Pasenadi Kosala said to the Blessed One: “Just now, lord, while I was alone in seclusion, this train of thought arose in my awareness: ‘Who have themselves protected, and who leave themselves unprotected?’ Then it occurred to me: ‘Those who engage in bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct leave themselves unprotected. Even though a squadron of elephant troops might protect them, a squadron of cavalry troops, a squadron of chariot troops, a squadron of infantry troops might protect them, still they leave themselves unprotected. Why is that? Because that’s an external protection, not an internal one. Therefore they leave themselves unprotected. But those who engage in good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct have themselves protected. Even though neither a squadron of elephant troops, a squadron of cavalry troops, a squadron of chariot troops, nor a squadron of infantry troops might protect them, still they have themselves protected. Why is that? Because that’s an internal protection, not an external one. Therefore they have themselves protected.’”

“That’s the way it is, great king! That’s the way it is! Those who engage in bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct leave themselves unprotected. Even though a squadron of elephant troops might protect them, a squadron of cavalry troops, a squadron of chariot troops, a squadron of infantry troops might protect them, still they leave themselves unprotected. Why is that? Because that’s an external protection, not an internal one. Therefore they leave themselves unprotected. But those who engage in good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct have themselves protected. Even though neither a squadron of elephant troops, a squadron of cavalry troops, a squadron of chariot troops, nor a squadron of infantry troops might protect them, still they have themselves protected. Why is that? Because that’s an internal protection, not an external one. Therefore they have themselves protected.”

That is what the Blessed One said. Having said that, the One Well-Gone, the Teacher, said further:

“Restraint with the body is good,

good is restraint with speech.

Restraint with the heart is good,

good is restraint     everywhere.

Restrained everywhere,

conscientious,

one is said to be

protected.”— SN 3:5

2 : The Practice of Restraint

§9. I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Sāvatthī at Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. And on that occasion, a large number of boys on the road between Sāvatthī & Jeta’s Grove were hitting a snake with a stick. Then early in the morning the Blessed One adjusted his under robe and—carrying his bowl & robes—went into Sāvatthī for alms. He saw the large number of boys on the road between Sāvatthī & Jeta’s Grove catching little fish. Seeing them, he went up to them and, on arrival, said to them, “Boys, do you fear pain? Do you dislike pain?”

“Yes, lord, we fear pain. We dislike pain.”

Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:

If you fear pain,

if you dislike pain,

don’t anywhere do an evil deed

in open or in secret.

If you’re doing or will do

an evil deed,

you won’t escape pain

catching up

as you run away. — Ud 5:4

§10. “There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones reflects thus: ‘I love life and don’t love death. I love happiness and abhor pain. Now if I—loving life and not loving death, loving happiness and abhorring pain—were to be killed, that would be displeasing & disagreeable to me. And if I were to kill another who loves life and doesn’t love death, who loves happiness and abhors pain, that would be displeasing & disagreeable to the other. What is displeasing & disagreeable to me is displeasing & disagreeable to others. How can I inflict on others what is displeasing & disagreeable to me?’ Reflecting in this way, he refrains from taking life, gets others to refrain from taking life, and speaks in praise of refraining from taking life. In this way his bodily behavior is pure in three ways.

“And further, he reflects thus: ‘If someone, by way of theft, were to take from me what I haven’t given, that would be displeasing & disagreeable to me.… If someone were to commit adultery with my wives, that would be displeasing & disagreeable to me.… If someone were to damage my well-being with a lie, that would be displeasing & disagreeable to me.… If someone were to divide me from my friends with divisive speech, that would be displeasing & disagreeable to me.… If someone were to address me with harsh speech, that would be displeasing & disagreeable to me.… If someone were to address me with idle chatter, that would be displeasing & disagreeable to me. And if I were to address another with idle chatter, that would be displeasing & disagreeable to the other. What is displeasing & disagreeable to me is displeasing & disagreeable to others. How can I inflict on others what is displeasing & disagreeable to me?’ Reflecting in this way, he refrains from idle chatter, gets others to refrain from idle chatter, and speaks in praise of refraining from idle chatter.” — SN 55:7

§11. Searching all directions

with your awareness,

you find no one dearer

than yourself.

In the same way, others

are thickly dear to themselves.

So you shouldn’t hurt others

if you love yourself. — Ud 5:1

§12. “And how is one made impure in three ways by bodily action? There is the case where a certain person takes life, is brutal, bloody-handed, devoted to killing & slaying, showing no mercy to living beings. He takes what is not given. He takes, in the manner of a thief, things in a village or a wilderness that belong to others and have not been given by them. He engages in sexual misconduct. He gets sexually involved with those who are protected by their mothers, their fathers, their brothers, their sisters, their relatives, or their Dhamma; those with husbands, those who entail punishments, or even those crowned with flowers by another man. This is how one is made impure in three ways by bodily action.

“And how is one made impure in four ways by verbal action? There is the case where a certain person tells lies. When he has been called to a town meeting, a group meeting, a gathering of his relatives, his guild, or of the royalty [i.e., a royal court proceeding], if he is asked as a witness, ‘Come & tell, good man, what you know’: If he doesn’t know, he says, ‘I know.’ If he does know, he says, ‘I don’t know.’ If he hasn’t seen, he says, ‘I have seen.’ If he has seen, he says, ’I haven’t seen.’ Thus he consciously tells lies for his own sake, for the sake of another, or for the sake of a certain reward. He engages in divisive speech. What he has heard here he tells there to break those people apart from these people here. What he has heard there he tells here to break these people apart from those people there. Thus breaking apart those who are united and stirring up strife between those who have broken apart, he loves factionalism, delights in factionalism, enjoys factionalism, speaks things that create factionalism. He engages in harsh speech. He speaks words that are insolent, cutting, mean to others, reviling others, provoking anger and destroying concentration. He engages in idle chatter. He speaks out of season, speaks what isn’t factual, what isn’t in accordance with the goal, the Dhamma, & the Vinaya, words that are not worth treasuring. This is how one is made impure in four ways by verbal action.…

“And how is one made pure in three ways by bodily action? There is the case where a certain person, abandoning the taking of life, abstains from the taking of life. He dwells with his rod laid down, his knife laid down, scrupulous, merciful, compassionate for the welfare of all living beings. Abandoning the taking of what is not given, he abstains from taking what is not given. He does not take, in the manner of a thief, things in a village or a wilderness that belong to others and have not been given by them. Abandoning sexual misconduct, he abstains from sexual misconduct. He does not get sexually involved with those who are protected by their mothers, their fathers, their brothers, their sisters, their relatives, or their Dhamma; those with husbands, those who entail punishments, or even those crowned with flowers by another man. This is how one is made pure in three ways by bodily action.

“And how is one made pure in four ways by verbal action? There is the case where a certain person, abandoning the telling of lies, abstains from telling lies. When he has been called to a town meeting, a group meeting, a gathering of his relatives, his guild, or of the royalty, if he is asked as a witness, ‘Come & tell, good man, what you know’: If he doesn’t know, he says, ‘I don’t know.’ If he does know, he says, ‘I know.’ If he hasn’t seen, he says, ‘I haven’t seen.’ If he has seen, he says, ’I have seen.’ Thus he doesn’t consciously tell a lie for his own sake, for the sake of another, or for the sake of any reward. Abandoning divisive speech, he abstains from divisive speech. What he has heard here he does not tell there to break those people apart from these people here. What he has heard there he does not tell here to break these people apart from those people there. Thus reconciling those who have broken apart or cementing those who are united, he loves concord, delights in concord, enjoys concord, speaks things that create concord. Abandoning harsh speech, he abstains from harsh speech. He speaks words that are soothing to the ear, that are affectionate, that go to the heart, that are polite, appealing & pleasing to people at large. Abandoning idle chatter, he abstains from idle chatter. He speaks in season, speaks what is factual, what is in accordance with the goal, the Dhamma, & the Vinaya. He speaks words worth treasuring, seasonable, reasonable, circumscribed, connected with the goal. This is how one is made pure in four ways by verbal action.” — AN 10:165

§13. “Monks, these four types of individuals are to be found existing in the world. Which four? The one who practices for his own benefit but not for that of others. The one who practices for the benefit of others but not for his own. The one who practices neither for his own benefit nor for that of others. The one who practices for his own benefit and for that of others.

“And how is one an individual who practices for his own benefit but not for that of others? There is the case where a certain individual himself abstains from the taking of life but doesn’t encourage others in undertaking abstinence from the taking of life. He himself abstains from stealing but doesn’t encourage others in undertaking abstinence from stealing. He himself abstains from sexual misconduct but doesn’t encourage others in undertaking abstinence from sexual misconduct. He himself abstains from lying but doesn’t encourage others in undertaking abstinence from lying. He himself abstains from intoxicants that cause heedlessness but doesn’t encourage others in undertaking abstinence from intoxicants that cause heedlessness. Such is the individual who practices for his own benefit but not for that of others.

“And how is one an individual who practices for the benefit of others but not for his own? There is the case where a certain individual himself doesn’t abstain from the taking of life but encourages others in undertaking abstinence from the taking of life. He himself doesn’t abstain from stealing but encourages others in undertaking abstinence from stealing. He himself doesn’t abstain from sexual misconduct but encourages others in undertaking abstinence from sexual misconduct. He himself doesn’t abstain from lying but encourages others in undertaking abstinence from lying. He himself doesn’t abstain from intoxicants that cause heedlessness but encourages others in undertaking abstinence from intoxicants that cause heedlessness. Such is the individual who practices for the benefit of others but not for his own.

“And how is one an individual who practices neither for his own benefit nor for that of others? There is the case where a certain individual himself doesn’t abstain from the taking of life and doesn’t encourage others in undertaking abstinence from the taking of life. He himself doesn’t abstain from stealing and doesn’t encourage others in undertaking abstinence from stealing. He himself doesn’t abstain from sexual misconduct and doesn’t encourage others in undertaking abstinence from sexual misconduct. He himself doesn’t abstain from lying and doesn’t encourage others in undertaking abstinence from lying. He himself doesn’t abstain from intoxicants that cause heedlessness and doesn’t encourage others in undertaking abstinence from intoxicants that cause heedlessness. Such is the individual who practices neither for his own benefit nor for that of others.

“And how is one an individual who practices for his own benefit and for that of others? There is the case where a certain individual himself abstains from the taking of life and encourages others in undertaking abstinence from the taking of life. He himself abstains from stealing and encourages others in undertaking abstinence from stealing. He himself abstains from sexual misconduct and encourages others in undertaking abstinence from sexual misconduct. He himself abstains from lying and encourages others in undertaking abstinence from lying. He himself abstains from intoxicants that cause heedlessness and encourages others in undertaking abstinence from intoxicants that cause heedlessness. Such is the individual who practices for his own benefit and for that of others.” — AN 4:99

§14. “And what is right resolve? Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill will, on harmlessness: This is called right resolve.” — SN 45:8

§15. The first precept:

I undertake the training rule to refrain from taking life. — Khp 2

§16. From the instructions to every new monk:

“A monk who has been accepted should not deprive a living being of life, even if it is only a black or white ant. Any monk who purposely deprives a human being of life, even to the extent of causing an abortion, is not a contemplative, not a son of the Sakyan.

“Just as a solid block of stone broken in two cannot be joined together again, in the same way a monk who has purposely deprived a human being of life is not a contemplative, not a son of the Sakyan. You are not to do this for the rest of your life.” — Mv I.78.2

§17. On one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Sāvatthī at Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. There he addressed the monks, “Monks!”

“Yes, lord,” the monks responded.

The Blessed One said, “Once in the past the devas & asuras1 were arrayed for battle. Then Vepacitti the asura-king said to Sakka the deva-king: ‘Let there be victory through what is well spoken.’

“‘Yes, Vepacitti, let there be victory through what is well spoken.’

“So the devas & asuras appointed a panel of judges, [thinking,] ‘These will decide for us what is well spoken & poorly spoken.’

“Then Vepacitti the asura-king said to Sakka the deva-king, ‘Say a verse, deva-king!’

“When this was said, Sakka the deva-king said to Vepacitti the asura-king, ‘But you are the senior deity here, Vepacitti. You say a verse.’

“When this was said, Vepacitti recited this verse:

‘Fools would flare up even more

if there were no constraints.

Thus an enlightened one

should restrain the fool

with a heavy stick.’

“When Vepacitti had said this verse, the asuras applauded but the devas were silent. So Vepacitti said to Sakka, ‘Say a verse, deva-king!’

“When this was said, Sakka recited this verse:

‘This, I think,

is the only constraint for a fool:

When, knowing the other’s provoked,

you mindfully grow calm.’

“When Sakka had said this verse, the devas applauded but the asuras were silent. So Sakka said to Vepacitti, ‘Say a verse, Vepacitti!’

“When this was said, Vepacitti recited this verse:

‘Vasava2, I see a fault

in this very forbearance:

When the fool thinks,

“He’s forbearing

out of fear of me,”

the idiot pursues you even more—

as a cow, someone who runs away.’

“When Vepacitti had said this verse, the asuras applauded but the devas were silent. So Vepacitti said to Sakka, ‘Say a verse, deva-king!’

“When this was said, Sakka recited this verse:

‘It doesn’t matter

whether he thinks,

“He’s forbearing

out of fear of me.”

One’s own true good

is the foremost good.

Nothing better

than patience

is found.

Whoever, when strong,

is forbearing

to one who is weak:

That’s the foremost patience.

The weak must constantly endure.

They call that strength

no strength at all:

whoever’s strength

is the strength of a fool.

There’s no reproach

for one who is strong,

guarding—guarded by—Dhamma.

You make things worse

when you flare up

at someone who’s angry.

Whoever doesn’t flare up

at someone who’s angry

wins a battle

hard to win.

You live for the good of both

—your own, the other’s—

when, knowing the other’s provoked,

you mindfully grow calm.

When you work the cure of both

—your own, the other’s—

those who think you a fool

know nothing of Dhamma.’

“When Sakka had said this verse, the devas applauded but the asuras were silent. Then the deva & asura panel of judges said, ‘The verses said by Vepacitti the asura-king lie in the sphere of swords & weapons—thence arguments, quarrels, & strife. Whereas the verses said by Sakka the deva-king lie outside the sphere of swords & weapons—thence no arguments, no quarrels, no strife. The victory through what is well spoken goes to Sakka the deva-king.’

“And that, monks, is how the victory through what was well spoken went to Sakka the deva-king.” — SN 11:5

Notes

1. The devas & asuras were two groups of deities who fought for control of heaven (like the gods & titans in Greek mythology). The devas eventually won. The asuras, known for their fierce anger, later became classed as angry demons and, in some Buddhist cosmologies, are regarded as a class of being lower than human.

2. Vasava—“Powerful”—is one of Sakka’s epithets.

§18. “There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones, abandoning the taking of life, abstains from taking life. In doing so, he gives freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings. In giving freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings, he gains a share in limitless freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, and freedom from oppression. This is the first gift, the first great gift—original, long-standing, traditional, ancient, unadulterated, unadulterated from the beginning—that is not open to suspicion, will never be open to suspicion, and is unfaulted by knowledgeable contemplatives & brahmans.” — AN 8:39

§19. “Monks, there are these five kinds of loss. Which five? Loss of relatives, loss of wealth, loss through disease, loss in terms of virtue, loss in terms of views. It’s not by reason of loss of relatives, loss of wealth, or loss through disease that beings—with the break-up of the body, after death—reappear in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell. It’s by reason of loss in terms of virtue and loss in terms of views that beings—with the break-up of the body, after death—reappear in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell. These are the five kinds of loss.

“There are these five ways of being consummate. Which five? Being consummate in terms of relatives, being consummate in terms of wealth, being consummate in terms of freedom from disease, being consummate in terms of virtue, being consummate in terms of views. It’s not by reason of being consummate in terms of relatives, being consummate in terms of wealth, or being consummate in terms of freedom from disease that beings—with the break-up of the body, after death—reappear in a good destination, a heavenly world. It’s by reason of being consummate in virtue and being consummate in terms of views that beings—with the break-up of the body, after death—reappear in a good destination, a heavenly world. These are the five ways of being consummate.” — AN 5:130

§20. “Once, monks, in Vārāṇasī, Brahmadatta was the king of Kāsi—rich, prosperous, with many possessions, many troops, many vehicles, many territories, with fully-stocked armories & granaries. Dīghīti was the king of Kosala—poor, not very prosperous, with few possessions, few troops, few vehicles, few territories, with poorly-stocked armories & granaries. So Brahmadatta the king of Kāsi, raising a fourfold army, marched against Dīghīti the king of Kosala. Dīghīti the king of Kosala heard, ‘Brahmadatta the king of Kāsi, they say, has raised a fourfold army and is marching against me.’ Then the thought occurred to him, ‘King Brahmadatta is rich, prosperous… with fully-stocked armories & granaries, whereas I am poor… with poorly-stocked armories & granaries. I am not competent to stand against even one attack by him. Why don’t I slip out of the city beforehand?’ So, taking his chief consort, he slipped out of the city beforehand. Then King Brahmadatta, conquering the troops, vehicles, lands, armories, & granaries of King Dīghīti, lived in lordship over them.

