In these pieces of music you just get one note at a time or less, just the melody. Sometimes you get two notes played at once, very occasionally three notes. But the music's very stark, very sparse, and you have to, or that the harmony of the music is implied, not actually played. So, I think it's rather like this with the sittanapata. It's very simple, very stark, very ascetic, and the later Buddhist teachings are implied, and we bring those teachings to the text. They're not actually stated. So, let's plunge in. I'm going to begin by reading you the first of these sittas, which is only actually six verses long, and it's called the kama sutra. And I always smile when I come across this sutra, because when I was young, I can say that now, when I was young, at school I remember there was talk about a text from India called the kama sutra, which is the Sanskrit equivalent of the kama sutra, in name that is, which was, it seemed, I never saw the book, but it seems it was some kind of exotic sex manual with different ways of different positions of having sex in. But this sutra is nothing like that. In fact, it's quite, quite different. So, I'm going to read you. What I've done is, it's quite hard to get good translations. In a sense, when you read these ancient Buddhist texts, you're at the mercy of the translators understanding of the dharma. So, for some of these texts, what I've done is I've amalgamated two translations to get the translation that I like. So, this is a translation of K.R. Norman and Tanisara. 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 grieves as opressed by a barb. Whoever avoids sensual pleasures, as if avoiding the head of a snake with his foot, mindful goes beyond this attachment to 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 crushed by dangers. Then misery enters into him, like water into a broken boat. So, one, always mindful, should avoid sensual pleasures, letting them go. He'd cross over the flood, like one who, having bailed out the boat, has reached the far shore. Very simple message. If you try to get sensual pleasures and you're successful, you'll have a great time. No question. He's enraptured at heart. Piti Marno. Marno is mind or heart. Piti is the same word that we use when we talk about the first jjana. That's one of the characteristics of the first jjana. Piti is rapture. So, if you get what you want, you're enraptured at heart. I like the last line of that verse, though. The mortal gets what he wants. Just to remind you that even when you get what you want, you're going to die. That's the message of this suitor. It's very, very simple. What's powerful about the suitor, I think, is not so much what the Buddha says as the way he says it. The metaphors are so strong. If, for that person, longing, desiring, the pleasures diminish, he grieves as though pierced by a barb. Barb is a translation of sala, which is an arrow, or a dart, or a barb. So, you get what you want. You're enraptured at heart, and then you start to lose it, and then comes the barb, the pain. I'm going to say more about this wonderful image of the barb later on. Then the next metaphor, "Whoever avoids sensual pleasures as if avoiding the head of a snake with his foot." Very strong image. Probably doesn't mean an awful lot to us. We have to use our imagination because we don't usually walk around bare feet in places where there are snakes. But, of course, in India, everyone would know. Everyone would be walking around barefoot in the grass where there are deadly snakes. Everyone would know that you have to avoid standing on a snake in your bare feet. I think if the Buddha were alive today, he wouldn't use that image. He would say something like, "Whoever avoids sensual pleasures as if crossing the road on a main street in a city." You've got to be that careful of sensual pleasures. You get hit by a sensual pleasure, and you are done for. The next one, the next image, a man who is greedy for fields, etc., is overpowered with weakness and crushed by dangers. Then misery enters into him, like water into a broken boat. What an image. You're in a boat on the water, on the flood, presumably, and it's broken, and the water's pouring in, and you're terrified. That's the image that the Buddha used. I just think that image of a broken boat with the water just pouring in is such a strong image. And the boat is on the flood. So one, always mindful, should avoid sensual desires. Letting them go. Letting them go. He'd cross over the flood, like one who, having bailed out that boat, has reached the far shore. Now, usually, when I've come across this idea of reaching the far shore, it's been a river, getting from one shore to the other. But a river kind of behaves itself, doesn't it? It's in its boundaries, and you live there, and the river's over there. But here, the Buddha's talking about a flood. And, of course, this would have meant so much to the ancient Indians. In the rainy season, you get floods. Imagine if we were flooded now. Imagine the chaos. If we had this amazing thunderstorm, and the whole of time, it was flooded out. Can you imagine the chaos, the damage? All our tents would be washed away. Our cars would be ruined. Our possessions, such as we got here, would be ruined. And it would be utter chaos. Perhaps some of us would die. That's the kind of