Volumes:  1    2    3    4    5    6    7      Contents     Exhortation    previous    next     
 

 

The Way to Shamatha

VOLUME 1, Chapter 5

 

N2 Ananda attaches to the mind as being outside the body.
O1 Ananda presents the analogy of the lamp and determines it is the same as the Buddha’s meaning.

Sutra:

Ananda bowed his head and said to the Buddha, “Upon hearing such a dharma-sound as the Tathagata has proclaimed, I realize that my mind is actually outside my body.

Commentary:

Ananda’s argument that the mind is inside the body did not hold up. Shakyamuni Buddha jolted him out of his folly and destroyed his position. And so Ananda, who was well versed in etiquette, bowed his head, which means he prostrated himself, and said to the Buddha, “Upon hearing such a dharma-sound as the Tathagata has proclaimed, I realize that my mind is actually outside my body.” “My mind is not in my body! It has run outside. I’m sure that’s where it is!” exclaims Ananda. One doesn’t know when his mind ran outside, but now he suddenly says that’s where it is.

Sutra:

”Why? For example, a lamp alight in a room will certainly illumine the inside of the room first, and only then will it pour through the doorway to reach the recesses of the hall. For all living beings who do not see within their bodies but only see outside them, it is as if the lighted lamp were placed outside the room, so that it cannot illumine the room.

Commentary:

Why? Why do I say my mind has run outside? For example, a lamp alight in a room will certainly illumine the inside of the room first, and only then will it pour through the doorway to reach the recesses of the hall. If my mind were inside,” Ananda reasons, “I would certainly be able to see what is happening inside my body, in the same way that a lamp inside a room will certainly light up the room.”

For all living beings who do not see within their bodies but only see outside them, it is as if the lighted lamp were placed outside the room, so that it cannot illumine the room. The Buddha pointed out that one cannot see one’s heart, liver, spleen, and stomach, and so Ananda concludes that the mind is outside, just like the lighted lamp outside the room. It is outside so one cannot see things inside.

Sutra:

”This principle is certainly clear: it is absolutely beyond all doubt and exactly the Buddha’s entire meaning, and so it isn’t wrong is it?”

Commentary:

This principle is certainly clear. This doctrine I have presented is certainly correct,” Ananda states emphatically. It is absolutely beyond all doubt. Ananda passes judgement in advance. There’s no question about it; it is exactly the Buddha’s entire meaning. “My argument is the same as the Buddha’s complete meaning. I couldn’t make a mistake. It isn’t just my idea. I believe the Buddha will agree, won’t he? It isn’t wrong is it?” In fact, Ananda is still not positive. “I’m pretty sure this is not wrong.”

O2 The Tathagata refutes by using the mutual awareness of body and mind.
P1 The analogy makes clear there would be no connection.


Sutra:

The Buddha said to Ananda, “All these bhikshus who just followed me to the city of Shravasti to beg in sequence for food have returned to the Jeta Grove and are rolling their food into balls as they eat. I have already finished eating, but consider the bhikshus: when one person eats, does everyone get full?”

Ananda answered, “No, World Honored One. Why? These bhikshus are arhats, but their individual lives differ. How could one person’s eating cause everyone to be full?”

Commentary:

Ananda felt certain that the Buddha would agree that the mind is outside. Who would have suspected that the Buddha wouldn’t even consider the proposal? The Buddha said to Ananda, “All these bhikshus who just followed me to the city of Shravasti to beg in sequence for food have returned to the Jeta Grove and are rolling their food into balls as they eat.” They begged from house to house and then returned to the grove of trees donated by Prince Jeta. In India they ate by picking up pieces of food in their hands and rolling them into balls, and so this is how the Buddha and his disciples ate. In present-day Burma, bowls are used, but those who have left the home-life still eat their vegetables and rice with their right hand, without using a spoon or chopsticks. They take a piece of food in their hand and roll it over and over. Then they eat it. Eating this way is very appetizing to them, though whether it is ultimately very appetizing I don’t know, since I’ve never tried it.

 I have already finished eating, but consider the bhikshus: when one person eats, does everyone get full? I have eaten my fill, but take a look at the assembly: some bhikshus have not finished eating. Now if just one person eats, can the rest get full?

If there is any doubt about this principle, we can try it out ourselves tomorrow. Just serve me food, and all of you can look on while I eat, and you can see if you get full. That will prove the principle found in the sutra.