“Meanwhile, King Dīghīti had set out for Vārāṇasī together with his consort and, traveling by stages, arrived there. There he lived with her on the outskirts of Vārāṇasī in a potter’s house, disguised as a wanderer. Not long afterwards, she became pregnant. She had a pregnancy wish of this sort: She wanted to see a fourfold army, armed & arrayed, standing on a parade ground at dawn, and to drink the water used for washing the swords. She said to King Dīghīti, ‘Your majesty, I am pregnant and I have a pregnancy wish of this sort: I want to see a fourfold army, armed & arrayed, standing on a parade ground at dawn, and to drink the water used for washing the swords.’ He said, ‘My queen, where is there for us—fallen on hard times—a fourfold army, armed & arrayed, standing on a parade ground, and water used for washing the swords?’

“‘If I don’t get this, your majesty, I will die.’

Now at that time, the brahman adviser to King Brahmadatta was a friend of King Dīghīti. So King Dīghīti went to him and, on arrival, said, ‘A lady friend of yours, old friend, is pregnant, and she has a pregnancy wish of this sort: She wants to see a fourfold army, armed & arrayed, standing on a parade ground at dawn, and to drink the water used for washing the swords.’

“‘In that case, let me see her.’

“So King Dīghīti’s consort went to King Brahmadatta’s brahman adviser. When he saw her coming from afar, he rose from his seat, arranged his robe over one shoulder and, with his hands raised in salutation to her, exclaimed three times, ‘Surely the king of Kosala has come to your womb! Surely the king of Kosala has come to your womb! Surely the king of Kosala has come to your womb! Don’t be worried, my queen. You will get to see a fourfold army, armed & arrayed, standing on a parade ground at dawn, and to drink the water used for washing the swords.’

“Then he went to King Brahmadatta and, on arrival, said to him, ‘Your majesty, signs have appeared such that tomorrow at dawn a fourfold army, armed & arrayed, should stand on a parade ground and that the swords should be washed.’

“So King Brahmadatta ordered his people, ‘I say, then: Do as the brahman adviser says.’ Thus King Dīghīti’s chief consort got to see a fourfold army, armed & arrayed, standing on a parade ground at dawn, and got to drink the water used for washing the swords. Then, with the maturing of the fetus, she gave birth to a son, whom they named Dīghāvu [LongLife]. Not long afterwards, Prince Dīghāvu reached the age of discretion. The thought occurred to King Dīghīti, ‘This King Brahmadatta of Kāsi has done us great harm. He has seized our troops, vehicles, lands, armories, & granaries. If he finds out about us, he will have all three of us killed. Why don’t I send Prince Dīghāvu to live outside of the city?’ So Prince Dīghāvu, having gone to live outside of the city, learned all the crafts.

“Now at that time King Dīghīti’s barber had gone over to King Brahmadatta. He saw King Dīghīti, together with his consort, living on the outskirts of Vārāṇasī in a potter’s house, disguised as a wanderer. On seeing them, he went to King Brahmadatta and, on arrival, said to him, ‘Your majesty, King Dīghīti of Kosala, together with his consort, is living on the outskirts of Vārāṇasī in a potter’s house, disguised as a wanderer.’

“So King Brahmadatta ordered his people, ‘I say, then: Go fetch King Dīghīti together with his consort.’

“Responding, ‘As you say, your majesty,’ to the king, they went and fetched King Dīghīti together with his consort.

“Then King Brahmadatta ordered his people, ‘I say, then: Having bound King Dīghīti & his consort with a stout rope with their arms pinned tightly against their backs, and having shaved them bald, march them to a harsh-sounding drum from street to street, crossroads to crossroads, evict them out the south gate of the city and there, to the south of the city, cut them into four pieces and bury them in holes placed in the four directions.’

Responding, ‘As you say, your majesty,’ to the king, the king’s people bound King Dīghīti & his consort with a stout rope, pinning their arms tightly against their backs, shaved them bald, and marched them to a harsh-sounding drum from street to street, crossroads to crossroads.

“Then the thought occurred to Prince Dīghāvu, ‘It’s been a long time since I saw my mother & father. What if I were to go see them?’ So he entered Vārāṇasī and saw his mother & father bound with a stout rope, their arms pinned tightly against their backs, their heads shaven bald, being marched to a harsh-sounding drum from street to street, crossroads to crossroads. So he went to them. King Dīghīti saw Prince Dīghāvu coming from afar, and on seeing him, said, ‘Don’t, my dear Dīghāvu, be far-sighted. Don’t be near-sighted. For vengeance is not settled through vengeance. Vengeance is settled through non-vengeance.’

“When this was said, the people said to him, ‘This King Dīghīti has gone crazy. He’s talking nonsense. Who is Dīghāvu? Why is he saying, “Don’t, my dear Dīghāvu, be far-sighted. Don’t be near-sighted. For vengeance is not settled through vengeance. Vengeance is settled through non-vengeance”?’

“‘I’m not crazy or talking nonsense. He who knows will understand.’ Then a second time… a third time he said, ‘Don’t, my dear Dīghāvu, be far-sighted. Don’t be near-sighted. For vengeance is not settled through vengeance. Vengeance is settled through non-vengeance.’

“A third time, the people said to him, ‘This King Dīghīti has gone crazy. He’s talking nonsense. Who is Dīghāvu? Why is he saying, “Don’t, my dear Dīghāvu, be far-sighted. Don’t be near-sighted. For vengeance is not settled through vengeance. Vengeance is settled through non-vengeance”?’

“‘I’m not crazy or talking nonsense. He who knows will understand.’

“Then the king’s people, having marched King Dīghīti together with his chief consort to a harsh-sounding drum from street to street, crossroads to crossroads, evicted them out the south gate of the city and there, to the south of the city, cut them into four pieces, buried them in holes placed in the four directions, stationed guards, and left.

“Then Prince Dīghāvu, having entered Vārāṇasī, brought out some liquor and got the guards to drink it. When they had fallen down drunk, he collected sticks, made a pyre, raised the bodies of his mother & father onto the pyre, set fire to it, and then circumambulated it three times with his hands raised in salutation.

“Now at that time, King Brahmadatta had gone up to the terrace on top of his palace. He saw Prince Dīghāvu circumambulating the pyre three times with his hands raised in salutation, and on seeing him, the thought occurred to him, ‘Doubtlessly, this person is a relative or blood-kinsman of King Dīghīti. Ah, how unfortunate for me, for there is no one who will tell me what this means!’

“Then Prince Dīghāvu, having gone into the wilderness and having cried & wept as much as he needed to, dried his tears and entered Vārāṇasī. Going to an elephant stable next to the king’s palace, he said to the chief elephant trainer, ‘Teacher, I want to learn this craft.’

“‘In that case, young man, you may learn it.’

“Then, rising in the last watch of the night, Prince Dīghāvu sang in a sweet voice and played the lute in the elephant stable. King Brahmadatta, also rising in the last watch of the night, heard the sweet-voiced singing & lute-playing in the elephant stable. On hearing it, he asked his people, ‘I say: Who was that, rising in the last watch of the night, singing in a sweet voice and playing a lute in the elephant stable?’

“‘Your majesty, a young man—the student of such-and-such an elephant trainer, rising in the last watch of the night—was singing in a sweet voice and playing a lute in the elephant stable.’

“‘I say, then: Go fetch that young man.’

“Responding, ‘As you say, your majesty,’ to the king, they went and fetched Prince Dīghāvu.

“Then King Brahmadatta said to Prince Dīghāvu, ‘I say, my young man: Was that you rising in the last watch of the night, singing in a sweet voice and playing a lute in the elephant stable?’

“‘Yes, your majesty.’

“‘I say then, my young man: Sing and play the lute.’

“Responding, ‘As you say, your majesty,’ to the king and seeking to win favor, Prince Dīghāvu sang with a sweet voice and played the lute.

Then King Brahmadatta said to him, ‘I say: You, my young man, are to stay and attend to me.’

“‘As you say, your majesty,’ Prince Dīghāvu responded to the king. Then he rose in the morning before King Brahmadatta, went to bed in the evening after him, did whatever the king ordered, always acting to please him, speaking politely to him. And it was not long before King Brahmadatta placed the prince close to him in a position of trust.

“Then one day King Brahmadatta said to Prince Dīghāvu, ‘I say then, my young man: Harness the chariot. I’m going hunting.’

“Responding, ‘As you say, your majesty,’ to the king, Prince Dīghāvu harnessed the chariot and then said to King Brahmadatta, ‘Your chariot is harnessed, your majesty. Now is the time for you to do as you see fit.’

“Then King Brahmadatta mounted the chariot, and Prince Dīghāvu drove it. He drove it in such a way that the king’s entourage went one way, and the chariot another. Then, after they had gone far, King Brahmadatta said to Prince Dīghāvu, ‘I say then, my young man: Unharness the chariot. I’m tired. I’m going to lie down.’

“Responding, ‘As you say, your majesty,’ to the king, Prince Dīghāvu unharnessed the chariot and sat down cross-legged on the ground. Then King Brahmadatta lay down, placing his head on Prince Dīghāvu’s lap. As he was tired, he went to sleep right away. Then the thought occurred to Prince Dīghāvu: ‘This King Brahmadatta of Kāsi has done us great harm. He has seized our troops, vehicles, lands, armories, & granaries. And it was because of him that my mother & father were killed. Now is my chance to wreak vengeance!’ He drew his sword from his scabbard. But then he thought, ‘My father told me, as he was about to die, “Don’t, my dear Dīghāvu, be far-sighted. Don’t be near-sighted. For vengeance is not settled through vengeance. Vengeance is settled through non-vengeance.” It would not be proper for me to transgress my father’s words.’ So he put his sword back in its scabbard. A second time… A third time the thought occurred to Prince Dīghāvu: ‘This King Brahmadatta of Kāsi has done us great harm. He has seized our troops, vehicles, lands, armories, & granaries. And it was because of him that my mother & father were killed. Now is my chance to wreak vengeance!’ He drew his sword from his scabbard. But then he thought, ‘My father told me, as he was about to die, “Don’t, my dear Dīghāvu, be far-sighted. Don’t be near-sighted. For vengeance is not settled through vengeance. Vengeance is settled through non-vengeance.” It would not be proper for me to transgress my father’s words.’ So once again he put his sword back in its scabbard.

“Then King Brahmadatta suddenly got up—frightened, agitated, unnerved, alarmed. Prince Dīghāvu said to him, ‘Your majesty, why have you gotten up suddenly—frightened, agitated, unnerved, & alarmed?’

“‘I say, my young man: Just now as I was dreaming, Prince Dīghāvu—son of Dīghīti, king of Kosala—struck me down with a sword.’ Then Prince Dīghāvu, grabbing King Brahmadatta by the head with his left hand, and drawing his sword from its scabbard with his right, said, ‘I, your majesty, am that very Prince Dīghāvu, son of Dīghīti, king of Kāsi. You have done us great harm. You have seized our troops, vehicles, lands, armories, & granaries. And it was because of you that my mother & father were killed. Now is my chance to wreak vengeance!’

“So King Brahmadatta, dropping his head down to Prince Dīghāvu’s feet, said, ‘Grant me my life, my dear Dīghāvu! Grant me my life, my dear Dīghāvu!’

“‘Who am I that I would dare grant life to your majesty? It is your majesty who should grant life to me!’

“‘In that case, my dear Dīghāvu, you grant me my life, and I grant you your life.’

“Then King Brahmadatta and Prince Dīghāvu granted one another their lives and, taking one another by the hands, swore an oath to do one another no harm.

“Then King Brahmadatta said to Prince Dīghāvu, ‘In that case, my dear Dīghāvu, harness the chariot. We will go on.’

“Responding, ‘As you say, your majesty,’ to the king, Prince Dīghāvu harnessed the chariot and then said to King Brahmadatta, ‘Your chariot is harnessed, your majesty. Now is the time for you to do as you see fit.’

“Then King Brahmadatta mounted the chariot, and Prince Dīghāvu drove it. He drove it in such a way that it was not long before they met up with the king’s entourage.

“Then King Brahmadatta, having entered Vārāṇasī, had his ministers & councilors convened and said to them, ‘I say, then. If you were to see Prince Dīghāvu, the son of Dīghīti, the king of Kosala, what would you do to him?’

Different ministers said, ‘We would cut off his hands, your majesty’—‘We would cut off his feet, your majesty’—‘We would cut off his hands & feet, your majesty’—‘We would cut off his ears, your majesty’—‘We would cut off his nose, your majesty’—‘We would cut off his ears & nose, your majesty’—‘We would cut off his head, your majesty.’

“Then the king said, ‘This, I say, is Prince Dīghāvu, the son of Dīghīti, the king of Kāsi. You are not allowed to do anything to him. It was by him that my life was granted to me, and it was by me that his life was granted to him.’

“Then King Brahmadatta said to Prince Dīghāvu, ‘What your father said to you as he was about to die—“Don’t, my dear Dīghāvu, be far-sighted. Don’t be near-sighted. For vengeance is not settled through vengeance. Vengeance is settled through non-vengeance”—in reference to what did he say that?’

“‘What my father said to me as he was about to die—“Don’t be far-sighted”—“Don’t bear vengeance for a long time” is what he was saying to me as he was about to die. And what he said to me as he was about to die—“Don’t be near-sighted”—“Don’t be quick to break with a friend” is what he was saying to me as he was about to die. And what he said to me as he was about to die—“For vengeance is not settled through vengeance. Vengeance is settled through non-vengeance”—My mother & father were killed by your majesty. If I were to deprive your majesty of life, those who hope for your majesty’s well-being would deprive me of life. And those who hope for my well-being would deprive them of life. And in that way, vengeance would not be settled by vengeance. But now I have been granted my life by your majesty, and your majesty has been granted your life by me. And in this way vengeance has been settled by non-vengeance. That is what my father was saying to me as he was about to die.’

“Then King Brahmadatta said, ‘Isn’t it amazing! Isn’t it astounding! How wise this Prince Dīghāvu is, in that he can understand in full the meaning of what his father said in brief!’ So he returned his father’s troops, vehicles, lands, armories, & granaries to him, and gave him his daughter in marriage.

“Such, monks, is the forbearance & gentleness of kings who wield the scepter, who wield the sword. So now let your light shine forth, so that you—who have gone forth in such a well-taught Dhamma & Vinaya—will be their equal in forbearance & gentleness.” — Mv X.2.3–20

3 : Overcoming the Causes of Violence

§21. “There are these four ways of going off course. Which four? One goes off course through desire. One goes off course through aversion. One goes off course through delusion. One goes off course through fear. These are the four ways of going off course.”

If you—

through desire,

aversion,

delusion,

fear—

transgress the Dhamma,

your honor wanes,

as in the dark fortnight,

the moon.

“There are these four ways of not going off course. Which four? One doesn’t go off course through desire. One doesn’t go off course through aversion. One doesn’t go off course through delusion. One doesn’t go off course through fear. These are the four ways of not going off course.”

If you don’t—

through desire,

aversion,

delusion,

fear—

transgress the Dhamma,

your honor waxes,

as in the bright fortnight,

the moon. — AN 4:19

§22. Then Jānussoṇin the brahman went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: “I am of the view & opinion that there is no one who, subject to death, is not afraid or in terror of death.”

(The Blessed One said:) “Brahman, there are those who, subject to death, are afraid & in terror of death. And there are those who, subject to death, are not afraid or in terror of death.

“And who is the person who, subject to death, is afraid & in terror of death? There is the case of the person who has not abandoned passion, desire, fondness, thirst, fever, & craving for sensuality. Then he comes down with a serious disease. As he comes down with a serious disease, the thought occurs to him, ‘O, those beloved sensual pleasures will be taken from me, and I will be taken from them!’ He grieves & is tormented, weeps, beats his breast, & grows delirious. This is a person who, subject to death, is afraid & in terror of death.

“Then there is the case of the person who has not abandoned passion, desire, fondness, thirst, fever, & craving for the body. Then he comes down with a serious disease. As he comes down with a serious disease, the thought occurs to him, ‘O, my beloved body will be taken from me, and I will be taken from my body!’ He grieves & is tormented, weeps, beats his breast, & grows delirious. This, too, is a person who, subject to death, is afraid & in terror of death.

“Then there is the case of the person who has not done what is good, has not done what is skillful, has not given protection to those in fear, and instead has done what is evil, savage, & cruel. Then he comes down with a serious disease. As he comes down with a serious disease, the thought occurs to him, ‘I have not done what is good, have not done what is skillful, have not given protection to those in fear, and instead have done what is evil, savage, & cruel. To the extent that there is a destination for those who have not done what is good, have not done what is skillful, have not given protection to those in fear, and instead have done what is evil, savage, & cruel, that’s where I’m headed after death.’ He grieves & is tormented, weeps, beats his breast, & grows delirious. This, too, is a person who, subject to death, is afraid & in terror of death.