image that the Buddha is using here. So, when you're on the boat, and the water's coming through, you are in big trouble. That's the first. The second sutta I want to talk about is the 15th. There are 16 sutas altogether. It's called the atta danda sutta. Danda is stick. Atta is to grab hold of or to seize, so it's the seizing the stick sutta. And to seize the stick is the ancient Buddhist way of talking about violence. It's a very concrete image. When you're violent, you seize a stick. So the atta danda sutta. When I first came across this sutta many, many years ago in Sadatita's translation, I was so, I was going to say, struck. I was, it had such a strong effect on me. You know, sometimes when you're reading these ancient texts, it feels like the Buddha's talking through a kind of a veil. You can't quite get at the Buddha as a human being. The kind of mythological idea of the Buddha as some kind of amazing being who never did anything wrong. For someone like me, that's quite hard to relate to. But when I came across this sutta many years ago, it was as if suddenly a door opened and there was the Buddha. The real human being, the Buddha. I'm not going to read you the whole sutta because it's a fairly long one, just the first five verses. This is actually a translation by Andrew Olensky. Never heard of him before, but I found it on the net. And I've changed it just very slightly. Fear is born from arming oneself. Just see how many people fight. I'll tell you about the dreadful fear that caused me to tremble all over. Seeing creatures flopping around like fish in water too shallow, so hostile to one another. Seeing this, I became afraid. This world completely lacks essence. It trembles in all directions. I longed to find myself a place unscathed, but I could not see it. Seeing people locked in conflict, I became completely distraught. But then I discerned here a barb, hard to see, lodged deep in the heart. It's only when pierced by this barb that one runs in all directions. So that if that barb is taken out, one does not run, one does not sink. I really felt that I'd met the Buddha when I read that. He's talking about his own fear and he's trembling and being distraught. This is presumably before his enlightenment. Sometimes when you read about the Buddha's life story or hear about the Buddha's life story, it's almost like this amazing guy who just thought, "Oh, I can see suffering everywhere. I think I'll become enlightened and save all beings." But here you get a real feeling for his own suffering, his own fear. And the first line is very interesting. Fear is born from arming oneself. This reminds me of another early text, a nudhana, where the Buddha says something like, "Open up the thatch, and thus it will not rain through." So if you want to protect yourself, open up. This arm, fear is born from arming oneself. So this is kind of counterintuitive, I think. It goes against what most people think. That if you want to be free from fear, you have to arm yourself. You have to protect yourself. But here the Buddha is saying, "That's what causes fear." If you take up the stick, then you will feel fear. Just see how many people fight. I'll tell you about the dreadful fear that caused me to tremble all over. Throughout the Sutra Nepata, you get this term tremble again and again and it signifies fear. It also signifies agitation. It's the opposite of peace and purity. It's that feeling of agitation. Seeing creatures flopping around like fish in water, too shallow, so hostile to one another. So here's another amazing image which would have meant so much to people in India at that time. This time the hot season, water is evaporating. Fish that were in a lake are now in a small pond and there are too many of them for the amount of water there. So they're all fighting for scant resources. So this is the image the Buddha gives us for humanity. We're like fish in too little water, hostile to one another. This world completely lacks essence. It trembles in all directions, so not only was the Buddha trembling, but he saw that everyone was trembling in some way. Seeing people locked in conflict, I became completely distraught. But then I discerned here a barb, hard to see, lodged deep in the heart. It's only when pierced by this barb that one runs in all directions. This to me is just a wonderful image of being pierced deep in the heart by a barb. What is the barb? The barb itself. Usually we don't feel the barb as painful. It's lodged in the heart, deep in the heart, but we don't usually feel it as painful. It's only when we're under stress. It's only when we're threatened in some way that we feel the pain of the barb. And it causes us to run in all directions. It causes us to fight with one another. Each one of us has a barb, a dart, pierced deep in the heart. And the only way that you can get that barb out is by becoming selfless, by disarming oneself. Wonderful, very, very simple teachings. Interesting thing here is the Buddha doesn't tell you how to get rid of the barb. How to take the barb out. He just said, "Get rid of it." It's true, I think, throughout the whole of the Suttinipata, there are these very strong wisdom teachings. And then the Buddha doesn't tell you how to go about realizing them. Perhaps the Buddha was there, he had a tremendous influence, and perhaps