agga: Pairs1. Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with an impure mind a person speaks or acts suffering follows him like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox.
2. Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with a pure mind a person speaks or acts happiness follows him like his never-departing shadow.
3. "He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred.
4. "He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred.
5. Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.
6. There are those who do not realize that one day we all must die. But those who do realize this settle their quarrels.
7. Just as a storm throws down a weak tree, so does Mara overpower the man who lives for the pursuit of pleasures, who is uncontrolled in his senses, immoderate in eating, indolent, and dissipated. 1
8. Just as a storm cannot prevail against a rocky mountain, so Mara can never overpower the man who lives meditating on the impurities, who is controlled in his senses, moderate in eating, and filled with faith and earnest effort. 2
9. Whoever being depraved, devoid of self-control and truthfulness, should don the monk's yellow robe, he surely is not worthy of the robe.
10. But whoever is purged of depravity, well-established in virtues and filled with self-control and truthfulness, he indeed is worthy of the yellow robe.
11. Those who mistake the unessential to be essential and the essential to be unessential, dwelling in wrong thoughts, never arrive at the essential.
12. Those who know the essential to be essential and the unessential to be unessential, dwelling in right thoughts, do arrive at the essential.
13. Just as rain breaks through an ill-thatched house, so passion penetrates an undeveloped mind.
14. Just as rain does not break through a well-thatched house, so passion never penetrates a well-developed mind.
15. The evil-doer grieves here and hereafter; he grieves in both the worlds. He laments and is afflicted, recollecting his own impure deeds.
16. The doer of good rejoices here and hereafter; he rejoices in both the worlds. He rejoices and exults, recollecting his own pure deeds.
17. The evil-doer suffers here and hereafter; he suffers in both the worlds. The thought, "Evil have I done," torments him, and he suffers even more when gone to realms of woe.
18. The doer of good delights here and hereafter; he delights in both the worlds. The thought, "Good have I done," delights him, and he delights even more when gone to realms of bliss.
19. Much though he recites the sacred texts, but acts not accordingly, that heedless man is like a cowherd who only counts the cows of others — he does not partake of the blessings of the holy life.
20. Little though he recites the sacred texts, but puts the Teaching into practice, forsaking lust, hatred, and delusion, with true wisdom and emancipated mind, clinging to nothing of this or any other world — he indeed partakes of the blessings of a holy life.
Notes:
Â
This is one of the better known sutras, I think. I've read it before, superficially, thinking of it as a series of counsels of perfection, more or less unrelated to each other. Upon reflection, though, I think there's a much clearer rhetorical plan to this sutra.
I think the first two verses are key:Â Nothing can be accomplished, the Buddha says, without reforming our mind.
What is our mind, from a Buddhist perspective? I like the formulation in Thich Nhat Hanh's book Understanding Our Mind:Â Mind is a field in which every kind of seed is sown -- seeds of enlightenment, but also seeds of suffering. The seeds are sown by our genetics, by the physical environment in which we develop, and by our social environment as well. What we do with the seeds determines whether we will have (in the words of this sutra) a pure or an impure mind. And this, in turn, determines whether we will experirence happiness or suffering (vs. 1-2.)
Given this framework, the remainder of the sutra goes on to discuss several particularly unwholesome seeds, which can lead to suffering. How do we deal with these unwholesome seeds?
The first seed discussed is hatred (vs. 3-6). If we feel we have been wronged, a seed of hatred will sprout. If we cultivate this seed by dwelling on the wrongs done to us (vs. 3), hatred will grow, further contaminating our mind and increasing suffering. If we do not cultivate the seed (vs. 4), it will not grow. But we have to go further, cultivating the opposing, wholesome seed of non-hatred (vs. 5). How do we do that? Verse 6 suggests that we keep in mind that both we and our enemy are destined to die.
How does that help? Well, in other contexts I've seen two answers to this question. First, recognizing that both of us will die can help us broaden our perspective. In a hundred years, will my grievance really be important? This is a useful thing to think about, not least because occasionally, the answer may be YES! (Think, for instance, of the grievance of African slaves brought to this country against their will and treated as less than human.) In most cases, though, it will be clear that a particular grievance is really not worth continuing to think about.
A second answer is that recognizing our common death can also entail recognizing our common humanity. If we can see that our "enemy" is very much like us, then even if our grievance must be addressed, we have a sane way of thinking about the problem, a basis for approaching our adversary, and a confidence in our own understanding. Without those things, how can anyone resolve their quarrels?
I think I will leave off this discussion for today.
Because I learn from writing as well as reading, I am posting the sutras I'm reading and my thoughts about them here. Because I value the thoughts of my many gather friends, I am allowing limited comments. If you want to comment, please friend me!
Namaste!
Shira
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 16
I wonder if the oldest Buddhist scripts will read the same when (and if) they are translated?
When you say "this one" do you mean the sutra, the sutra collection, or something else?
I'm not sure if this addresses your issue, but I have read that nirvana and samsara are present at every moment, and our perceptions determine which mode we experience. Perhaps all the "realms of being, stages and worlds" are like that as well -- a matter of psychology rather than physics? Not *asserting* that, mind you, just ruminating.
So your take is that "both worlds" are possible at all times?
"The first assurance he has won is this: 'If there is another world, and if good and bad deeds bear fruit and yield results, it is possible that with the breakup of the body, after death, I shall arise in a good destination, in a heavenly world.'
"The second assurance he has won is this: 'If there is no other world, and if good and bad deeds do not bear fruit and yield results, still right here, in this very life, I live happily, free of enmity and ill will.'
"The third assurance he has won is this: 'Suppose evil befalls the evil-doer. Then, as I do not intend evil for anyone, how can suffering afflict me, one who does no evil deed?'
"The fourth assurance he has won is this: 'Suppose evil does not befall the evil-doer. Then right here I see myself purified in both respects.' [In that he does no evil and no evil will befall him.]
Clearly, early Buddhists weren't worried about the idea that the Buddha didn't think an afterlife was a definite fact!
I have no idea if Christians borrowed anything from Buddhists... the separation of time, language and geography makes me suspect not. But I think the idea of life after death can be acquired from experience -- many people feel that the newly dead (especially) are still present. And retribution is a pretty basic part of our psyche. So, my guess (with no real evidence to back it up, just a hunch) is that a retributive afterlife could be developed multiple times.
My current compromise with "traditional" Buddhism is to regard most of the supernatural stuff as psychological. I tend to avoid discussions of this stuff with folks who feel that the supernatural stuff is central. Or if it comes up, I listen and don't talk.
Which I should now do some more of....
41: Meditating on the nature of interdependence
can transform delusion into enlightenment.
Samsara and suchness are not two.
They are one and the same.
TNH's Commentary: When we live in mindfulness, we are able to see the interdependent nature at the heart of things and transform our ignorance into insight. Delusion becomes enlightenment -- we see that what we formerly perceived as samsara is really none other than nirvana, the realm of suchness. Mindfulness of the nature of interdependence is the key to this transformation. (There are a couple of pages more -- I really do recommend the book as an object of meditation.)
In this regard, I think the next verse is also helpful:
42: Even while blooming, the flower is already in the compost,
and the compost is already in the flower.
Flower and compost are not two.
Delusion and enlightenment inter-are.
Do you have an approximate date for this text, Shira? I'm fairly certain it was written at least a century after the birth of Christ. I don't think this text is thought to be "cross-pollinated' with Christianity, but I'm pretty sure that Christianity and Mahayana Buddhism (which came after this) influenced each other.
I don't know if text-critical analysis has been attempted on Buddhist texts. If anyone does know that, I'd be grateful for a citation.