“Then there is the case of the person in doubt & perplexity, who has not arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma. Then he comes down with a serious disease. As he comes down with a serious disease, the thought occurs to him, ‘How doubtful & perplexed I am! I have not arrived at any certainty with regard to the True Dhamma!’ He grieves & is tormented, weeps, beats his breast, & grows delirious. This, too, is a person who, subject to death, is afraid & in terror of death.

“These, brahman, are four people who, subject to death, are afraid & in terror of death.

“And who is the person who, subject to death, is not afraid or in terror of death?

“There is the case of the person who has abandoned passion, desire, fondness, thirst, fever, & craving for sensuality. Then he comes down with a serious disease. As he comes down with a serious disease, the thought doesn’t occur to him, ‘O, those beloved sensual pleasures will be taken from me, and I will be taken from them!’ He doesn’t grieve, isn’t tormented; doesn’t weep, beat his breast, or grow delirious. This is a person who, subject to death, is not afraid or in terror of death.

“Then there is the case of the person who has abandoned passion, desire, fondness, thirst, fever, & craving for the body. Then he comes down with a serious disease. As he comes down with a serious disease, the thought doesn’t occur to him, ‘O, my beloved body will be taken from me, and I will be taken from my body!’ He doesn’t grieve, isn’t tormented; doesn’t weep, beat his breast, or grow delirious. This, too, is a person who, subject to death, is not afraid or in terror of death.

“Then there is the case of the person who has done what is good, has done what is skillful, has given protection to those in fear, and has not done what is evil, savage, or cruel. Then he comes down with a serious disease. As he comes down with a serious disease, the thought occurs to him, ‘I have done what is good, have done what is skillful, have given protection to those in fear, and I have not done what is evil, savage, or cruel. To the extent that there is a destination for those who have done what is good, what is skillful, have given protection to those in fear, and have not done what is evil, savage, or cruel, that’s where I’m headed after death.’ He doesn’t grieve, isn’t tormented; doesn’t weep, beat his breast, or grow delirious. This, too, is a person who, subject to death, is not afraid or in terror of death.

“Then there is the case of the person who has no doubt or perplexity, who has arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma. Then he comes down with a serious disease. As he comes down with a serious disease, the thought occurs to him, ‘I have no doubt or perplexity. I have arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.’ He doesn’t grieve, isn’t tormented; doesn’t weep, beat his breast, or grow delirious. This, too, is a person who, subject to death, is not afraid or in terror of death.

“These, brahman, are four people who, subject to death, are not afraid or in terror of death.”

[When this was said, Jānussoṇin the brahman said to the Blessed One:] “Magnificent, Master Gotama! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has Master Gotama—through many lines of reasoning—made the Dhamma clear. I go to Master Gotama for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Saṅgha of monks. May Master Gotama remember me as a lay follower who has gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life.” — AN 4: 184

§23. As he was sitting to one side, King Pasenadi Kosala said to the Blessed One: “Is there, lord, any one quality that keeps both kinds of benefits secure—benefits in this life & benefits in lives to come?”

“There is one quality, great king, that keeps both kinds of benefits secure— benefits in this life & benefits in lives to come.”

“But what, lord, is that one quality… ?”

“Heedfulness, great king. Just as the footprints of all living beings with legs can be encompassed by the footprint of the elephant, and the elephant’s footprint is declared to be supreme among them in terms of its great size; in the same way, heedfulness is the one quality that keeps both kinds of benefits secure—benefits in this life & benefits in lives to come.” — SN 3:17

§24. “Monks, these two bright qualities guard the world. Which two? Shame & compunction.” — AN 2:9

§25. Hostilities aren’t stilled

through hostility,

regardless.

Hostilities are stilled

through non-hostility:

this, an unending truth.

Unlike those who don’t realize

that we’re here on the verge

of perishing,

those who do:

Their quarrels are stilled. — Dhp 5–6

§26. Winning gives birth to hostility.

Losing, one lies down in pain.

The calmed lie down with ease,

having set

winning & losing

aside. — SN 3:14

§27. Greater in battle

than the man who would conquer

a thousand-thousand men,

is he who would conquer

just one—

himself.

Better to conquer yourself

than others.

When you’ve trained yourself,

living in constant self-control,

neither a deva nor gandhabba,

nor a Māra banded with Brahmās,

could turn that triumph

back into defeat. — Dhp 103–105

§28. Conquer anger

with lack of anger;

bad with good;

stinginess with a gift;

a liar with truth. — Dhp 223

§29. “Monks, there are these five types of warriors who can be found existing in the world. Which five?

“There is the case of a warrior who, on seeing a cloud of dust [stirred up by the enemy army], falters, faints, doesn’t steel himself, can’t engage in the battle.…

“Then there is the warrior who can handle the cloud of dust, but on seeing the top of the enemy’s banner, he falters, faints, doesn’t steel himself, can’t engage in the battle.…

“Then there is the warrior who can handle the cloud of dust & the top of the enemy’s banner, but on hearing the tumult [of the approaching forces], he falters, faints, doesn’t steel himself, can’t engage in the battle.…

“Then there is the warrior who can handle the cloud of dust, the top of the enemy’s banner, & the tumult, but when in hand-to-hand combat he is struck and falls wounded.…

“Then there is the warrior who can handle the cloud of dust, the top of the enemy’s banner, the tumult, & the hand-to-hand combat. On winning the battle, victorious in battle, he comes out at the very head of the battle.…

“These are the five types of warriors who can be found existing in the world.

“In the same way, monks, there are these five warrior-like individuals who can be found existing among the monks. Which five?

[1] “There is the case of the monk who, on seeing a cloud of dust, falters, faints, doesn’t steel himself, can’t continue in the holy life. Declaring his weakness in the training, he leaves the training and returns to the lower life. What is the cloud of dust for him? There is the case of the monk who hears, ‘In that village or town over there is a woman or girl who is shapely, good-looking, charming, endowed with the foremost lotus-like complexion.’ On hearing this, he falters, faints, doesn’t steel himself, can’t continue in the holy life. Declaring his weakness in the training, he leaves the training and returns to the lower life. That, for him, is the cloud of dust. This individual, I tell you, is like the warrior who, on seeing a cloud of dust, falters, faints, doesn’t steel himself, can’t engage in the battle. Some individuals are like this. This is the first type of warrior-like individual who can be found existing among the monks.

[2] “Then there is the case of the monk who can handle the cloud of dust, but on seeing the top of the enemy’s banner, he falters, faints, doesn’t steel himself, can’t continue in the holy life. Declaring his weakness in the training, he leaves the training and returns to the lower life. What is the top of the banner for him? There is the case of the monk who not only hears that ‘In that village or town over there is a woman or girl who is shapely, good-looking, charming, endowed with the foremost lotus-like complexion.’ He sees for himself that in that village or town over there is a woman or girl who is shapely, good-looking, charming, endowed with the foremost lotus-like complexion. On seeing her, he falters, faints, doesn’t steel himself, can’t continue in the holy life. Declaring his weakness in the training, he leaves the training and returns to the lower life. That, for him, is the top of the banner. This individual, I tell you, is like the warrior who can handle the cloud of dust, but on seeing the top of the enemy’s banner, he falters, faints, doesn’t steel himself, can’t engage in the battle. Some individuals are like this. This is the second type of warrior-like individual who can be found existing among the monks.

[3] “Then there is the case of the monk who can handle the cloud of dust & the top of the enemy’s banner, but on hearing the tumult [of the approaching forces], he falters, faints, doesn’t steel himself, can’t continue in the holy life. Declaring his weakness in the training, he leaves the training and returns to the lower life. What is the tumult for him? There is the case of the monk who has gone to the wilderness, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty building. A woman approaches him and giggles at him, calls out to him, laughs aloud, & teases him. On being giggled at, called out to, laughed at, & teased by the woman, he falters, faints, doesn’t steel himself, can’t continue in the holy life. Declaring his weakness in the training, he leaves the training and returns to the lower life. That, for him, is the tumult. This individual, I tell you, is like the warrior who can handle the cloud of dust & the top of the enemy’s banner, but on hearing the tumult he falters, faints, doesn’t steel himself, can’t engage in the battle. Some individuals are like this. This is the third type of warrior-like individual who can be found existing among the monks.

[4] “Then there is the case of the monk who can handle the cloud of dust, the top of the enemy’s banner, & the tumult, but when in hand-to-hand combat he is struck and falls wounded. What is the hand-to-hand combat for him? There is the case of the monk who has gone to the wilderness, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty building. A woman approaches him and sits down right next to him, lies down right next to him, throws herself all over him. When she sits down right next to him, lies down right next to him, and throws herself all over him, he—without renouncing the training, without declaring his weakness—engages in sexual intercourse. This, for him, is hand-to-hand combat. This individual, I tell you, is like the warrior who can handle the cloud of dust, the top of the enemy’s banner, & the tumult, but when in hand-to-hand combat he is struck and falls wounded. Some individuals are like this. This is the fourth type of warrior-like individual who can be found existing among the monks.

[5] “Then there is the case of the monk who can handle the cloud of dust, the top of the enemy’s banner, the tumult, & hand-to-hand combat. On winning the battle, victorious in battle, he comes out at the very head of the battle. What is victory in the battle for him? There is the case of the monk who has gone to the wilderness, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty dwelling. A woman approaches him and sits down right next to him, lies down right next to him, throws herself all over him. When she sits down right next to him, lies down right next to him, and throws herself all over him, he extricates himself, frees himself, and goes off where he will.” — AN 5:75

§30. “Endowed with four qualities, monks, a warrior is worthy of a king, an asset to a king, and counts as a very limb of his king. Which four?

“There is the case where a warrior is skilled in his stance, able to shoot far, able to fire shots in rapid succession, and able to pierce great objects. A warrior endowed with these four qualities is worthy of a king, an asset to a king, and counts as a very limb of his king.

“In the same way a monk endowed with four qualities is deserving of gifts, deserving of hospitality, deserving of offerings, deserving of respect, an unexcelled field of merit for the world. Which four?

“There is the case where a monk is skilled in his stance, able to shoot far, able to fire shots in rapid succession, and able to pierce great objects. A monk endowed with these four qualities is deserving of gifts, deserving of hospitality, deserving of offerings, deserving of respect, an unexcelled field of merit for the world.

“And how is a monk skilled in his stance? There is the case where a monk is virtuous. He dwells restrained in accordance with the Pāṭimokkha, consummate in his behavior & sphere of activity. He trains himself, having undertaken the training rules, seeing danger in the slightest faults. This is how a monk is skilled in his stance.

“And how is a monk one who is able to shoot far? There is the case where a monk sees any form whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near—every form—as it has come to be with right discernment as: ‘This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.’

“He sees any feeling whatsoever.…

“He sees any perception whatsoever.…

“He sees any fabrications whatsoever.…

“He sees any consciousness whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle, common or sublime, far or near—every consciousness—as it has come to be with right discernment as: ‘This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.’

“This is how a monk is one who is able to shoot far.

“And how is a monk one who is able to fire shots in rapid succession? There is the case where a monk discerns, as it has come to be, that ‘This is stress’ … ‘This is the origination of stress’ … ‘This is the cessation of stress’ … ‘This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.’ This is how a monk is one who is able to fire shots in rapid succession.

“And how is a monk one who is able to pierce great objects? There is the case where a monk pierces right through the great mass of ignorance. This is how a monk is one who is able to pierce great objects right through.

“Endowed with these four qualities, a monk is deserving of gifts, deserving of hospitality, deserving of offerings, deserving of respect, an unexcelled field of merit for the world.” — AN 4:181

§31. On one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Vesālī at the Gabled Hall in the Great Forest. Then in the early morning, Ven. Ānanda, having adjusted his under robe and carrying his bowl & outer robe, went into Vesālī for alms. He saw a large number of Licchavi boys practicing archery in the stadium building. From a distance they were shooting arrows through a tiny keyhole without missing, one right after the other. On seeing this, the thought occurred to him, “How trained these Licchavi boys are, how well-trained these Licchavi boys are, in that from a distance they can shoot arrows through a tiny keyhole without missing, one right after the other!”

Then, having gone for alms in Vesālī, after his meal, returning from his alms round, Ven. Ānanda went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: “Just now, lord, in the early morning, having adjusted my under robe and carrying my bowl & outer robe, I went into Vesālī for alms. I saw a large number of Licchavi boys practicing archery in the stadium building. From a distance they were shooting arrows through a tiny keyhole without missing, one right after the other. On seeing this, the thought occurred to me ‘How trained these Licchavi boys are, how well-trained these Licchavi boys are, in that from a distance they can shoot arrows through a tiny keyhole without missing, one right after the other!’”

“What do you think, Ānanda? Which is harder to do, harder to master—to shoot arrows through a tiny keyhole without missing, one right after the other, or to take a horsehair split into seven strands and pierce tip with a tip?”

“This, lord, is harder to do, harder to master—to take a horsehair split into seven strands and pierce tip with a tip.”

“And they, Ānanda, pierce what is even harder to pierce, those who pierce, as it has come to be, that ‘This is stress’; who pierce, as it has come to be, that ‘This is the origination of stress’… ‘This is the cessation of stress’… ‘This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.’

“Therefore, Ānanda, your duty is the contemplation, ‘This is stress… This is the origination of stress… This is the cessation of stress.’ Your duty is the contemplation, ‘This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.’” — SN 56:45

§32. “Now, a king’s elephant endowed with five qualities is worthy of a king, is a king’s asset, counts as a very limb of his king. Which five? There is the case where a king’s elephant is resilient to sights, resilient to sounds, resilient to aromas, resilient to flavors, resilient to tactile sensations.

“And how is a king’s elephant resilient to sights? There is the case where a king’s elephant, having gone into battle, sees a troop of elephants, a troop of cavalry, a troop of chariots, a troop of foot soldiers, but he doesn’t falter or faint. He steels himself and engages in the battle. This is how a king’s elephant is resilient to sights.

“And how is a king’s elephant resilient to sounds? There is the case where a king’s elephant, having gone into battle, hears the sound of elephants, the sound of cavalry, the sound of chariots, the sound of foot soldiers, the resounding din of drums, cymbals, conchs, & tom-toms, but he doesn’t falter or faint. He steels himself and engages in the battle. This is how a king’s elephant is resilient to sounds.

“And how is a king’s elephant resilient to aromas? There is the case where a king’s elephant, having gone into battle, smells the stench of the urine & feces of those pedigreed royal elephants who are at home in the battlefield, but he doesn’t falter or faint. He steels himself and engages in the battle. This is how a king’s elephant is not resilient to aromas.

“And how is a king’s elephant resilient to flavors? There is the case where a king’s elephant, having gone into battle, goes without his ration of grass & water for one day, two days, three days, four days, five, but he doesn’t falter or faint. He steels himself and engages in the battle. This is how a king’s elephant is resilient to flavors.

“And how is a king’s elephant resilient to tactile sensations? There is the case where a king’s elephant, having gone into battle, is pierced by a flight of arrows, two flights, three flights, four flights, five flights of arrows, but he doesn’t falter or faint. He steels himself and engages in the battle. This is how a king’s elephant is resilient to tactile sensations.

“Endowed with these five qualities, monks, a king’s elephant is worthy of a king, is a king’s asset, counts as a very limb of his king.

“In the same way, a monk endowed with five qualities is deserving of gifts, deserving of hospitality, deserving of offerings, deserving of respect, an unexcelled field of merit for the world. Which five? There is the case where a monk is resilient to sights, resilient to sounds, resilient to aromas, resilient to flavors, resilient to tactile sensations.

“And how is a monk resilient to sights? There is the case where a monk, on seeing a sight with the eye, feels no passion for a sight that incites passion and can center his mind. This is how a monk is resilient to sights.

“And how is a monk resilient to sounds? There is the case where a monk, on hearing a sound with the ear, feels no passion for a sound that incites passion and can center his mind. This is how a monk is resilient to sounds.

“And how is a monk resilient to aromas? There is the case where a monk, on smelling an aroma with the nose, feels no passion for an aroma that incites passion and can center his mind. This is how a monk is resilient to aromas.

“And how is a monk resilient to flavors? There is the case where a monk, on tasting a flavor with the tongue, feels no passion for a flavor that incites passion and can center his mind. This is how a monk is resilient to flavors.

“And how is a monk resilient to tactile sensations? There is the case where a monk, on touching a tactile sensation with the body, feels no passion for a tactile sensation that incites passion and can center his mind. This is how a monk is resilient to tactile sensations.

“Endowed with these five qualities, a monk is deserving of gifts, deserving of hospitality, deserving of offerings, deserving of respect, an unexcelled field of merit for the world.” — AN 5:139

§33. “Endowed with five qualities, a king’s elephant is worthy of a king, is a king’s asset, counts as a very limb of his king. Which five? There is the case where a king’s elephant is a listener, a destroyer, a protector, an endurer, and a goer.