people just managed to get rid of the barb there and then. I don't know, but it's just very strong wisdom teachings that you can reflect on again and again. Another strong theme in the Suttinipata is renunciation, and specifically renouncing home. I'll read you a couple of sections from the number six, Suttin number six, Jara Sutra, Jara Means Old Age. People grieve for their cherished things, for known possessions are permanent. Seeing that this separation is inevitable, one should not live the household life. Those who are greedy for cherished things do not abandon grief, lamentation, and avarice. Therefore, the sages, seeing security, abandoning possessions, have wandered forth. Seeing security, security is the translation of Kmar, which means full of peace, safe, tranquil, calm. And then from number nine, the Magandia Sutra, having abandoned home, living free from society, the sage, in villages, creates no intimacies. So very strong emphasis over and over again in these sutas, renounce, renounce pleasures, renounce the world, renounce home. Now the Buddha didn't teach these teachings to make us unhappy. He didn't teach these teachings to give us a hard time. He taught them for us to help us take out the barb of suffering. He wants us to be happy. So I think we need to take these teachings very seriously. Some books on Buddhist and these days, especially perhaps those coming from America, are very strong on meditation, very good meditation books. But they're very weak on changing one's life. They're very weak on renunciation, talking generally here. But when you read the Buddha in the ancient text, this is one of the strongest things that he says, leave, let go, abandon. That's the way to happiness. However, there is another way of understanding this idea of leaving home. This section that I just read you from the Magandria sutta was quoted to Maha Kachina, having abandoned home, living free from society, the sage, in villages, creates no intimacies. So a householder asked Maha Kachina what this means. Maha Kachina answered in a very interesting way, he said, the property of form householder is the home of consciousness. When consciousness is in bondage through passion to the property of form, it is said to be living at home. And he goes on to say, the property of feeling householder is the home of consciousness, the property of perception, the property of intentions. Those of you who know your Buddhist lists will know that Maha Kachina is going through the five scandanas. So the five scandanas make up the self. When you're in bondage to the self, you live at home. So Maha Kachina has, as it were, "psychologize" this teaching. And then, he goes on to say, and how does one live in society? One who is in bondage to the distraction of the society of bodily sensations is said to be living in society, saying with the other five sense contacts, the sensation of sight, hearing and so on. Connected with this idea of homelessness is the parley term viveka. Viveka has become currently my favorite parley term, I go through phases. But viveka, I think, is quite a wonderful term, very rich. It means detachment. It means loneliness, separation, seclusion. But it also means singleness of heart, discrimination of thought, very interesting word. This is all from the parley English dictionary. I have to say I take issue with the parley English dictionary on one thing where it says viveka means loneliness. Perhaps it does, but I've never come across a text where viveka meant loneliness in a negative sense. I think it more means aloneness, solitude. So viveka means physical seclusion or detachment, but it also means mental seclusion or detachment. In fact, there is a later list of the three kinds of viveka, kaya viveka, which is physical seclusion, chitta viveka, which is seclusion of the mind, mental seclusion, and upadi viveka, which is ethical seclusion. Very, very interesting. Here's a line from one of the suitors from the sutinyapata, from the goohatoga sutta translators. A person sunk in confusion is far from seclusion. Then from number seven, somebody says to the Buddha, "Having heard your teaching will train in seclusion." So there's a training in seclusion. Then from number ten, the poor abheda sutta, free from attachment with regard to the future, not soloing over the past, he sees seclusion in the midst of sensory contacts. This is fascinating, he sees seclusion viveka in the midst of sensory contact. Later in the tradition, you get the idea of the twelve midanas going round the wheel of life. And three of them are contact, sense contact, that is, including the mind, leads to feeling. Feeling leads to craving. So you could say here, when the Buddha says he sees seclusion in the midst of sensory contacts, viveka is the gap between feeling and craving. You could say viveka is that gap, that open space, that awareness, that discrimination of thought perhaps, that non-distractedness, that singleness of heart. Kia Kigard wrote a very famous book called Purity of Heart is to Will One Thing. Purity of heart is to want one thing, non-distractedness. I've been very inspired these last couple of weeks when I've been thinking about the sutta nipata with this idea of viveka, bringing viveka into everything I do when I'm in contact with people, bringing this sense of seclusion, this