Ananda answered, “No, World Honored One. Why?” Having answered in the negative, Ananda was afraid the Buddha might not understand, so he proceeded to give the Buddha a commentary. “Why do I say they can’t get full? These bhikshus are arhats, but their individual lives differ. Although they have become enlightened and they all have spiritual penetrations, still their bodies are not the same. Their appearances, their faces, are all different. If they were all one, then when one ate, all would get full, but they are not one; each has his own individual life. So how could one person’s eating cause everyone to be full? Therefore, I say there is no such principle.”

Sutra:

The Buddha told Ananda, “If your mind which understands, knows, sees and is aware were actually outside your body, your body and mind would be mutually exclusive and would have no relationship to one another. The body would be unaware of what the mind perceives, and the mind would not perceive the awareness within the body.

Commentary:

The Buddha told Ananda, “If your mind which understands, knows, sees and is aware were actually outside your body, your body and mind would be mutually exclusive and would have no relationship to one another.”
If the mind which has awareness, which calculates, which discriminates, and which has knowledge and views were outside the body, then there would be no connection between the two. They’d have parted ways; they wouldn’t reside together. Your body would be your body; your mind would be your mind, and your mind would be apart from your body. “You pay no attention to my business,” they’d say, “and I won’t pay attention to yours.” The body would be unaware of what the mind perceives, and the mind would not perceive the awareness within the body. The body would not be aware of the mind or influenced by it, and if your awareness was within the body, the mind wouldn’t know about it.

P2 Investigation shows there is a connection.

Sutra:

”Now as I show you my tula-cotton hand, does your mind distinguish it when your eyes see it?”
Ananda answered, “So it is, World Honored One.”

The Buddha told Ananda, “If the mind and eyes create a common perception, how then can the mind be outside?

Commentary:

The Buddha’s hands are extremely soft and supple, like cotton. Now I will relate a point of physiognomy. If you rub someone’s hand and find it to be as soft as cotton, that person has a promising future and will eventually be honorable. Ordinary people’s hands are very stiff. I know my hands, for example, are as stiff as a board, not soft like cotton. However, soft hands do not necessarily indicate a great future. The countenance is equally important in this matter. Are the features heroic? Is the person’s appearance powerful?

In general, women’s hands are far softer than men’s. If you don’t believe it, you can notice next time you have occasion to shake hands with a woman. As for men, I have met only two whose hands were extremely soft. However, during the time I knew them neither one of them displayed signs of greatness. Their appearances didn’t match up. I have one disciple with extremely soft hands - he had never done any physical labor, but he is also very ordinary. A fellow student of mine, who was also a relative, also had extremely soft hands, but before I came to America he had not done anything of great importance, and I don’t know if he has accomplished anything since then.

The Buddha told Ananda, “Now as I show you my tula-cotton hand, does your mind distinguish it when your eyes see it? When your eyes see it, does your mind make a distinction that my hand is a tula-cotton hand?”

Ananda answered, “So it is, World Honored One.” Yes. My eyes see it and my mind distinguishes it. My mind makes a discrimination of fondness. “Ah,” it says, “the Buddha’s tula-cotton hand is the very finest. This is one of the thirty-two hallmarks of the Tathagata.”

The Buddha told Ananda, “If the mind and eyes create a common perception, how then can the mind be outside?” If your mind knows what your eyes see, how can you say that your mind is outside your body? If it were outside, how could it perceive what the eyes see? Note, though, the Buddha does not say that the mind is inside. It has already been made clear that that too, is a mistake.

P3 Concluding refutation.

Sutra:

”Therefore you should know you state the impossible when you say that the mind which knows, understands, and is aware is outside the body.”

Commentary:

Since Ananda’s argument that the mind is inside the body did not hold up, he revised his contention to say that the mind is outside the body. The World Honored One has used all kinds of analogies to instruct him, but unfortunately Ananda only knows how to analyze the Buddhadharma by means of his conscious mind, which is subject to production and extinction. He does not perceive the pure nature and bright substance of the everlasting true mind. So the Buddha once again gives Ananda his critique: “Therefore you should know you state the impossible when you say that the mind which knows, understands, and is aware is outside the body. You were wrong,” the Buddha says. The mind which calculates and understands is not outside your body. Do you understand? You have made a mistake.

N3 Ananda attaches to the mind’s being hidden in the eyes.
O1 Ananda uses the analogy of crystals covering the eyes.