“And how is a king’s elephant a listener? There is the case where, whenever the tamer of tamable elephants gives him a task, then—regardless of whether he has or hasn’t done it before—he pays attention, applies his whole mind, and lends ear. This is how a king’s elephant is a listener.

“And how is a king’s elephant a destroyer? There is the case where a king’s elephant, having gone into battle, destroys an elephant together with its rider, destroys a horse together with its rider, destroys a chariot together with its driver, destroys a foot soldier. This is how a king’s elephant is a destroyer.

“And how is a king’s elephant a protector? There is the case where a king’s elephant, having gone into battle, protects his forequarters, protects his hindquarters, protects his forefeet, protects his hindfeet, protects his head, protects his ears, protects his tusks, protects his trunk, protects his tail, protects his rider. This is how a king’s elephant is a protector.

“And how is a king’s elephant an endurer? There is the case where a king’s elephant, having gone into battle, endures blows from spears, swords, arrows, & axes; he endures the resounding din of drums, cymbals, conchs, & tom-toms. This is how a king’s elephant is an endurer.

“And how is a king’s elephant a goer? There is the case where—in whichever direction the tamer of tamable elephants sends him, regardless of whether he has or hasn’t gone there before—a king’s elephant goes there right away. This is how a king’s elephant is a goer.

“Endowed with these five qualities, a king’s elephant is worthy of a king, is a king’s asset, counts as a very limb of his king.

“In the same way, a monk endowed with five qualities is deserving of gifts, deserving of hospitality, deserving of offerings, deserving of respect, an unexcelled field of merit for the world. Which five? There is the case where a monk is a listener, a destroyer, a protector, an endurer, and a goer.

“And how is a monk a listener? There is the case where, when the Dhamma & Vinaya declared by the Tathāgata is being taught, a monk pays attention, applies his whole mind, and lends ear to the Dhamma. This is how a monk is a listener.

“And how is a monk a destroyer? There is the case where a monk does not tolerate an arisen thought of sensuality. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, & wipes it out of existence. He does not tolerate an arisen thought of ill will… an arisen thought of cruelty… He does not tolerate arisen evil, unskillful qualities. He abandons them, destroys them, dispels them, & wipes them out of existence. This is how a monk is a destroyer.

“And how is a monk a protector? There is the case where a monk, on seeing a form with the eye, does not grasp at any theme or particulars by which—if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye—evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail him. He practices with restraint. He guards the faculty of the eye. He achieves restraint with regard to the faculty of the eye.

“On hearing a sound with the ear.…

“On smelling an aroma with the nose.…

“On tasting a flavor with the tongue.…

“On touching a tactile sensation with the body.…

“On cognizing an idea with the intellect, he does not grasp at any theme or particulars by which—if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the intellect—evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail him. He practices with restraint. He guards the faculty of the intellect. He achieves restraint with regard to the faculty of the intellect.

“This is how a monk is a protector.

“And how is a monk an endurer? There is the case where a monk is resilient to cold, heat, hunger, & thirst; the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, & reptiles; ill-spoken, unwelcome words & bodily feelings that, when they arise, are painful, racking, sharp, piercing, disagreeable, displeasing, & menacing to life. This is how a monk is an endurer.

“And how is a monk a goer? There is the case where a monk goes right away to that direction to which he has never been before in the course of this long stretch of time—in other words, to the pacification of all fabrications, the relinquishing of all acquisitions, the ending of craving, dispassion, cessation, unbinding. This is how a monk is a goer.

“Endowed with these five qualities a monk is deserving of gifts, deserving of hospitality, deserving of offerings, deserving of respect, an unexcelled field of merit for the world.” — AN 5:140

§34. When anger arises,

whoever keeps firm control

as if with a racing chariot:

him

I call a master charioteer.

Anyone else,

a rein-holder—

that’s all. — Dhp 222

4 : Contemplations for Overcoming Anger

§35. “Having killed what

do you sleep in ease?

Having killed what

do you not grieve?

Of the slaying

of what one thing

does Gotama [the Buddha] approve?”

The Buddha:

“Having killed anger

you sleep in ease.

Having killed anger

you do not grieve.

The noble ones praise

the slaying of anger

—with its honeyed crest

& poison root—

for having killed it

you do not grieve.”— SN 2:70

§36. “These seven things—pleasing to an enemy, bringing about an enemy’s aim—come to a man or woman who is angry. Which seven?

“There is the case where an enemy wishes of an enemy, ‘O, may this person be ugly!’ Why is that? An enemy is not pleased with an enemy’s good looks. Now, when a person is angry—overcome with anger, oppressed with anger—then even though that he may be well-bathed, well-anointed, dressed in white clothes, his hair & beard neatly trimmed, he is ugly nevertheless, all because he is overcome with anger. This is the first thing pleasing to an enemy, bringing about an enemy’s aim, that comes to a man or woman who is angry.

“And further, an enemy wishes of an enemy, ‘O, may this person sleep badly!’ Why is that? An enemy is not pleased with an enemy’s restful sleep. Now, when a person is angry—overcome with anger, oppressed with anger—then even though he sleeps on a bed spread with a white blanket, spread with a woolen coverlet, spread with a flower-embroidered bedspread, covered with a rug of deerskins, with a canopy overhead, or on a sofa with red cushions at either end, he sleeps badly nevertheless, all because he is overcome with anger. This is the second thing pleasing to an enemy, bringing about an enemy’s aim, that comes to a man or woman who is angry.

“And further, an enemy wishes of an enemy, ‘O, may this person not profit!’ Why is that? An enemy is not pleased with an enemy’s profits. Now, when a person is angry—overcome with anger, oppressed with anger—then even when he suffers a loss, he thinks, ‘I’ve gained a profit’; and even when he gains a profit, he thinks, ‘I’ve suffered a loss.’ When he has grabbed hold of these ideas that work in mutual opposition (to the truth), they lead to his long-term suffering & loss, all because he is overcome with anger. This is the third thing pleasing to an enemy, bringing about an enemy’s aim, that comes to a man or woman who is angry.

“And further, an enemy wishes of an enemy, ‘O, may this person not have any wealth!’ Why is that? An enemy is not pleased with an enemy’s wealth. Now, when a person is angry—overcome with anger, oppressed with anger—then whatever his wealth, earned through his efforts & enterprise, amassed through the strength of his arm, and piled up through the sweat of his brow—righteous wealth righteously gained—the king orders it sent to the royal treasury [in payment of fines levied for his behavior] all because he is overcome with anger. This is the fourth thing pleasing to an enemy, bringing about an enemy’s aim, that comes to a man or woman who is angry.

“And further, an enemy wishes of an enemy, ‘O, may this person not have any reputation!’ Why is that? An enemy is not pleased with an enemy’s reputation. Now, when a person is angry—overcome with anger, oppressed with anger—whatever reputation he has gained from being heedful, it falls away, all because he is overcome with anger. This is the fifth thing pleasing to an enemy, bringing about an enemy’s aim, that comes to a man or woman who is angry.

“And further, an enemy wishes of an enemy, ‘O, may this person not have any friends!’ Why is that? An enemy is not pleased with an enemy’s having friends. Now, when a person is angry—overcome with anger, oppressed with anger—his friends, companions, & relatives will avoid him from afar, all because he is overcome with anger. This is the sixth thing pleasing to an enemy, bringing about an enemy’s aim, that comes to a man or woman who is angry.

“And further, an enemy wishes of an enemy, ‘O, may this person, on the break-up of the body, after death, reappear in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell!’ Why is that? An enemy is not pleased with an enemy’s going to heaven. Now, when a person is angry—overcome with anger, oppressed with anger—he engages in misconduct with the body, misconduct with speech, misconduct with the mind. Having engaged in misconduct with the body, misconduct with speech, misconduct with the mind, then—on the break-up of the body, after death—he reappears in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell, all because he was overcome with anger. This is the seventh thing pleasing to an enemy, bringing about an enemy’s aim, that comes to a man or woman who is angry.

“These are the seven things—pleasing to an enemy, bringing about an enemy’s aim—that come to a man or woman who is angry.”

An angry person is ugly & sleeps poorly.

Gaining a profit, he turns it into a loss,

having done damage with word & deed.

A person overwhelmed with anger

destroys his wealth.

Maddened with anger,

he destroys his status.

Relatives, friends, & colleagues avoid him.

Anger brings loss.

Anger inflames the mind.

He doesn’t realize

that his danger is born from within.

An angry person

doesn’t know his own benefit.

An angry person

doesn’t see the Dhamma.

A man conquered by anger

is in a mass of darkness.

He takes pleasure in bad deeds

as if they were good,

but later, when his anger is gone,

he suffers as if burned with fire.

He is spoiled, blotted out,

like fire enveloped in smoke.

When anger spreads,

when a man becomes angry,

he has no shame, no compunction,

is not respectful in speech.

For a person overcome with anger,

nothing gives light.

I’ll list the deeds that bring remorse,

that are far from the teachings.

Listen!

An angry person

kills his father,

kills his mother,

kills brahmans

& people run-of-the-mill.

It’s because of a mother’s devotion

that one sees the world,

yet an angry run-of-the-mill person

can kill this giver of life.

Like oneself, all beings hold themselves most dear,

yet an angry person, deranged,

can kill himself in many ways:

with a sword, taking poison,

hanging himself by a rope in a mountain glen.

Doing these deeds

that kill beings and do violence to himself,

the angry person doesn’t realize he’s ruined.

This snare of Māra, in the form of anger,

dwelling in the cave of the heart:

Cut it out with self-control,

discernment, persistence, right view.

The wise would cut out

each & every form of unskillfulness.

Train yourselves:

‘May we not be blotted out.’

Free from anger & untroubled,

free from greed, without longing,

tamed, your anger abandoned,

effluent [āsava]-free, you will be

unbound. — AN 7:60

§37. I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rājagaha in the Bamboo Forest, the Squirrels’ Sanctuary. Then the brahman Akkosaka [“Insulter”] Bhāradvāja heard that a brahman of the Bhāradvāja clan had gone forth from the home life into homelessness in the presence of the Blessed One. Angered & displeased, he went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, insulted & cursed him with rude, harsh words.

When this was said, the Blessed One said to him: “What do you think, brahman? Do friends & colleagues, relatives & kinsmen come to you as guests?”

“Yes, Master Gotama, sometimes friends & colleagues, relatives & kinsmen come to me as guests.”

“And what do you think? Do you serve them with staple & non-staple foods & delicacies?”

“Yes, sometimes I serve them with staple & non-staple foods & delicacies.”

“And if they don’t accept them, to whom do those foods belong?”

“If they don’t accept them, Master Gotama, those foods are all mine.”

“In the same way, brahman, that with which you have insulted me, who is not insulting; that with which you have taunted me, who is not taunting; that with which you have berated me, who is not berating: that I don’t accept from you. It’s all yours, brahman. It’s all yours.

“Whoever returns insult to one who is insulting, returns taunts to one who is taunting, returns a berating to one who is berating, is said to be eating together, sharing company, with that person. But I am neither eating together nor sharing your company, brahman. It’s all yours. It’s all yours.”

“The king together with his court know this of Master Gotama—‘Gotama the contemplative is an arahant’—and yet still Master Gotama gets angry.”

The Buddha:

“Whence is there anger

for one free from anger,

tamed,

living in tune—

one released through right knowing,

calmed

& Such [tādin].

You make things worse

when you flare up

at someone who’s angry.

Whoever doesn’t flare up

at someone who’s angry

wins a battle

hard to win.

You live for the good of both

—your own, the other’s—

when, knowing the other’s provoked,

you mindfully grow calm.

When you work the cure of both

—your own, the other’s—

those who think you a fool

know nothing of the Dhamma.”— SN 7:2

§38. “There are these five ways of subduing hatred by which, when hatred arises in a monk, he should wipe it out completely. Which five?

“When you give birth to hatred for an individual, you should develop goodwill for that individual. Thus the hatred for that individual should be subdued.

“When you give birth to hatred for an individual, you should develop compassion for that individual. Thus the hatred for that individual should be subdued.

“When you give birth to hatred for an individual, you should develop equanimity toward that individual. Thus the hatred for that individual should be subdued.

“When you give birth to hatred for an individual, you should pay him no mind & pay him no attention. Thus the hatred for that individual should be subdued.

“When you give birth to hatred for an individual, you should direct your thoughts to the fact of his being the product of his actions: ‘This venerable one is the doer of his actions, heir of his actions, born of his actions, related by his actions, and has his actions as his arbitrator. Whatever action he does, for good or for evil, to that will he fall heir.’ Thus the hatred for that individual should be subdued.

“These are five ways of subduing hatred by which, when hatred arises in a monk, he should wipe it out completely.” — AN 5:161

§39. “Now as for a person who is impure in his bodily behavior but pure in his verbal behavior, how should one subdue hatred for him? Just as when a monk who makes use of things that are thrown away sees a rag in the road: Taking hold of it with his left foot and spreading it out with his right, he would tear off the sound part and go off with it. In the same way, when the individual is impure in his bodily behavior but pure in his verbal behavior, one should at that time pay no attention to the impurity of his bodily behavior, and instead pay attention to the purity of his verbal behavior. Thus the hatred for him should be subdued.

“And as for a person who is impure in his verbal behavior, but pure in his bodily behavior, how should one subdue hatred for him? Just as when there is a pool overgrown with slime & water plants, and a person comes along, burning with heat, covered with sweat, exhausted, trembling, & thirsty. He would jump into the pool, part the slime & water plants with both hands, and then, cupping his hands, drink the water and go on his way. In the same way, when the individual is impure in his verbal behavior but pure in his bodily behavior, one should at that time pay no attention to the impurity of his verbal behavior, and instead pay attention to the purity of his bodily behavior. Thus the hatred for him should be subdued.

“And as for a person who is impure in his bodily behavior & verbal behavior, but who periodically experiences mental clarity & calm, how should one subdue hatred for him? Just as when there is a little puddle in a cow’s footprint, and a person comes along, burning with heat, covered with sweat, exhausted, trembling, & thirsty. The thought would occur to him, ‘Here is this little puddle in a cow’s footprint. If I tried to drink the water using my hand or cup, I would disturb it, stir it up, & make it unfit to drink. What if I were to get down on all fours and slurp it up like a cow, and then go on my way?’ So he would get down on all fours, slurp up the water like a cow, and then go on his way. In the same way, when an individual is impure in his bodily behavior & verbal behavior, but periodically experiences mental clarity & calm, one should at that time pay no attention to the impurity of his bodily behavior…the impurity of his verbal behavior, and instead pay attention to the fact that he periodically experiences mental clarity & calm. Thus the hatred for him should be subdued.

“And as for a person who is impure in his bodily behavior & verbal behavior, and who does not periodically experience mental clarity & calm, how should one subdue hatred for him? Just as when there is a sick man—in pain, seriously ill—traveling along a road, far from the next village & far from the last, unable to get the food he needs, unable to get the medicine he needs, unable to get a suitable assistant, unable to get anyone to take him to human habitation. Now suppose another person were to see him coming along the road. He would do what he could out of compassion, pity, & sympathy for the man, thinking, ‘O that this man should get the food he needs, the medicine he needs, a suitable assistant, someone to take him to human habitation. Why is that? So that he won’t fall into ruin right here.’ In the same way, when a person is impure in his bodily behavior & verbal behavior, and who does not periodically experience mental clarity & calm, one should do what one can out of compassion, pity, & sympathy for him, thinking, ‘O that this man should abandon wrong bodily conduct and develop right bodily conduct, abandon wrong verbal conduct and develop right verbal conduct, abandon wrong mental conduct and develop right mental conduct. Why is that? So that, on the break-up of the body, after death, he won’t fall into the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, purgatory.’ Thus the hatred for him should be subdued.

“And as for a person who is pure in his bodily behavior & verbal behavior, and who periodically experiences mental clarity & calm, how should one subdue hatred for him? Just as when there is a pool of clear water—sweet, cool, & limpid, with gently sloping banks, & shaded on all sides by trees of many kinds—and a person comes along, burning with heat, covered with sweat, exhausted, trembling, & thirsty. Having plunged into the pool, having bathed & drunk & come back out, he would sit down or lie down right there in the shade of the trees. In the same way, when an individual is pure in his bodily behavior & verbal behavior, and periodically experiences mental clarity & calm, one should at that time pay attention to the purity of his bodily behavior…the purity of his verbal behavior, and to the fact that he periodically experiences mental clarity & calm. Thus the hatred for him should be subdued. An entirely inspiring individual can make the mind grow serene.” — AN 5:162

5 : Building Endurance

§40. “And what are the effluents [āsava] to be abandoned by tolerating? There is the case where a monk, reflecting appropriately, endures. He tolerates cold, heat, hunger, & thirst; the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, & reptiles; ill-spoken, unwelcome words & bodily feelings that, when they arise, are painful, racking, sharp, piercing, disagreeable, displeasing, & menacing to life. The effluents, vexation, or fever that would arise if he were not to tolerate these things do not arise for him when he tolerates them. These are called the effluents to be abandoned by tolerating.…

“And what are the effluents to be abandoned by destroying? There is the case where a monk, reflecting appropriately, doesn’t tolerate an arisen thought of sensuality. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, & wipes it out of existence.