sense of space, this sense of openness within my sense of contacts. I would say viveka is the closest we get to in the Pali Canon to what Sankarachta Banti is trying to get at when he talks about individuality or the true individual. For many, many years I've been thinking, well, where do you get this teaching of the true individual in the Pali Canon? Well, in a sense you don't get it actually, but this is about the closest I've come to, seclusion, singleness of heart, discrimination of thought. In fact, viveka is enlightenment. Here's another line from number 14, the Tuvatica Suta. I ask the king's man of the sun, the Buddha, the great seer, about seclusion and the state of peace. Now, I said earlier that the state of peace was enlightenment, but here, so is seclusion. Seclusion is, in fact, enlightenment. And remember, the first jyana is said to be born of seclusion. Now, I always used to think that meant that you had to go away and be on your own, and it's a secluded place, and it does mean that sometimes, but even more importantly is the state of mind of seclusion. The singleness of heart, which allows the first jyana to arise. Another important strand in the fourth chapter is no views. The wise man has no views. Is a quote. They do not form views. They do not prefer. And connected to having those views is having no disputes. A sage would not engage in disputes with the people. Now, this is interesting. That line I've just read you comes immediately after the verse I read earlier. I read the whole thing. Having abandoned home, living free from society, the sage in villages creates no intimacies, and then comes a sage would not engage in disputes with the people. So, I think the idea here is that views are a form of home. And in the sutani pata, you need to leave the home of your views, the safety of your own views. It's very similar, I think, to a line from the Ratnaguna samsayagata, one of the first of the perfection of wisdom texts, where the Buddha says, without a home they wander. Dhanas never hold them, nor do they grasp at them. Also connected to no views, and therefore no disputes, is this idea of neither being superior, nor inferior, nor even equal to other people. The idea here is that when you have views, you then engage in disputes with other people. You try to show that your view is right and the other person's view is wrong. And if you win the argument, you feel elated, you feel superior. If you lose the argument, you feel depressed, despondent, you feel inferior. So, if you have no views, you don't engage in disputes, you don't even think in those terms of superior, inferior, or even equal. You do not even compare yourself with others, there's no comparisons. So, we usually engage, I think it's true to say, in disputes from egoistic motives. Now, there were about, I think, five suitors all on this idea of not having views and not engaging in disputes. And the teaching seemed to be particularly for bikus. So, the idea we're back to this atadando again, taking up the stick. A bikku has given up physical violence, but they may still engage in violence, as it were, through the mind and the speech. So, you even have to give up that form of violence to defeating others in arguments, becoming defeated in arguments. You have to let that go. A few weeks ago, Sancho Akshta was in Manchester, and he did a question and answer session for order members. And, as I've been looking at these suitors, I asked him about these suitors where the Buddha talks about no views. And I said, do you think that the fourth and fifth chapters of the sutinyapata, well, they're obviously different from many other aspects of the parley canon, where the Buddha talks about the importance of right views. Usually, in the parley canon, the Buddha talks about right views, which then lead to the state of having no views. And Banti said that he thought it was very, very difficult, if not impossible, to move from wrong views to no views. So, you've got on the one side, you've got wrong views. On the other side, you've got right views, and they're in opposition to each other. But to move to the middle way, which is above, to no views, you have to go from wrong views firstly to right views, and that gives you access to wrong views. It's as if right views are on the side of no view. In other words, they're freeing. They free you up to a position whereby you have no views. Wrong views tend to entrap you. Okay, I'm going to read one last section to you. I'm going to read you parts of number 10, the Purabheda Sutta, and here is another important strand in the fourth chapter. Here, somebody asks the Buddha, seeing how, behaving how, is one said to be at peace. In other words, what's it like to be enlightened? And the Buddha gives a fairly long reply. And in a way, Sadatissa entitles this sutta, qualities of the mooning, qualities of the sage. And I think he's quite right. This is a kind of description of what it's like to be enlightened. It's an early budhanu sati. It's an early recollection of the Buddha's qualities. And if you recollect these qualities, if you recite them to yourself over and over again and open yourself up to them, you become like that. You take on those qualities. You become more and more like the mooning, the Buddha. So, seeing how, behaving how, is one said to be at