Sutra:

Ananda said to the Buddha, “World Honored One, it is as the Buddha has said, since I cannot see inside, my mind does not reside in the body. Since my body and mind have a common awareness, they are not separate and so my mind does not dwell outside my body. As I now consider it, I know it is in a certain place.”

Commentary:

Ananda considered: here it is again. It is just because he keeps considering that he makes mistakes. Ananda said to the Buddha, “World Honored One, it is as the Buddha has said.” Ananda says, “I followed the Buddha to leave the home-life and I listen to the Buddha’s teaching, including the doctrine the Buddha has just spoken, those proclamations of the dharma-sound. Since I cannot see inside, my mind does not reside in the body. If the mind were inside the body, I’d be able to see my heart, liver, spleen, lungs, and kidneys, the five viscera. Since my body and mind have a common awareness, they are not separate and so my mind does not dwell outside my body. The Buddha now says it is not outside. As I now consider it, I know it is in a certain place. Now I have another thought. Outside is not correct, inside is not correct, therefore it has to be in a certain particular place.”

Sutra:

The Buddha said, “Now where is it?”

Ananda said, “Since the mind which knows and understands does not perceive what is inside but can see outside, upon reflection I believe it is concealed in the organ of vision.

Commentary:

The Buddha said, “Now where is it?
Ah, you say it is in a certain place. What place? Where is your mind? Hurry up and tell me.” That’s how he questioned him.

Ananda said, “Since the mind which knows and understands does not perceive what is inside but can see outside, upon reflection I believe…” Before, he said, “As I now consider it,” and here again he says, “Upon reflection.” It’s still his conscious mind at work. Consideration and reflection both make use of the conscious mind, the mind subject to production and extinction. What is his reflection? The mind is concealed in the organ of vision. The organ of vision refers to the eye. It is hidden away there, Ananda says. The mind was stashed there where no one could see it. That.s what is meant by “concealed.”

The Buddha doesn’t reply to this right away. In fact the sutra text leaves you in suspense for a while. Today I heard someone say that he didn’t understand the sutra. To say nothing of your not understanding, Ananda himself didn’t understand at this point. You have to listen to the entire sutra; then you will come to understand. If you haven’t heard it completely, how could you be expected to understand? Of course you don’t understand. Why would you want to listen to sutras in the first place if you already understood them? You shouldn’t say, “I don’t understand what is being said so I’ll stop listening.” It’s just because you don’t understand that you should listen.

Sutra:

”For example, when someone places crystal bowls over his eyes, the bowls cover his eyes but do not obstruct his vision. The organ of vision is thus able to see, and discriminations are made accordingly.

Commentary:

Ananda gives the Buddha an example to explain his new contention. When someone places crystal bowls over his eyes, the bowls cover his eyes but do not obstruct his vision. Actually there is no such person, but Ananda invents someone who puts on eyeglasses - that is what is meant here. In the Buddha’s day they were called crystal bowls. The glasses cover the eyes, but this does not stop the eyes from seeing out. In Ananda’s analogy, the mind is represented by the eyes, and the eyes, where Ananda contends the mind is hidden, are represented by the glasses. Our mind, Ananda contends, is hidden in our eyes, but this does not stop our mind from seeing out.

The organ of vision is thus able to see, and discriminations are made accordingly. That is, as soon as you see, your mind knows it. Discrimination takes place in the organ of vision, where, Ananda says, the mind is hidden. “This time the doctrine I have expressed is the right one,” Ananda says. He still considers himself to be very intelligent. “See how smart I am? I have an answer for everything the Buddha asks me.” Why does Ananda keep making mistakes? It is because he uses the mind subject to production and extinction. No matter what the circumstance is, he always uses his thought-processes to consider it from each side.

His considerations are grounded in the thoughts of his consciousness, and he recognizes the consciousness to be the true mind. He doesn’t know that the “true mind” neither exists nor does not exist, and that the true mind is the nature. He is like one who gets off on the wrong road, and the farther he goes, the more he has lost his way, and the more he has lost his way the more he thinks he’s on the right road. So now he brings up yet another analogy for the Buddha to pass judgement on.

Sutra:

”And so my mind which knows, understands, and is aware does not see within because it resides in the organ. It can gaze outside clearly, without obstruction for the same reason: it is concealed in the organ.”