“Reflecting appropriately, he doesn’t tolerate an arisen thought of ill will…

“Reflecting appropriately, he doesn’t tolerate an arisen thought of harmfulness…

“Reflecting appropriately, he doesn’t tolerate arisen evil, unskillful qualities. He abandons them, destroys them, dispels them, & wipes them out of existence. The effluents, vexation, or fever that would arise if he were not to destroy these things do not arise for him when he destroys them. These are called the effluents to be abandoned by destroying.” — MN 2

§41. “Once, monks, in this same Sāvatthī, there was a lady of a household named Vedehikā. This good report about Lady Vedehikā had circulated: ‘Lady Vedehikā is gentle. Lady Vedehikā is mild-tempered. Lady Vedehikā is calm.’ Now, Lady Vedehikā had a slave named Kālī who was diligent, deft, & neat in her work. The thought occurred to Kālī the slave, ‘This good report about my Lady Vedehikā has circulated: “Lady Vedehikā is gentle. Lady Vedehikā is mild-tempered. Lady Vedehikā is calm.” Now, is anger present in my lady without showing, or is it absent? Or is it just because I’m diligent, deft, & neat in my work that the anger present in my lady doesn’t show? Why don’t I test her?’

“So Kālī the slave got up after daybreak. Then Lady Vedehikā said to her: ‘Hey, Kālī!’

“‘What, madam?’

“‘Why did you get up after daybreak?’

“‘No reason, madam.’

“‘No reason, you wicked slave, and yet you get up after daybreak?’ Angered & displeased, she scowled.

Then the thought occurred to Kālī the slave: ‘Anger is present in my lady without showing, and not absent. And it’s just because I’m diligent, deft, & neat in my work that the anger present in my lady doesn’t show. Why don’t I test her some more?’

“So Kālī the slave got up later in the day. Then Lady Vedehikā said to her: ‘Hey, Kālī!’

“‘What, madam?’

“‘Why did you get up later in the day?’

“‘No reason, madam.’

“‘No reason, you wicked slave, and yet you get up later in the day?’ Angered & displeased, she grumbled.

Then the thought occurred to Kālī the slave: ‘Anger is present in my lady without showing, and not absent. And it’s just because I’m diligent, deft, & neat in my work that the anger present in my lady doesn’t show. Why don’t I test her some more?’

“So Kālī the slave got up even later in the day. Then Lady Vedehikā said to her: ‘Hey, Kālī!’

“‘What, madam?’

“‘Why did you get up even later in the day?’

“‘No reason, madam.’

“‘No reason, you wicked slave, and yet you get up even later in the day?’ Angered & displeased, she grabbed hold of a rolling pin and gave her a whack over the head, cutting it open.

Then Kālī the slave, with blood streaming from her cut-open head, went and denounced her mistress to the neighbors: ‘See, ladies, the gentle one’s handiwork? See the mild-tempered one’s handiwork? See the calm one’s handiwork? How could she, angered & displeased with her only slave for getting up after daybreak, grab hold of a rolling pin and give her a whack over the head, cutting it open?’

“After that this evil report about Lady Vedehikā circulated: ‘Lady Vedehikā is vicious. Lady Vedehikā is foul-tempered. Lady Vedehikā is violent.’

“In the same way, monks, a monk may be ever so gentle, ever so mild-tempered, ever so calm, as long as he is not touched by disagreeable aspects of speech. But it is only when disagreeable aspects of speech touch him that he can truly be known as gentle, mild-tempered, & calm. I don’t call a monk easy to admonish if he is easy to admonish and makes himself easy to admonish only by reason of robes, almsfood, lodging, & medicinal requisites for curing the sick. Why is that? Because if he doesn’t get robes, almsfood, lodging, & medicinal requisites for curing the sick, then he isn’t easy to admonish and doesn’t make himself easy to admonish. But if a monk is easy to admonish and makes himself easy to admonish purely out of esteem for the Dhamma, respect for the Dhamma, reverence for the Dhamma, then I call him easy to admonish. So, monks, you should train yourselves: ‘We will be easy to admonish and make ourselves easy to admonish purely out of esteem for the Dhamma, respect for the Dhamma, reverence for the Dhamma.’ That’s how you should train yourselves.

“Monks, there are these five aspects of speech by which others may address you: timely or untimely, true or false, affectionate or harsh, beneficial or unbeneficial, with a mind of goodwill or with inner hate. Others may address you in a timely way or an untimely way. They may address you with what is true or what is false. They may address you in an affectionate way or a harsh way. They may address you in a beneficial way or an unbeneficial way. They may address you with a mind of goodwill or with inner hate. In any event, you should train yourselves: ‘Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic to that person’s welfare, with a mind of goodwill, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading him with an awareness imbued with goodwill and, beginning with him, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with goodwill—abundant, enlarged, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.’ That’s how you should train yourselves.

“Suppose that a man were to come along carrying a hoe & a basket, saying, ‘I will make this great earth be without earth.’ He would dig here & there, scatter soil here & there, spit here & there, urinate here & there, saying, ‘Be without earth. Be without earth.’ Now, what do you think? Would he make this great earth be without earth?”

“No, lord. Why is that? Because this great earth is deep & enormous. It can’t easily be made to be without earth. The man would reap only a share of weariness & disappointment.”

“In the same way, monks, there are these five aspects of speech by which others may address you: timely or untimely, true or false, affectionate or harsh, beneficial or unbeneficial, with a mind of goodwill or with inner hate. Others may address you in a timely way or an untimely way. They may address you with what is true or what is false. They may address you in an affectionate way or a harsh way. They may address you in a beneficial way or an unbeneficial way. They may address you with a mind of goodwill or with inner hate. In any event, you should train yourselves: ‘Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic to that person’s welfare, with a mind of goodwill, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading him with an awareness imbued with goodwill and, beginning with him, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with goodwill equal to the great earth—abundant, enlarged, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.’ That’s how you should train yourselves.

“Suppose that a man were to come along carrying lac, yellow orpiment, indigo, or crimson, saying, ‘I will draw pictures in space, I will make pictures appear.’ Now, what do you think? Would he draw pictures in space & make pictures appear?”

“No, lord. Why is that? Because space is formless & without surface. It’s not easy to draw pictures there and to make them appear. The man would reap only a share of weariness & disappointment.”

“In the same way, monks, there are these five aspects of speech by which others may address you: timely or untimely, true or false, affectionate or harsh, beneficial or unbeneficial, with a mind of goodwill or with inner hate. Others may address you in a timely way or an untimely way. They may address you with what is true or what is false. They may address you in an affectionate way or a harsh way. They may address you in a beneficial way or an unbeneficial way. They may address you with a mind of goodwill or with inner hate. In any event, you should train yourselves: ‘Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic to that person’s welfare, with a mind of goodwill, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading him with an awareness imbued with goodwill and, beginning with him, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with goodwill equal to space—abundant, enlarged, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.’ That’s how you should train yourselves.

“Suppose that a man were to come along carrying a burning grass torch and saying, ‘With this burning grass torch I will heat up the river Ganges and make it boil.’ Now, what do you think? Would he, with that burning grass torch, heat up the river Ganges and make it boil?”

“No, lord. Why is that? Because the river Ganges is deep & enormous. It’s not easy to heat it up and make it boil with a burning grass torch. The man would reap only a share of weariness & disappointment.”

“In the same way, monks, there are these five aspects of speech by which others may address you: timely or untimely, true or false, affectionate or harsh, beneficial or unbeneficial, with a mind of goodwill or with inner hate. Others may address you in a timely way or an untimely way. They may address you with what is true or what is false. They may address you in an affectionate way or a harsh way. They may address you in a beneficial way or an unbeneficial way. They may address you with a mind of goodwill or with inner hate. In any event, you should train yourselves: ‘Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic to that person’s welfare, with a mind of goodwill, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading him with an awareness imbued with goodwill and, beginning with him, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with goodwill equal to the river Ganges—abundant, enlarged, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.’ That’s how you should train yourselves.

“Suppose there were a catskin bag—beaten, well-beaten, beaten through & through, soft, silky, free of rustling & crackling—and a man were to come along carrying a stick or shard and saying, ‘With this stick or shard I will take this catskin bag—beaten, well-beaten, beaten through & through, soft, silky, free of rustling & crackling—and I will make it rustle & crackle.’ Now, what do you think? Would he, with that stick or shard, take that catskin bag—beaten, well-beaten, beaten through & through, soft, silky, free of rustling & crackling—and make it rustle & crackle?”

“No, lord. Why is that? Because the catskin bag is beaten, well-beaten, beaten through & through, soft, silky, free of rustling & crackling. It’s not easy to make it rustle & crackle with a stick or shard. The man would reap only a share of weariness & disappointment.”

“In the same way, monks, there are these five aspects of speech by which others may address you: timely or untimely, true or false, affectionate or harsh, beneficial or unbeneficial, with a mind of goodwill or with inner hate. Others may address you in a timely way or an untimely way. They may address you with what is true or what is false. They may address you in an affectionate way or a harsh way. They may address you in a beneficial way or an unbeneficial way. They may address you with a mind of goodwill or with inner hate. In any event, you should train yourselves: ‘Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic to that person’s welfare, with a mind of goodwill, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading him with an awareness imbued with goodwill and, beginning with him, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with goodwill equal to a catskin bag—abundant, enlarged, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.’ That’s how you should train yourselves.

“Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding. Even then you should train yourselves: ‘Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic, with a mind of goodwill, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading these people with an awareness imbued with goodwill and, beginning with them, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with goodwill—abundant, enlarged, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.’ That’s how you should train yourselves.

“Monks, if you attend constantly to this admonition on the simile of the saw, do you see any aspects of speech, slight or gross, that you could not endure?”

“No, lord.”

“Then attend constantly to this admonition on the simile of the saw. That will be for your long-term welfare & happiness.”

That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, the monks delighted in the Blessed One’s words. — MN 21

§42. “Now if other people insult, malign, exasperate, & harass a monk, he discerns that ’A painful feeling, born of ear-contact, has arisen within me. And that is dependent, not independent. Dependent on what? Dependent on contact.’ And he sees that contact is inconstant, feeling is inconstant, perception is inconstant, consciousness is inconstant. His mind, with the (earth/water/wind/fire) property as its object/support, leaps up, grows confident, steadfast, & released.

“And if other people attack the monk in ways that are undesirable, displeasing, & disagreeable—through contact with fists, contact with stones, contact with sticks, or contact with knives—the monk discerns that ‘This body is of such a nature that contacts with fists come, contacts with stones come, contacts with sticks come, & contacts with knives come. Now the Blessed One has said, in his exhortation of the simile of the saw, “Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding.” So my persistence will be aroused & untiring, my mindfulness established & unconfused, my body calm & unaroused, my mind centered & unified. And now let contact with fists come to this body, let contact with stones, with sticks, with knives come to this body, for this is how the Buddha’s bidding is done.’

“And if, in the monk recollecting the Buddha, Dhamma, & Saṅgha in this way, equanimity based on what is skillful is not established, he feels apprehensive at that and gives rise to a sense of urgency: ‘It is a loss for me, not a gain; ill-gotten for me, not well-gotten, that when I recollect the Buddha, Dhamma, & Saṅgha in this way, equanimity based on what is skillful is not established within me.’ Just as when a daughter-in-law, on seeing her father-in-law, feels apprehensive and gives rise to a sense of urgency (to please him), in the same way, if, in the monk recollecting the Buddha, Dhamma, & Saṅgha in this way, equanimity based on what is skillful is not established, he feels apprehensive at that and gives rise to a sense of urgency: ‘It is a loss for me, not a gain; ill-gotten for me, not well-gotten, that when I recollect the Buddha, Dhamma, & Saṅgha in this way, equanimity based on what is skillful is not established within me.’

“But if, in the monk recollecting the Buddha, Dhamma, & Saṅgha in this way, equanimity based on what is skillful is established, then he is gratified at that. And even to this extent, friends, the monk has accomplished a great deal.” — MN 28

§43. “He

insulted me,

hit me,

beat me,

robbed me”

—for those who brood on this,

hostility isn’t stilled.

“He

insulted me,

hit me,

beat me,

robbed me”

—for those who don’t brood on this,

hostility is stilled. — Dhp 3–4

§44. “There are these ten ways of subduing hatred. Which ten?

[1] “Thinking, ‘He has done me harm. But what should I expect?’ one subdues hatred.

[2] “Thinking, ‘He is doing me harm. But what should I expect?’ one subdues hatred.

[3] “Thinking, ‘He is going to do me harm. But what should I expect?’ one subdues hatred.

[4] “Thinking, ‘He has done harm to people who are dear & pleasing to me. But what should I expect?’ one subdues hatred.

[5] “Thinking, ‘He is doing harm to people who are dear & pleasing to me. But what should I expect?’ one subdues hatred.

[6] “Thinking, ‘He is going to do harm to people who are dear & pleasing to me. But what should I expect?’ one subdues hatred.

[7] “Thinking, ‘He has aided people who are not dear or pleasing to me. But what should I expect?’ one subdues hatred.

[8] “Thinking, ‘He is aiding people who are not dear or pleasing to me. But what should I expect?’ one subdues hatred.

[9] “Thinking, ‘He is going to aid people who are not dear or pleasing to me. But what should I expect?’ one subdues hatred.

[10] “One does not get worked up over impossibilities.” — AN 10:80

§45. “Well then, Puṇṇa. Now that I have instructed you with a brief instruction, in which country are you going to live?”

“Lord, there is a country called Sunāparanta. I am going to live there.”

“Puṇṇa, the Sunāparanta people are vicious. They are rough. If they insult and ridicule you, what will you think?”

“If they insult and ridicule me, I will think, ‘These Sunāparanta people are civilized, very civilized, in that they don’t hit me with their hands.’ That is what I will think, O Blessed One. That is what I will think, O One Well-Gone.”

“But if they hit you with their hands, what will you think?”

“…I will think, ‘These Sunāparanta people are civilized, very civilized, in that they don’t hit me with a clod’…”

“But if they hit you with a clod…?”

“…I will think, ‘These Sunāparanta people are civilized, very civilized, in that they don’t hit me with a stick’…”

“But if they hit you with a stick…?”

“…I will think, ‘These Sunāparanta people are civilized, very civilized, in that they don’t hit me with a knife’…”

“But if they hit you with a knife…?”

“…I will think, ‘These Sunāparanta people are civilized, very civilized, in that they don’t take my life with a sharp knife’…”

“But if they take your life with a sharp knife…?”

“If they take my life with a sharp knife, I will think, ‘There are disciples of the Blessed One who—horrified, humiliated, and disgusted by the body and by life—have sought for an assassin, but here I have met my assassin without searching for him.’1 That is what I will think, O Blessed One. That is what I will think, O One Well-Gone.”

“Good, Puṇṇa, very good. Possessing such calm and self-control you are fit to dwell among the Sunāparantans. Now it is time to do as you see fit.” — SN 35:88

6 : Developing Goodwill

§46. “There is the case, headman, where a Tathāgata appears in the world, worthy & rightly self-awakened, consummate in clear-knowing & conduct, well-gone, an expert with regard to the cosmos, unexcelled trainer of people fit to be tamed, teacher of devas & human beings, awakened, blessed. He, in various ways, criticizes & censures the taking of life, and says, ‘Abstain from taking life.’ He criticizes & censures stealing, and says, ‘Abstain from stealing.’ He criticizes & censures indulging in illicit sex, and says, ‘Abstain from indulging in illicit sex.’ He criticizes & censures the telling of lies, and says, ‘Abstain from the telling of lies.’

“A disciple has faith in that teacher and reflects: ‘The Blessed One in a variety of ways criticizes & censures the taking of life, and says, “Abstain from taking life.” There are living beings that I have killed, to a greater or lesser extent. That was not right. That was not good. But if I become remorseful for that reason, that evil deed of mine will not be undone.’ So, reflecting thus, he abandons right then the taking of life, and in the future refrains from taking life. This is how there comes to be the abandoning of that evil deed. This is how there comes to be the transcending of that evil deed.

“(He reflects:) ‘The Blessed One in a variety of ways criticizes & censures stealing… indulging in illicit sex… the telling of lies, and says, “Abstain from the telling of lies.” There are lies that I have told, to a greater or lesser extent. That was not right. That was not good. But if I become remorseful for that reason, that evil deed of mine will not be undone.’ So, reflecting thus, he abandons right then the telling of lies, and in the future refrains from telling lies. This is how there comes to be the abandoning of that evil deed. This is how there comes to be the transcending of that evil deed.