peace. Without anger, without trembling, not boasting, without remorse, speaking intelligently, unperturbed, he indeed is a sage of restrained speech. Free from attachment with regard to the future, not grieving over the past, he sees seclusion in the midst of sensory contacts. He can't be led in terms of views, withdrawn, not deceitful, not covetous, not avaricious, not insolent, not offensive. He does not engage in divisive speech, not intoxicated with enticements, nor given to pride. He's gentle, quick-witted. He neither attaches himself nor makes an effort to detach himself. So, here's a line which is very similar to some of the perfection of wisdom teachings. He neither attaches himself nor makes an effort to detach himself. Another translator translates this line up as he is not impassioned or dispassioned. This is very interesting because usually the path moves from knowledge and vision of things as they really are to dispassion. But here, he is not impassioned or dispassioned. He reminds me of another line from the Sudataka Sutra. He is not impassioned by passion. He is not attached to the passionless. Or come laterless. Not in hopes of material gain does he take on the training. When, without material gain, he isn't upset. He is not opposed to craving nor is he greedy for flavors. Not opposed to craving. Well, what was the kama-sutra all about then? He is not opposed to craving. Nor is he greedy for flavors. What does this mean? Come back to that. Equanimous always mindful. He doesn't think of himself as equal, superior or inferior in the world. No swillings of pride are his. He for whom there is no state of dependence. When, on knowing the dharma, he is independent. In whom, no craving is found for becoming or not becoming. Indifferent to sensual pleasures. Actually, the word "indifferent" is a translation of upeka. So you could just as easily say "equanimous" towards sensual pleasures. He is said to be at peace. With nothing at all to tie him down. One who's crossed over attachment. He has no children. No cattle. No fields. No land. In him, you can't pin down what's embraced or rejected. Very interesting is it neither embraced nor rejected. Another possible translation of that line is, in him, you can't pin down what's self or opposed to self. So far then we've had, he neither attaches himself nor makes an effort to detach himself or the other translation. He is not impassioned nor dispassioned. We've had, he is not opposed to craving nor is he greedy for flavours. In him, you can't pin down what's embraced or rejected or what's self or opposed to self. So these teachings, although many of them are very down to earth, dualistic teachings, do this, don't do that, don't crave, don't get attached, etc. Some of them are very subtle. Some of them you could say are non-dual teachings. Usually we think of right view and wrong view. You have to go from wrong view to right view. Here, no views. Attachment, detachment are opposites. Throughout most of this text, they are seen as opposites. Attachment, you get rid of and you go to detachment. But here in this text, the Buddha is neither attached nor makes an effort to detach himself. Same with passion, dispassion, same with craving, not craving, etc. And it reminds me of another line in the Ratnaguna Samtyaigata, change and no change. Suffering and happiness. The self and not self. The lovely and repulsive. Just one suchness in this emptiness they are. But I think an easy way of understanding this is that you've got opposites. You've got wrong views, right views, craving, no craving, etc. And the Buddhist way is to go from one opposite to the other. From craving to the state of no craving. Before you reach the state of Buddhahood where craving is no longer a problem. Think of chocolate. Let's say you're one of those kinds of people and there are those kinds of people in the world who have to have chocolate every day. I met someone just not too long ago where she said I have to have some chocolate every day. Just imagine you're like that. And you want to free yourself of the craving of chocolate. So you stop eating chocolate. Well for a few weeks and months you're going to be thinking about chocolate. You're going to be opposed to chocolate. You're going to be in a kind of a battle with chocolate. But after a while if you persist your cravings for chocolate die away. And then you become someone who is not opposed to chocolate. Someone who neither likes chocolate nor dislikes chocolate. So I think that's the way we can understand these texts. The Buddha wants us to be happy. And the way to do that is to go from craving to non-craving. And at first there's a battle. It's difficult. It's hard. But eventually we get to the state of peace, the state of Kmar which is safety and peace. So I'm just going to read you the last few lines of the text. Then I'm going to finish. And I think I said already that I don't like applause didn't I? Did I say that in the beginning? Okay so we'll just finish with the Buddhist words. That on account of which the common people and ascetics and brahmines might accuse him. He's not preferred by him. Therefore he is not agitated in the midst of their accusations. For whom nothing in the world is his own. Who doesn't grieve over what is not. Who doesn't enter into things. He is said to be at peace.