Commentary:

”And so
refers to the doctrine he was just explaining. My mind which knows, understands, and is aware does not see within because it resides in the organ. Why can’t I see inside my body? It’s because my mind is in my eyes. It can gaze outside clearly, without obstruction for the same reason: it is concealed in the organ. Why can I see outside but not inside? It is because my mind, which also refers to vision, the power of seeing, is concealed in the eye. So there is no obstruction when I look outside.” Whether Ananda is right in his theory will become clear in the following passages.

O2 The Buddha uses dharma to show the analogy is not apt.
P1 He discusses its aptness.


Sutra:

The Buddha said to Ananda, “Assuming that it is concealed in the organ, as you assert in your analogy of the crystals: if someone were to cover his eyes with the crystals and look at the mountains and rivers, would he see the crystals as well?”

”Yes, World Honored One, if a person were to cover his eyes with the crystals, he would in fact see the crystals.”

Commentary:

Having heard Ananda use the analogy of the crystals, the Buddha said to Ananda, “Assuming that it is concealed in the organ, as you assert in your analogy of the crystals: Suppose it is the way you explain it,” the Buddha says, “and the mind is concealed in the organ. If someone were to cover his eyes with the crystals and look at the mountains and rivers, would he see the crystals as well? When the person in your analogy puts on his glasses in order to see, and he takes a look at the mountains, rivers, and the vast expanse of earth, does he see his glasses?”

Yes, World Honored One, if a person were to cover his eyes with the crystals, he would in fact see the crystals. When someone wears glasses, he sees the mountains, rivers, the vast expanse of earth, and he also sees the glasses.” That is what the Buddha asked Ananda and how Ananda answered him.

Sutra:

The Buddha said to Ananda, “If your mind is analogous to the eyes covered with crystals, then when you see the mountains and rivers, why don’t you see your eyes?

Commentary:

The Buddha said to Ananda,
“You put on glasses and can see the mountains, rivers, and the vast expanse of earth, and you can also see the glasses. If your mind is analogous to the eyes covered with crystals: if your mind dwells within your organ of vision, then your eyes are like the glasses in the analogy. So when your mind looks at the mountains, rivers, and the great expanse of earth, then when you see the mountains and rivers, why don’t you see your eyes?”

Someone will say, “I see my eyes.”

I also see my eyes - if I look in a mirror. If you could see your own eyes simply by turning your light back to reflect upon yourself, then the Buddha’s argument here wouldn’t work. But the flesh eyes of an ordinary person cannot see themselves. And although Ananda had attained the first stage of arhatship, his flesh eyes could not look into his own eyes either.

So the Buddha asks him, “You made up the analogy for the mind being hidden in the eyes, like eyes covered with glasses, didn’t you? So your eyes would be like the crystals in the analogy and since you say you can see the crystals, then why can’t you see your own eyes at this very moment?” That is what the Buddha asked him.

P2 Both possibilities explored and refuted.

Sutra:

”If you could see your eyes, your eyes would be part of the external environment. If you cannot see them, why did you say that the mind which understands, knows, and is aware is concealed in the organ of vision as eyes are covered by crystals?

Commentary:

Shakyamuni Buddha questioned him further: If you could see your eyes, your eyes would be part of the external environment. It has already been made clear that Ananda does not see his eyes, but the Buddha was concerned that Ananda would become so confused that he’d contend he could see his own eyes. So the Buddha points out that if Ananda could see his eyes, that would mean his eyes would be outside of him and not part of his body. And thus the organ of vision would not be able to see. You couldn’t say, as you just did, that “the organ of vision is thus able to see, and discriminations are made accordingly.”

If you cannot see them, why did you say that the mind which understands, knows, and is aware is concealed in the organ of vision as eyes are covered by crystals? If you cannot see your eyes, then how can you contend that your mind is hidden in your organ of vision the way eyes are covered by glasses? Your analogy of the crystals doesn’t hold up. It too is incorrect.

P3 The concluding refutation.

Sutra:

”Therefore you should know that you state the impossible when you say that the mind which knows, understands, and is aware is concealed in the organ of vision in the way that the eyes are covered by crystals.”

Commentary:

Therefore
- because of the doctrine explained above - you should know that you state the impossible when you say that the mind which knows, understands, and is aware is concealed in the organ of vision in the way that the eyes are covered by crystals. To say that the aware and knowing mind is hidden in the eye is incorrect. Your doctrine is not right. You are wrong again.

previous    next    Contents

Volume 1 pages:  1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9    10    11    12    13    14    15    16

17    18    19    20    21    22    23    24    25    26

return to top