“Having abandoned the taking of life, he refrains from taking life. Having abandoned stealing, he refrains from stealing. Having abandoned illicit sex, he refrains from illicit sex. Having abandoned lies, he refrains from lies. Having abandoned divisive speech, he refrains from divisive speech. Having abandoned harsh speech, he refrains from harsh speech. Having abandoned idle chatter, he refrains from idle chatter. Having abandoned covetousness, he becomes uncovetous. Having abandoned ill will & anger, he becomes one with a mind of no ill will. Having abandoned wrong views, he becomes one who has right views.

“That disciple of the noble ones, headman—thus devoid of covetousness, devoid of ill will, unbewildered, alert, mindful—keeps pervading the first direction [the east] with an awareness imbued with goodwill, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth. Thus above, below, & all around, everywhere, in its entirety, he keeps pervading the all-encompassing cosmos with an awareness imbued with goodwill—abundant, enlarged, immeasurable, without hostility, without ill will. Just as a strong conch-trumpet blower can notify the four directions without any difficulty, in the same way, when the awareness-release through goodwill is thus developed, thus pursued, any deed done to a limited extent no longer remains there, no longer stays there.

“That disciple of the noble ones—thus devoid of covetousness, devoid of ill will, unbewildered, alert, mindful—keeps pervading the first direction with an awareness imbued with compassion… empathetic joy… equanimity, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth. Thus above, below, & all around, everywhere, in its entirety, he keeps pervading the all-encompassing cosmos with an awareness imbued with equanimity—abundant, enlarged, immeasurable, without hostility, without ill will. Just as a strong conch-trumpet blower can notify the four directions without any difficulty, in the same way, when the awareness-release through equanimity is thus developed, thus pursued, any deed done to a limited extent no longer remains there, no longer stays there.” — SN 42:8

§47. Think: Happy, at rest,

may all beings be happy at heart.

Whatever beings there may be,

weak or strong, without exception,

long, large,

middling, short,

subtle, blatant,

seen & unseen,

near & far,

born & seeking birth:

May all beings be happy at heart.

Let no one deceive another

or despise anyone anywhere,

or through anger or irritation

wish for another to suffer.

As a mother would risk her life

to protect her child, her only child,

even so should one cultivate the heart limitlessly

with regard to all beings.

With goodwill for the entire cosmos,

cultivate the heart limitlessly:

above, below, & all around,

unobstructed, without hostility or hate.

Whether standing, walking,

sitting, or lying down,

as long as one has banished torpor,

one should be resolved on this mindfulness.

This is called a sublime abiding

here. — Sn 1:8

§48. “Monks, for one whose awareness-release through goodwill is cultivated, developed, pursued, given a means of transport, given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, and well-undertaken, eleven rewards can be expected. Which eleven?

“One sleeps easily, wakes easily, dreams no evil dreams. One is dear to human beings, dear to non-human beings. The devas protect one. Neither fire, poison, nor weapons can touch one. One’s mind gains concentration quickly. One’s complexion is bright. One dies unconfused and—if penetrating no higher—is headed for a Brahmā world.” — AN 11:16

§49. “Mindful & astute, you should develop immeasurable concentration [i.e., concentration based on immeasurable goodwill, compassion, empathetic joy, or equanimity]. When, mindful & astute, one has developed immeasurable concentration, five realizations arise right within oneself. Which five?

“The realization arises right within oneself that ‘This concentration is blissful in the present and will result in bliss in the future.’

“The realization arises right within oneself that ‘This concentration is noble & not connected with the baits of the flesh.’

“The realization arises right within oneself that ‘This concentration is not obtained by base people.’

“The realization arises right within oneself that ‘This concentration is peaceful, exquisite, the acquiring of calm, the attainment of unification, not kept in place by the fabrications of forceful restraint.’

“The realization arises right within oneself that ‘I enter into this concentration mindfully, and mindfully I emerge from it.’

“Mindful & astute, you should develop immeasurable concentration. When, mindful & astute, one has developed immeasurable concentration, these five realizations arise right within oneself.” — AN 5:27

7 : Overcoming Sensuality

§50. “Now, craving is dependent on feeling,

seeking is dependent on craving,

acquisition is dependent on seeking,

ascertainment is dependent on acquisition,

desire and passion is dependent on ascertainment,

attachment is dependent on desire and passion,

possessiveness is dependent on attachment,

stinginess is dependent on possessiveness,

defensiveness is dependent on stinginess,

and because of defensiveness, dependent on defensiveness, various evil, unskillful phenomena come into play: the taking up of sticks & knives; conflicts, quarrels, and disputes; accusations, divisive speech, & lies.” — DN 15

§51. “And which craving? These six are classes of craving: craving for forms, craving for sounds, craving for smells, craving for tastes, craving for tactile sensations, craving for ideas. This is called craving.” — SN 12:2

§52. “There are these five strings of sensuality. Which five? Forms cognizable via the eye—agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, enticing, linked with sensual desire; 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, enticing, linked with sensual desire. 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, in this regard,

the enlightened

subdue their desire.

“And what is the cause by which sensuality comes into play? Contact is the cause by which sensuality comes into play.

“And what is the diversity in sensuality? Sensuality with regard to forms is one thing, sensuality with regard to sounds is another, sensuality with regard to aromas is another, sensuality with regard to flavors is another, sensuality with regard to tactile sensations is another. This is called the diversity in sensuality.

“And what is the result of sensuality? One who wants sensuality produces a corresponding state of existence, on the side of merit or demerit. This is called the result of sensuality.

“And what is the cessation of sensuality? From the cessation of contact is the cessation of sensuality; and just this noble eightfold path—right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration—is the way leading to the cessation of sensuality.” — AN 6:63

§53. “It’s 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, brahmans with brahmans, 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, sensuality for its source, sensuality for its cause, the reason being simply sensuality.

“Again, it’s 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, sensuality for its source, sensuality for its cause, the reason being simply sensuality.

“Again, it’s 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.” — MN 13

§54. “It’s 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 brahman who doesn’t 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.” — SN 14:12

§55. “Suppose a dog, overcome with weakness & hunger, were to come across a slaughterhouse, and there a dexterous butcher or butcher’s apprentice were to fling him a chain of bones—thoroughly scraped, without any flesh, smeared with blood. What do you think? Would the dog, gnawing on that chain of bones—thoroughly scraped, without any flesh, smeared with blood—appease its weakness & hunger?”

“No, lord. And why is that? Because the chain of bones is thoroughly scraped, without any flesh, & smeared with blood. The dog would get nothing but its share of weariness & vexation.”

“In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: ‘The Blessed One has compared sensuality to a chain of bones, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.’ Seeing this with right discernment, as it has come to be, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace.

“Now suppose a vulture, a kite, or a hawk, seizing a lump of flesh, were to take off, and other vultures, kites, or hawks—following right after it—were to tear at it with their beaks & pull at it with their claws. What do you think? If that vulture, kite, or hawk were not quickly to drop that lump of flesh, would it meet with death from that cause, or with death-like pain?”

“Yes, lord.”

“In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: ‘The Blessed One has compared sensuality to a lump of flesh, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.’ Seeing this with right discernment, as it has come to be, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace.

“Now suppose a man were to come against the wind, carrying a burning grass torch. What do you think? If he were not quickly to drop that grass torch, would he burn his hand or his arm or some other part of his body, so that he would meet with death from that cause, or with death-like pain?”

“Yes, lord.”

“In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: ‘The Blessed One has compared sensuality to a grass torch, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.’ Seeing this with right discernment, as it has come to be, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace.

“Now suppose there were a pit of glowing embers, deeper than a man’s height, full of embers that were neither flaming nor smoking, and a man were to come along—loving life, hating death, loving pleasure, abhorring pain—and two strong men, grabbing him with their arms, were to drag him to the pit of embers. What do you think? Wouldn’t the man twist his body this way & that?”

“Yes, lord. And why is that? Because he would realize, ‘If I fall into this pit of glowing embers, I will meet with death from that cause, or with death-like pain.’”

“In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: ‘The Blessed One has compared sensuality to a pit of glowing embers, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.’ Seeing this with right discernment, as it has come to be, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace.

“Now suppose a man, when dreaming, were to see delightful parks, delightful forests, delightful stretches of land, & delightful lakes, and on awakening were to see nothing. In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: ‘The Blessed One has compared sensuality to a dream, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.’ Seeing this with right discernment, as it has come to be, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace.

“Now suppose a man having borrowed some goods—a manly carriage, fine jewels, & ear ornaments—were to go into the market preceded & surrounded by his borrowed goods, and people seeing him would say, ‘How wealthy this man is, for this is how the wealthy enjoy their possessions,’ but the actual owners, wherever they might see him, would strip him then & there of what is theirs. What do you think? Should the man rightly be upset?”

“No, lord. And why is that? The owners are stripping him of what is theirs.”

“In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: ‘The Blessed One has compared sensuality to borrowed goods, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.’ Seeing this with right discernment, as it has come to be, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace.

“Now suppose that, not far from a village or town, there were a dense forest grove, and there in the grove was a tree with delicious fruit, abundant fruit, but with no fruit fallen to the ground. A man would come along, desiring fruit, looking for fruit, searching for fruit. Plunging into the forest grove, he would see the tree… and the thought would occur to him, ‘This is a tree with delicious fruit, abundant fruit, and there is no fruit fallen to the ground, but I know how to climb a tree. Why don’t I climb the tree, eat what I like, and fill my clothes with the fruit?’ So, having climbed the tree, he would eat what he liked and fill his clothes with the fruit. Then a second man would come along, desiring fruit, looking for fruit, searching for fruit and carrying a sharp ax. Plunging into the forest grove, he would see the tree… and the thought would occur to him, ‘This is a tree with delicious fruit, abundant fruit, and there is no fruit fallen to the ground, and I don’t know how to climb a tree. Why don’t I chop down this tree at the root, eat what I like, and fill my clothes with the fruit?’ So he would chop the tree at the root. What do you think? If the first man who climbed the tree didn’t quickly come down, wouldn’t the falling tree crush his hand or foot or some other part of his body, so that he would meet with death from that cause, or with death-like pain?”

“Yes, lord.”

“In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: ‘The Blessed One has compared sensuality to the fruits of a tree, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.’ Seeing this with right discernment, as it has come to be, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace.” — MN 54

§56. 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 afflicted,

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 4:1

§57. “Even though a disciple of the noble ones has clearly seen as it has come to be with right discernment that sensuality is of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks, still—if he has not attained a rapture & pleasure apart from sensuality, apart from unskillful qualities [i.e., in the first jhāna], or something more peaceful than that—he can be tempted by sensuality. But when he has clearly seen as it has come to be with right discernment that sensuality is of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks, and he has attained a rapture & pleasure apart from sensuality, apart from unskillful qualities, or something more peaceful than that, he cannot be tempted by sensuality.” — MN 14

§58. “Monks, these four things are born. Which four? Love is born of love. Aversion is born of love. Love is born of aversion. Aversion is born of aversion.

“And how is love born of love? There is the case where an individual is pleasing, appealing, & charming to (another) individual. Others treat that individual as pleasing, appealing, & charming, and the other one thinks, ‘This individual is pleasing, appealing, & charming to me. Others treat this individual as pleasing, appealing, & charming.’ He gives rise to love for them. This is how love is born of love.

“And how is aversion born of love? There is the case where an individual is pleasing, appealing, & charming to (another) individual. Others treat that individual as displeasing, unappealing, & not charming, and the other one thinks, ‘This individual is pleasing, appealing, & charming to me. Others treat this individual as displeasing, unappealing, & not charming.’ He gives rise to aversion for them. This is how aversion is born of love.

“And how is love born of aversion? There is the case where an individual is displeasing, unappealing, & not charming to (another) individual. Others treat that individual as displeasing, unappealing, & not charming, and the other one thinks, ‘This individual is displeasing, unappealing, & not charming to me. Others treat this individual as displeasing, unappealing, & not charming.’ He gives rise to love for them. This is how love is born of aversion.

“And how is aversion born of aversion? There is the case where an individual is displeasing, unappealing, & not charming to (another) individual. Others treat that individual as pleasing, appealing, & charming, and the other one thinks, ‘This individual is displeasing, unappealing, & not charming to me. Others treat this individual as pleasing, appealing, & charming.’ He gives rise to aversion for them. This is how aversion is born of aversion.

“Monks, these are the four things that are born.

“Now, on the occasion when a monk, quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhāna—rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation—then any love of his that is born of love does not come about. Any aversion of his that is born of love… any love of his that is born of aversion… any aversion of his that is born of aversion does not come about.

“On the occasion when a monk, with the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, enters & remains in the second jhāna—rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation, internal assurance—then any love of his that is born of love does not come about. Any aversion of his that is born of love… any love of his that is born of aversion… any aversion of his that is born of aversion does not come about.

“On the occasion when a monk, with the fading of rapture, remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, senses pleasure with the body, and enters & remains in the third jhāna—of which the noble ones declare, ‘Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding’—then any love of his that is born of love does not come about. Any aversion of his that is born of love… any love of his that is born of aversion… any aversion of his that is born of aversion does not come about.

“On the occasion when a monk, with the abandoning of pleasure & pain, as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress, enters & remains in the fourth jhāna—purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain—then any love of his that is born of love does not come about. Any aversion of his that is born of love… any love of his that is born of aversion… any aversion of his that is born of aversion does not come about.

“On the occasion when a monk, through the ending of effluents, enters & remains in the effluent-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having directly known & realized them for himself right in the here & now, then any love of his that is born of love is abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Any aversion of his that is born of love… any love of his that is born of aversion… any aversion of his that is born of aversion is abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising.

“This is said to be a monk who doesn’t pull in, doesn’t push away, doesn’t smolder, doesn’t flare up, and doesn’t burn.

“And how does a monk pull in? There is the case where a monk assumes form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He assumes feeling to be the self, or the self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in the self, or the self as in feeling. He assumes perception to be the self, or the self as possessing perception, or perception as in the self, or the self as in perception. He assumes fabrications to be the self, or the self as possessing fabrications, or fabrications as in the self, or the self as in fabrications. He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. This is how a monk pulls in.

“And how does a monk not pull in? There is the case where a monk 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. He doesn’t assume feeling to be the self.… doesn’t assume perception to be the self.… doesn’t assume fabrications to be the self.… doesn’t assume consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. This is how a monk doesn’t pull in.

“And how does a monk push away? There is the case where a monk returns insult to one who has insulted him, returns anger to one who is angry at him, quarrels with one who is quarreling. This is how a monk pushes away.

“And how does a monk not push away? There is the case where a monk doesn’t return insult to one who has insulted him, doesn’t return anger to one who is angry at him, doesn’t quarrel with one who is quarreling. This is how a monk pushes away.

“And how does a monk smolder? There is the case where, there being ‘I am,’ there comes to be ‘I am here,’ there comes to be ‘I am like this’ … ‘I am otherwise’ … ‘I am bad’ … ‘I am good’ … ‘I might be’ … ‘I might be here’ … ‘I might be like this’ … ‘I might be otherwise’ … ‘May I be’ … ‘May I be here’ … ‘May I be like this’ … ‘May I be otherwise’ … ‘I will be’ … ‘I will be here’ … ‘I will be like this’ … ‘I will be otherwise.’

“And how does a monk not smolder? There is the case where, there not being ‘I am,’ there doesn’t come to be ‘I am here,’ there doesn’t come to be ‘I am like this’ … ‘I am otherwise’ … ‘I am bad’ … ‘I am good’ … ‘I might be’ … ‘I might be here’ … ‘I might be like this’ … ‘I might be otherwise’ … ‘May I be’ … ‘May I be here’ … ‘May I be like this’ … ‘May I be otherwise’ … ‘I will be’ … ‘I will be here’ … ‘I will be like this’ … ‘I will be otherwise.’

“And how does a monk flare up? There is the case where, there being ‘I am because of this [or: by means of this],’ there comes to be ‘I am here because of this,’ there comes to be ‘I am like this because of this’ … ‘I am otherwise because of this’ … ‘I am bad because of this’ … ‘I am good because of this’ … ‘I might be because of this’ … ‘I might be here because of this’ … ‘I might be like this because of this’ … ‘I might be otherwise because of this’ … ‘May I be because of this’ … ‘May I be here because of this’ … ‘May I be like this because of this’ … ‘May I be otherwise because of this’ … ‘I will be because of this’ … ‘I will be here because of this’ … ‘I will be like this because of this’ … ‘I will be otherwise because of this.’

“And how does a monk not flare up? There is the case where, there not being ‘I am because of this [or: by means of this],’ there doesn’t come to be ‘I am here because of this,’ there doesn’t come to be ‘I am like this because of this’ … ‘I am otherwise because of this’ … ‘I am bad because of this’ … ‘I am good because of this’ … ‘I might be because of this’ … ‘I might be here because of this’ … ‘I might be like this because of this’ … ‘I might be otherwise because of this’ … ‘May I be because of this’ … ‘May I be here because of this’ … ‘May I be like this because of this’ … ‘May I be otherwise because of this’ … ‘I will be because of this’ … ‘I will be here because of this’ … ‘I will be like this because of this’ … ‘I will be otherwise because of this.’

“And how does a monk burn? There is the case where a monk’s conceit, ‘I am,’ is not abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. This is how a monk burns.

“And how does a monk not burn? There is the case where a monk’s conceit, ‘I am,’ is abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. This is how a monk doesn’t burn.” — AN 4:200

8 : Overcoming Objectification

§59. As he was sitting there, Ven. Rādha said to the Blessed One: “‘A being,’ lord. ‘A being,’ it’s said. To what extent is one said to be ‘a being’?”

“Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Rādha: when one is caught up [satta] there, tied up [visatta] there, one is said to be ‘a being [satta].’

“Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for feeling… perception… fabrications…

“Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for consciousness, Rādha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be ‘a being.’

“Just as when boys or girls are playing with little sand castles (lit: dirt houses): as long as they are not free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, that’s how long they have fun with those sand castles, enjoy them, treasure them, feel possessive of them. But when they become free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, then they smash them, scatter them, demolish them with their hands or feet and make them unfit for play.

“In the same way, Rādha, you too should smash, scatter, & demolish form, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for form.

“You should smash, scatter, & demolish feeling, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for feeling.

“You should smash, scatter, & demolish perception, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for perception.

“You should smash, scatter, & demolish fabrications, and make them unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for fabrications.

“You should smash, scatter, & demolish consciousness and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for consciousness—because the ending of craving, Rādha, is unbinding.” — SN 23:2

§60. “Rightly being disenchanted, rightly being dispassioned, rightly released, rightly seeing the total end, rightly breaking through with regard to one thing, a monk is one who puts an end to stress. With regard to which one thing? ‘All beings subsist on nutriment.’” — AN 10:27

§61. “And what are the effluents to be abandoned by seeing? 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 people of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma—doesn’t discern what ideas are fit for attention or what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he doesn’t attend to ideas fit for attention and attends (instead) to ideas unfit for attention.

“And what are the ideas unfit for attention that he attends to? Whatever ideas such that, when he attends to them, the unarisen effluent of sensuality arises in him, and the arisen effluent of sensuality increases; the unarisen effluent of becoming arises in him, and the arisen effluent of becoming increases; the unarisen effluent of ignorance arises in him, and the arisen effluent of ignorance increases. These are the ideas unfit for attention that he attends to.

“And what are the ideas fit for attention that he doesn’t attend to? Whatever ideas such that, when he attends to them, the unarisen effluent of sensuality doesn’t arise in him, and the arisen effluent of sensuality is abandoned; the unarisen effluent of becoming doesn’t arise in him, and the arisen effluent of becoming is abandoned; the unarisen effluent of ignorance doesn’t arise in him, and the arisen effluent of ignorance is abandoned. These are the ideas fit for attention that he doesn’t attend to. Through his attending to ideas unfit for attention and through his not attending to ideas fit for attention, both unarisen effluents arise in him, and arisen effluents increase.

“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? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall 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 he 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 by means of self that I perceive self … or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self … or the view It is precisely by means 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, I tell you, from suffering & stress.

“The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones—who has regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for people of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma—discerns what ideas are fit for attention and what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he doesn’t attend to ideas unfit for attention and attends (instead) to ideas fit for attention.

“And what are the ideas unfit for attention that he doesn’t attend to? Whatever ideas such that, when he attends to them, the unarisen effluent of sensuality arises in him, and the arisen effluent of sensuality increases; the unarisen effluent of becoming arises in him, and the arisen effluent of becoming increases; the unarisen effluent of ignorance arises in him, and the arisen effluent of ignorance increases. These are the ideas unfit for attention that he doesn’t attend to.

“And what are the ideas fit for attention that he does attend to? Whatever ideas such that, when he attends to them, the unarisen effluent of sensuality doesn’t arise in him, and the arisen effluent of sensuality is abandoned; the unarisen effluent of becoming doesn’t arise in him, and the arisen effluent of becoming is abandoned; the unarisen effluent of ignorance doesn’t arise in him, and the arisen effluent of ignorance is abandoned. These are the ideas fit for attention that he does attend to. Through his not attending to ideas unfit for attention and through his attending to ideas fit for attention, unarisen effluents do not arise in him, and arisen effluents are abandoned.

“He attends appropriately, This is stress … This is the origination of stress … This is the cessation of stress … This is the way leading to the cessation of stress. As he attends appropriately in this way, three fetters are abandoned in him: self-identification view, doubt, and grasping at habits & practices. These are called the effluents to be abandoned by seeing.” — MN 2

§62. Having been given leave by the Blessed One, Sakka the deva-king asked him his first question: “Fettered with what, dear sir—though they think, ‘May we live free from hostility, free from violence, free from rivalry, free from ill will, free from those who are hostile’—do devas, human beings, asuras, nāgas, gandhabbas, & whatever other many kinds of beings there are, nevertheless live in hostility, violence, rivalry, ill will, with those who are hostile?”

Thus Sakka asked his first question of the Blessed One, and the Blessed One, when asked, replied: “Devas, human beings, asuras, nāgas, gandhabbas, & whatever other many kinds of beings there are, are fettered with envy & stinginess, which is why—even though they think, ‘May we live free from hostility, free from violence, free from rivalry, free from ill will, free from those who are hostile’—they nevertheless live in hostility, violence, rivalry, ill will, with those who are hostile.”

Thus the Blessed One answered, having been asked by Sakka the deva-king. Gratified, Sakka was delighted in & expressed his approval of the Blessed One’s words: “So it is, O Blessed One. So it is, O One Well-gone. Hearing the Blessed One’s answer to my question, my doubt is now cut off, my perplexity is overcome.”

Then Sakka, having delighted in & expressed his approval of the Blessed One’s words, asked him a further question: “But what, dear sir, is the cause of envy & stinginess, what is their origination, what gives them birth, what is their source? When what exists do they come into being? When what doesn’t exist do they not?”

“Envy & stinginess have dear-&-not-dear as their cause, have dear-&-not-dear as their origination, have dear-&-not-dear as what gives them birth, have dear-&-not-dear as their source. When dear-&-not-dear exist, they come into being. When dear-&-not-dear are not, they don’t.”

“But what, dear sir, is the cause of dear-&-not-dear, what is their origination, what gives them birth, what is their source? When what exists do they come into being? When what doesn’t exist do they not?”

“Dear-&-not-dear have desire as their cause, have desire as their origination, have desire as what gives them birth, have desire as their source. When desire exists, they come into being. When desire is not, they don’t.”

“But what, dear sir, is the cause of desire, what is its origination, what gives it birth, what is its source? When what exists does it come into being? When what doesn’t exist does it not?”

“Desire has thinking as its cause, has thinking as its origination, has thinking as what gives it birth, has thinking as its source. When thinking exists, desire comes into being. When thinking is not, it doesn’t.”

“But what, dear sir, is the cause of thinking, what is its origination, what gives it birth, what is its source? When what exists does it come into being? When what doesn’t exist does it not?”

“Thinking has the perceptions & categories of objectification 1 as its cause, has the perceptions & categories of objectification as its origination, has the perceptions & categories of objectification as what gives it birth, has the perceptions & categories of objectification as its source. When the perceptions & categories of objectification exist, thinking comes into being. When the perceptions & categories of objectification are not, it doesn’t.”

“And how has he practiced, dear sir: the monk who has practiced the practice leading to the right cessation of the perceptions & categories of objectification?”

“Joy is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued. Grief is of two sorts: to be pursued & not to be pursued. Equanimity is of two sorts: to be pursued & not to be pursued.

“‘Joy is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of a feeling of joy, ‘As I pursue this joy, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,’ that sort of joy is not to be pursued. When one knows of a feeling of joy, ‘As I pursue this joy, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,’ that sort of joy is to be pursued. And this sort of joy may be accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the latter is the more refined. ‘Joy is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

“‘Grief is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of a feeling of grief, ‘As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,’ that sort of grief is not to be pursued. When one knows of a feeling of grief, ‘As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,’ that sort of grief is to be pursued. And this sort of grief may be accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the latter is the more refined. ‘Grief is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

“‘Equanimity is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of a feeling of equanimity, ‘As I pursue this equanimity, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,’ that sort of equanimity is not to be pursued. When one knows of a feeling of equanimity, ‘As I pursue this equanimity, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,’ that sort of equanimity is to be pursued. And this sort of equanimity may be accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the latter is the more refined. ‘Equanimity is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

“This is how he has practiced, deva-king: the monk who has practiced the practice leading to the right cessation of the perceptions & categories of objectification.”

Thus the Blessed One answered, having been asked by Sakka the deva-king. Gratified, Sakka was delighted in & expressed his approval of the Blessed One’s words: “So it is, O Blessed One. So it is, O One Well-gone. Hearing the Blessed One’s answer to my question, my doubt is now cut off, my perplexity is overcome.”

Then Sakka, having delighted in & expressed his approval of the Blessed One’s words, asked him a further question: “But how has he practiced, dear sir: the monk who has practiced for restraint in the Pāṭimokkha?”

“Bodily conduct is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued. Verbal conduct is of two sorts: to be pursued & not to be pursued. Searching is of two sorts: to be pursued & not to be pursued.

“‘Bodily conduct is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of bodily conduct, ‘As I pursue this bodily conduct, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,’ that sort of bodily conduct is not to be pursued. When one knows of bodily conduct, ‘As I pursue this bodily conduct, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,’ that sort of bodily conduct is to be pursued. ‘Bodily conduct is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

“‘Verbal conduct is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of verbal conduct, ‘As I pursue this verbal conduct, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,’ that sort of verbal conduct is not to be pursued. When one knows of verbal conduct, ‘As I pursue this verbal conduct, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,’ that sort of verbal conduct is to be pursued. ‘Verbal conduct is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

“‘Searching is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of a search, ‘As I pursue this search, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,’ that sort of search is not to be pursued. When one knows of a search, ‘As I pursue this search, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,’ that sort of search is to be pursued. ‘Searching is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

“This is how he has practiced, deva-king: the monk who has practiced the practice for restraint in the Pāṭimokkha.”

Thus the Blessed One answered, having been asked by Sakka the deva-king. Gratified, Sakka was delighted in & expressed his approval of the Blessed One’s words: “So it is, O Blessed One. So it is, O One Well-gone. Hearing the Blessed One’s answer to my question, my doubt is now cut off, my perplexity is overcome.”

Then Sakka, having delighted in & expressed his approval of the Blessed One’s words, asked him a further question: “But how has he practiced, dear sir: the monk who has practiced for restraint with regard to the sense faculties?”

“Forms cognizable by the eye are of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued. Sounds cognizable by the ear.… Aromas cognizable by the nose.… Flavors cognizable by the tongue.… Tactile sensations cognizable by the body.… Ideas cognizable by the intellect are of two sorts: to be pursued & not to be pursued.”

When this was said, Sakka the deva-king said to the Blessed One, “Dear sir, I understand the detailed meaning of the Blessed One’s brief statement. If, as one pursues a certain type of form cognizable by the eye, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline, that sort of form cognizable by the eye is not to be pursued. But if, as one pursues a certain type of form cognizable by the eye, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase, that sort of form cognizable by the eye is to be pursued.

“If, as one pursues a certain type of sound cognizable by the ear.…

“If, as one pursues a certain type of aroma cognizable by the nose.…

“If, as one pursues a certain type of flavor cognizable by the tongue.…

“If, as one pursues a certain type of tactile sensation cognizable by the body.…

“If, as one pursues a certain type of idea cognizable by the intellect, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline, that sort of idea cognizable by the intellect is not to be pursued. But if, as one pursues a certain type of idea cognizable by the intellect, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase, that sort of idea cognizable by the intellect is to be pursued.

“This is how I understand the detailed meaning of the Blessed One’s brief statement. Hearing the Blessed One’s answer to my question, my doubt is now cut off, my perplexity is overcome.” — DN 21

§63. “From where have there arisen

quarrels, disputes,

lamentation, sorrows, along with stinginess,

conceit & pride, along with divisiveness?

From where have they arisen?

Please tell me.”

“From what is dear

there have arisen

quarrels, disputes,

lamentation, sorrows, along with stinginess,

conceit & pride, along with divisiveness.

Tied up with stinginess

are quarrels & disputes.

In the arising of disputes

is divisiveness.”

“Where is the cause

of things dear in the world,

along with the greeds that go about in the world?

And where is the cause

of the hopes & aims

for the sake of a person’s next life?”

“Desires are the cause

of things dear in the world,

along with the greeds that go about in the world.

And here too is the cause

of the hopes & aims

for the sake of a person’s next life.”

“Now where is the cause

of desire in the world?

And from where have there arisen

decisions, anger, lies, & perplexity,

and all the qualities

described by the Contemplative?”

“What they call

‘appealing’ &

‘unappealing’

in the world:

In dependence on that,

desire arises.

Having seen becoming & not-

with regard to forms,

a person gives rise to decisions in the world;

anger, lies, & perplexity:

these qualities, too,

when there exists

that very pair.

A person perplexed

should train for the path of knowledge,

for it’s in having known

that the Contemplative has spoken

of qualities/dhammas.”1

“Where is the cause

of appealing & un-?

When what isn’t

do they not exist?

And whatever is meant

by becoming & not- :

Tell me,

Where is their cause?”

“Contact is the cause

of appealing & un-.

When contact isn’t,

they do not exist,

along with what’s meant

by becoming & not- :

I tell you,

from here is their cause.”

“Now where is the cause

of contact in the world,

and from where have graspings,

possessions, arisen?

When what isn’t

does there not exist mine-ness?

When what has disappeared

do contacts not touch?”

“Conditioned by name-&-form

is contact.

In longing do graspings,

possessions have their cause.

When longing isn’t,

mine-ness doesn’t exist.

When forms have disappeared

contacts don’t touch.”

“For one how-arriving

does form disappear?

How do pleasure & pain disappear?

Tell me this.

My heart is set

on knowing how

they disappear.”

“One not percipient of perceptions

not percipient of aberrant perceptions,

not unpercipient,

nor percipient of what’s disappeared2:

For one thus-arriving,

form disappears3—

for objectification-classifications4

have their cause in perception.”

“What we have asked,

you’ve expounded to us.

We ask one thing more.

Please tell it.

Do some of the wise

say that just this much is the utmost,

that purity of spirit5 is here?

Or do they say

that it’s other than this?”

“Some of the wise

say that just this much is the utmost,

that purity of spirit is here.

But some of them,

who say they are skilled,

say it’s the moment

with no clinging remaining.

But knowing,

‘Having known, they still are dependent,’6

the sage ponders dependencies.

On knowing them, released,

he doesn’t get into disputes,

doesn’t meet with becoming & not-

: He’s enlightened.” — Sn 4:11

Notes

1. As other passages in this poem indicate (see note 6, below), the goal is not measured in terms of knowledge, but as this passage points out, knowledge is a necessary part of the path to the goal.

2. According to Nd I, “percipient of perceptions” means having ordinary perceptions. “Percipient of aberrant perceptions” means being insane. “Unpercipient” means either having entered the cessation of perception and feeling (see AN 9:33) or the dimension of beings without perception (DN 1 and DN 15). “Percipient of what’s disappeared” (or: having perceptions that have disappeared) means having entered any of the four formless states. Of these four explanations, the last is the least likely, for as the next lines show, this passage is describing the stage of concentration practice in which one is transcending the fourth jhāna and entering the formless attainment of the infinitude of space. A more likely explanation of “percipient of what’s disappeared” would be the act of holding to perceptions of the breath and of pleasure and pain, even though these phenomena have all disappeared in the fourth jhāna (see SN 36:11, AN 9:31, AN 10:20, and AN 10:72).

3. This is the point where the meditator leaves the fourth jhāna and enters the perception of the infinitude of space.

4. Objectification-classifications (papañca-saṅkhā): Nd I defines papañca simply as craving, views, and conceit. A survey of how the term papañca is actually used in the suttas, however, shows that it denotes the mind’s tendency to objectify itself as a being. Then, from that objectification, it searches for nourishment to keep that being in existence, classifying experience in terms conducive to that search and thus giving rise to conflict. As Sn 4:14 points out, the root of the objectification-classifications is the perception, “I am the thinker.”

5. “Spirit” is the usual rendering of the Pāli word, yakkha. According to Nd I, however, in this context the word yakkha means person, individual, human being, or living being.

6. In other words, the sage knows that both groups in the previous verse fall back on their knowledge as a measure of the goal, without comprehending the dependency still latent in their knowledge. The sages in the first group are mistaking the experience of neither perception nor non-perception as the goal, and so they are still dependent on that state of concentration. The sages in the second group, by the fact that they claim to be skilled, show that there is still a latent conceit in their experience of not-clinging, and thus it is not totally independent of clinging. (For more on this point, see MN 102.) Both groups still maintain the concept of a “spirit” that is purified in the realization of purity. Once these dependencies are comprehended, one gains release from disputes and from states of becoming and not-becoming. It is in this way that knowledge is a means to the goal, but the goal itself is not measured or defined in terms of knowledge.

§64. I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying among the Sakyans near Kapilavatthu in the Banyan Park. Then in the early morning, having adjusted his under robe and carrying his bowl & outer robe, he went into Kapilavatthu for alms. Having gone for alms in Kapilavatthu, after the meal, returning from his alms round, he went to the Great Forest for the day’s abiding. Plunging into the Great Forest, he sat down at the root of a young clump of bamboo for the day’s abiding.

Daṇḍapānin [“Stick-in-hand”] the Sakyan, out roaming & rambling for exercise, also went to the Great Forest. Plunging into the Great Forest, he went to the Blessed One under the young clump of bamboo. On arrival, he exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he stood to one side. As he was standing there, he said to the Blessed One, “What is the contemplative’s doctrine? What does he proclaim?”

“The sort of doctrine, friend, where one does not keep quarreling with anyone in the cosmos with its devas, Māras, & Brahmās, with its contemplatives & brahmans, its royalty & commonfolk; the sort (of doctrine) where perceptions no longer obsess the brahman who remains dissociated from sensuality, free from perplexity, his uncertainty cut away, devoid of craving for becoming & non-. Such is my doctrine; such is what I proclaim.”

When this was said, Daṇḍapānin the Sakyan—shaking his head, wagging his tongue, raising his eyebrows so that his forehead was wrinkled in three furrows—left, leaning on his stick.

Then the Blessed One, emerging from his seclusion in the late afternoon, went to the Banyan Park and, on arrival, sat down on a seat made ready. Having sat down, he [told the monks what had happened]. When this was said, a certain monk said to the Blessed One, “Lord, what sort of doctrine is it where one does not keep quarreling with anyone in the cosmos with its devas, Māras, & Brahmās, with its contemplatives & brahmans, its royalty & commonfolk; where perceptions no longer obsess the brahman who remains dissociated from sensuality, free from perplexity, his uncertainty cut away, devoid of craving for becoming & non-?”

“If, monk, with regard to the cause whereby the perceptions & categories of objectification assail a person, there is nothing there to relish, welcome, or remain fastened to, then that is the end of the obsessions of passion, the obsessions of resistance, the obsessions of views, the obsessions of uncertainty, the obsessions of conceit, the obsessions of passion for becoming, & the obsessions of ignorance. That is the end of taking up rods & bladed weapons, of arguments, quarrels, disputes, accusations, divisive speech, & false speech. That is where these evil, unskillful things cease without remainder.” That is what the Blessed One said. Having said it, he—the One Well-Gone—got up from his seat and went into his dwelling.

Then, not long after the Blessed One had left, this thought occurred to the monks: “This brief statement the Blessed One made, after which he went into his dwelling without analyzing the detailed meaning—i.e., ‘If, with regard to the cause whereby the perceptions & categories of objectification assail a person, there is nothing to relish… that is where these evil, unskillful things cease without remainder’: Now who might analyze the unanalyzed detailed meaning of this brief statement?” Then the thought occurred to them, “Ven. Mahā Kaccāna is praised by the Teacher and esteemed by his observant companions in the holy life. He is capable of analyzing the unanalyzed detailed meaning of this brief statement. Suppose we were to go to him and, on arrival, cross-question him about this matter.”

So the monks went to Ven. Mahā Kaccāna and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, they sat to one side. As they were sitting there, they [told him what had happened, and added,] “Analyze the meaning, Ven. Mahā Kaccāna!”

(He replied:) “Friends, it’s as if a man needing heartwood, looking for heartwood, wandering in search of heartwood—passing over the root & trunk of a standing tree possessing heartwood—were to imagine that heartwood should be sought among its branches & leaves. So it is with you, who—having bypassed the Blessed One when you were face to face with him, the Teacher—imagine that I should be asked about this matter. For knowing, the Blessed One knows; seeing, he sees. He is the Eye, he is Knowledge, he is Dhamma, he is Brahmā. He is the speaker, the proclaimer, the elucidator of meaning, the giver of the deathless, the lord of the Dhamma, the Tathāgata. That was the time when you should have cross-questioned him about this matter. However he answered, that was how you should have remembered it.”

“Yes, friend Kaccāna: Knowing, the Blessed One knows; seeing, he sees. He is the Eye, he is Knowledge, he is Dhamma, he is Brahmā. He is the speaker, the proclaimer, the elucidator of meaning, the giver of the deathless, the lord of the Dhamma, the Tathāgata. That was the time when we should have cross-questioned him about this matter. However he answered, that was how we should have remembered it. But you are praised by the Teacher and esteemed by your observant companions in the holy life. You are capable of analyzing the unanalyzed detailed meaning of this brief statement. Analyze the meaning, Ven. Mahā Kaccāna, without making it difficult!”

“In that case, my friends, listen & pay close attention. I will speak.”

“As you say, friend,” the monks responded to him.

Ven. Mahā Kaccāna said this: “Friends, concerning the brief statement the Blessed One made, after which he went into his dwelling without analyzing the detailed meaning—i.e., ‘If, with regard to the cause whereby the perceptions & categories of objectification assail a person, there is nothing there to relish, welcome, or remain fastened to, then that is the end of the obsessions of passion, the obsessions of resistance, the obsessions of views, the obsessions of uncertainty, the obsessions of conceit, the obsessions of passion for becoming, & the obsessions of ignorance. That is the end of taking up rods & bladed weapons, of arguments, quarrels, disputes, accusations, divisive speech, & false speech. That is where these evil, unskillful things cease without remainder’—I understand the detailed meaning to be this:

“Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives [labels in the mind]. What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one objectifies. Based on what a person objectifies, the perceptions & categories of objectification assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye.

“Dependent on ear & sounds, ear-consciousness arises.…

“Dependent on nose & aromas, nose-consciousness arises.…

“Dependent on tongue & flavors, tongue-consciousness arises.…

“Dependent on body & tactile sensations, body-consciousness arises.…

“Dependent on intellect & ideas, intellect-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives. What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one objectifies. Based on what a person objectifies, the perceptions & categories of objectification assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future ideas cognizable via the intellect.

“Now, when there is the eye, when there are forms, when there is eye-consciousness, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of contact.1 When there is a delineation of contact, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of feeling. When there is a delineation of feeling, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of perception. When there is a delineation of perception, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of thinking. When there is a delineation of thinking, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of being assailed by the perceptions & categories of objectification.

“When there is the ear.…

“When there is the nose.…

“When there is the tongue.…

“When there is the body.…

“When there is the intellect, when there are ideas, when there is intellect-consciousness, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of contact. When there is a delineation of contact, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of feeling. When there is a delineation of feeling, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of perception. When there is a delineation of perception, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of thinking. When there is a delineation of thinking, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of being assailed by the perceptions & categories of objectification.

“Now, when there is no eye, when there are no forms, when there is no eye-consciousness, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of contact. When there is no delineation of contact, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of feeling. When there is no delineation of feeling, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of perception. When there is no delineation of perception, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of thinking. When there is no delineation of thinking, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of being assailed by the perceptions & categories of objectification.

“When there is no ear.…

“When there is no nose.…

“When there is no tongue.…

“When there is no body.…

“When there is no intellect, when there are no ideas, when there is no intellect-consciousness, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of contact. When there is no delineation of contact, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of feeling. When there is no delineation of feeling, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of perception. When there is no delineation of perception, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of thinking. When there is no delineation of thinking, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of being assailed by the perceptions & categories of objectification.

“So, concerning the brief statement the Blessed One made, after which he entered his dwelling without analyzing the detailed meaning—i.e., ‘If, with regard to the cause whereby the perceptions & categories of objectification assail a person, there is nothing there to relish, welcome, or remain fastened to, then that is the end of the obsessions of passion, the obsessions of resistance, the obsessions of views, the obsessions of uncertainty, the obsessions of conceit, the obsessions of passion for becoming, & the obsessions of ignorance. That is the end of taking up rods & bladed weapons, of arguments, quarrels, disputes, accusations, divisive speech, & false speech. That is where these evil, unskillful things cease without remainder’—this is how I understand the detailed meaning. Now, friends, if you wish, having gone to the Blessed One, cross-question him about this matter. However he answers is how you should remember it.”

Then the monks, delighting in & approving of Ven. Mahā Kaccāna’s words, got up from their seats and went to the Blessed One. On arrival, having bowed down to him, they sat to one side. As they were sitting there, they [told him what had happened after he had gone into his dwelling, and ended by saying,] “Then Ven. Mahā Kaccāna analyzed the meaning using these words, these statements, these phrases.”

“Mahā Kaccāna is wise, monks. He is a person of great discernment. If you had asked me about this matter, I too would have answered in the same way he did. That is its meaning, and that is how you should remember it.”

When this was said, Ven. Ānanda said to the Blessed One, “Lord, it’s as if a man—overcome with hunger, weakness, & thirst—were to come across a ball of honey. Wherever he might taste it, he would experience a sweet, delectable flavor. In the same way, wherever a monk of capable awareness might investigate the meaning of this Dhamma discourse with his discernment, he would experience gratification, he would experience confidence. What is the name of this Dhamma discourse?”

“Then, Ānanda, you can remember this Dhamma discourse as the ‘Ball of Honey Discourse.’”

That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, Ven. Ānanda delighted in the Blessed One’s words. — MN 18

Note

1. The artificiality of this phrase—“delineate a delineation”—seems intentional. It underlines the artifice implicit in the process by which the mind, in singling out events, turns them into discrete things. See MN 109, note 2.

§65. “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 objectification-classifications:

‘I am the thinker.’

He should train, always mindful,

to subdue any craving inside him.

Whatever truth he may know,

within or without,

he shouldn’t, because of it,

make himself hardened,

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 theorizing about 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?

As in the middle of the sea

it is still,

with no waves upwelling,

so the monk—unperturbed, still—

should not swell himself

anywhere.” — Sn 4:14

§66. Then Ven. Mahā Koṭṭhita went to Ven. Sāriputta and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to Ven. Sāriputta, “With the remainderless fading & cessation of the six contact-media [vision, hearing, smell, taste, touch, & intellection], is it the case that there is anything else?”

[Ven. Sāriputta:] “Don’t say that, my friend.”

[Ven. Mahā Koṭṭhita:] “With the remainderless fading & cessation of the six contact-media, is it the case that there is not anything else?”

[Ven. Sāriputta:] “Don’t say that, my friend.”

[Ven. Mahā Koṭṭhita:] “…is it the case that there both is & is not anything else?”

[Ven. Sāriputta:] “Don’t say that, my friend.”

[Ven. Mahā Koṭṭhita:] “…is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?”

[Ven. Sāriputta:] “Don’t say that, my friend.”

[Ven. Mahā Koṭṭhita:] “Being asked if, with the remainderless fading & cessation of the six contact-media, there is anything else, you say, ‘Don’t say that, my friend.’ Being asked if… there is not anything else… there both is & is not anything else… there neither is nor is not anything else, you say, ‘Don’t say that, my friend.’ Now, how is the meaning of your words to be understood?”

[Ven. Sāriputta:] “The statement, ‘With the remainderless fading & cessation of the six contact-media, is it the case that there is anything else?’ objectifies the non-objectified. The statement, ‘… 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?’ objectifies the non-objectified. However far the six contact-media go, that is how far objectification goes. However far objectification goes, that is how far the six contact media go. With the remainderless fading & cessation of the six contact-media, there comes to be the cessation of objectification, the stilling of objectification.” — AN 4:173

§67. “Therefore, monks, that dimension should be experienced where the eye [vision] ceases and the perception of form fades. That dimension should be experienced where the ear ceases and the perception of sound fades. That dimension should be experienced where the nose ceases and the perception of aroma fades. That dimension should be experienced where the tongue ceases and the perception of flavor fades. That dimension should be experienced where the body ceases and the perception of tactile sensation fades. That dimension should be experienced where the intellect ceases and the perception of idea fades. That dimension should be experienced.” — SN 35:117

Study Aid : Papañca as a Cause of Conflict

Three passages—§§62–64—map the causal processes that give rise to papañca and lead from papañca to conflict. Because the Buddhist analysis of causality is generally non-linear, with plenty of room for feedback loops, the maps vary in some of their details.

In §62, the map reads like this:

the perceptions & categories of papañca > thinking > desire > dear-&-not-dear > envy & stinginess > rivalry & hostility

In §63, the map is less linear and can be diagramed like this:

perception > the categories of papañca

perception > name & form > contact > appealing & unappealing > desire > dear-&-not-dear > stinginess/divisiveness/quarrels/disputes

In §64, the map is this:

contact > feeling > perception > thinking > the perceptions & categories of papañca

In this last case, however, the bare outline misses some of the important implications of the way this process is phrased. In the full passage, the analysis starts out in an impersonal tone:

“Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises [similarly with the rest of the six sense]. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling.

Starting with feeling, the notion of an “agent”—in this case, the feeler—acting on “objects,” is introduced:

“What one feels, one perceives [labels in the mind]. What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one ‘papañcizes.’”

Through the process of papañca, the agent then becomes a victim of his/her own patterns of thinking:

“Based on what a person papañcizes, the perceptions & categories of papañca assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye [as with the remaining senses].”

Glossary

Arahant: A “worthy one” or “pure one;” a person whose mind is free of defilement and thus is not destined for further rebirth. A title for the Buddha and the highest level of his noble disciples.

Āsava: Effluent; fermentation. Four qualities—sensuality, views, becoming, and ignorance—that “flow out” of the mind and create the flood of the round of death and rebirth.

Asura: A member of a race of beings who, like the Titans in Greek mythology, bat<strong><em>>tled the devas for sovereignty in heaven and lost.

Brahman: In common usage, a brahman is a member of the priestly caste, which claimed to be the highest caste in India, based on birth. In a specifically Buddhist usage, “brahman” can also mean an arahant, conveying the point that excellence is based, not on birth or race, but on the qualities attained in the mind.

Brahmā: An inhabitant of the heavenly realms of form or formlessness.

Deva: Literally, “shining one.” An inhabitant of the terrestrial or heavenly realms higher than the human.

Dhamma: (1) Event; action; (2) a phenomenon in and of itself; (3) mental quality; (4) doctrine, teaching; (5) nibbāna (although there are passages describing nibbāna as the abandoning of all dhammas). Sanskrit form: Dharma.

Gandhabba:Celestial musician, a member of one of the lower deva realms.

Jhāna: Mental absorption. A state of strong concentration focused on a single sensation or mental notion. This term is derived from the verb jhāyati, which means to burn with a steady, still flame.

Kamma: Intentional act. Sanskrit form: Karma.

Māra: The personification of temptation and all forces, within and without, that create obstacles to release.

Nāga: A magical serpent, technically classed as a common animal, but possessing many of the powers of a deva, including the ability to take on human shape.

Nibbāna: Literally, the “unbinding” of the mind from passion, aversion, and delusion, and from the entire round of death and rebirth. As this term also denotes the extinguishing of a fire, it carries connotations of stilling, cooling, and peace. “Total nibbāna” in some contexts denotes the experience of awakening; in others, the final passing away of an arahant. Sanskrit form: Nirvāṇa.

Pāli: The earliest extant canon of the Buddha’s teachings and, by extension, the language in which those teachings are recorded.

Pāṭimokkha: Basic code of monastic discipline, composed of 227 rules for monks and 311 for nuns.

Sakya: The Buddha’s family name.

Saṅgha: On the conventional (sammati) level, this term denotes the communities of Buddhist monks and nuns. On the ideal (ariya) level, it denotes those followers of the Buddha, lay or ordained, who have attained at least stream-entry.

Sutta: Discourse.

Tādin: “Such,” an adjective to describe one who has attained the goal. It indicates that the person’s state is indefinable but not subject to change or influences of any sort.

Tathāgata: Literally, “one who has become authentic (tatha-āgata) or is truly gone (tathā-gata)”: an epithet used in ancient India for a person who has attained the highest religious goal. In Buddhism, it usually denotes the Buddha, although occasionally it also denotes any of his arahant disciples.

Vinaya: The monastic discipline, whose rules and traditions comprise six volumes in printed text. The Buddha’s name for his own teaching was “this Dhamma-&-Vinaya.”

Abbreviations

AN | Aṅguttara Nikāya
Dhp | Dhammapada
DN | Dīgha Nikāya
Khp | Khuddakapāṭha
MN | Majjhima Nikāya
Mv | Mahāvagga
Nd I | Mahāniddesa
SN | Saṁyutta Nikāya
Sn | Sutta Nipāta
Ud | Udāna

References to DN and MN are to discourse (sutta). Those to Dhp are to verse. Those to Mv are to chapter, section, and sub-section. References to other texts are to section (saṁyutta, nipāta, or vagga) and discourse.