The Buddha's First Sermon (sutra)

Dhr. Seven, Wisdom Quarterly translation (Dhammachakapavattana Sutra, SN 56.11)

(My-Third-Eye/flickr.com)

PREFACE: Seven weeks after the great enlightenment, the former ascetic Prince Siddhartha, now the fully awakened Buddha, set out to teach his five former companions. He realized that they were still stuck in the futility of struggling by severe asceticism near India' holy city on the Ganges, Varanasi. He had previously practiced with them undertaking the most extreme penances and painful observances. He abandoned this well worn path to "spirituality" when he realized it would never lead to awakening to the Truth and liberation from all suffering. He discovered that cultivating absorptions and insight (jhana and vipassana) through proper concentration and mindfulness (samma samadhi and samma sati). In this sutra the Buddha sets in motion the Wheel of the Truth (the essential limbs, or spokes, of which lead to the hub of nirvana). This is the True Wheel, the path to the liberation he had experienced seven weeks earlier.

 

The Buddha addresses the Group of Five

SARNATH, India - Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was in Varanasi at the Resort of Seers (Isipatana) in the Deer Park. There he addressed the group of five ascetics.

  

"Recluses, these two extremes should be abandoned by anyone who has gone forth from household life. What two?

   

"There is devotion to indulgence, coarse pleasures associated with sensual desire, which is inferior, base, vulgar, ignoble, and leads to disappointment on the one hand, and on the other hand there is devotion to asceticism, which is just the same.

  

"The middle way discovered by [me] avoids both extremes. This path leads to vision, knowledge, peace, direct experience, discovery, to nirvana (final liberation). What middle way? 

  

"It is this ennobling Eightfold Path, namely:

1. right view
2. right intention
3. right speech
4. right action
5. right livelihood
6. right effort
7. right mindfulness
8. right concentration.

The Four Noble Truths

I. "Disappointment as an Ennobling Truth is this: Birth is disappointing as are aging, sickness, death, association with the unpleasant, dissociation from the pleasant, not getting what one wants is disappointing -- in brief, the Five Aggregates of Clinging are disappointing.

II. "The origin of disappointment as an Ennobling Truth is this: Craving produces renewal of being [rebirth] accompanied by enjoyment and lust and delighting in this and that. What craving? Craving for sensual desires, craving for [eternal] existence, and craving for nonexistence.

  

III. "Cessation of disappointment as an ennobling truth is this: It is remainderless fading and ceasing, letting go, relinquishing, rejecting and abandoning of such craving.

   

IV. "The path leading to the cessation of disappointment as an ennobling truth is this: It is this ennobling Eightfold Path...

  

"'Disappointment as an ennobling truth is this.' Such was the knowing-and-seeing (knowledge and vision of the Dharma), understanding, discovery, the light that arose in regard to things never heard by me before. 'Disappointment as an ennobling truth can be diagnosed.' Such was the knowing-and-seeing, understanding, discovery, the light that arose in regard to things never heard by me before. 'Disappointment as an ennobling truth has been diagnosed.' Such was the knowing-and-seeing, understanding, discovery, the light that arose in regard to things never heard by me before.

  

"'The origin of disappointment as an ennobling truth is this.' Such was the knowing-and seeing... 'This origin of disappointment as an ennobling truth can be abandoned.' Such was the knowing-and-seeing... 'This origin of disappointment as an ennobling truth has been abandoned.' Such was the knowing-and-seeing... in regard to things never heard by me before.

  

"'The cessation of disappointment as an ennobling truth is this.' Such was the knowing-and-seeing... 'This cessation of disappointment as an ennobling truth can be verified.' Such was the knowing-and-seeing... 'The cessation of disappointment as an ennobling truth has been verified.' Such was the knowing-and-seeing... in regard to things never heard by me before.

  

"'The way leading to the cessation of disappointment as an ennobling truth is this.' Such was the knowing-and-seeing... 'The way leading to the cessation of disappointment as an ennobling truth can be developed.' Such was the knowing-and-seeing... 'The way leading to the cessation of disappointment as an ennobling truth has been developed.' Such was the vision... in regard to things never heard by me before.

  

"As long as my knowing-and-seeing of things just as they are was not purified with regard to these 12 aspects, in three phases for each of these Four Noble Truths, I did not claim in this world with its light beings (devas), its killers (maras), its creatives (brahmas), in this generation with its wandering ascetics (recluses) and Brahmin priests, with its princes and people to have discovered the supreme enlightenment.

  

"But as soon as my knowing-and-seeing of things just as they are was purified with regard to these 12 aspects, in the three phases for each of these Four Noble Truths, then did I claim in this world... to have discovered the supreme enlightenment. Knowledge and vision arose in me: 'My heart's deliverance is assured. This is my last birth. Now there is to be no renewal of being.'"

  

That is what the Blessed One said. The group of five were glad, and they approved of his words.

   

Now during this teaching there arose in the ascetic Kondañña the purified and stainless vision of the Truth: "Whatever is subject to arising is also subject to falling away."

   

Word Spreads Fast

Our 10,000-fold world-system

When the Wheel of Truth had been set rolling by the Buddha, the earthbound devas raised this cry: "At Varanasi, at the Deer Park in the Resort of Seers, the matchless Wheel of Truth has been set rolling by the Blessed One, not to be stopped by any recluse or deity, death-angel or divinity, or anyone in the world!"

  

On hearing the earthbound devas' cry, the devas inhabiting the six celestial paradises in space within the Sensual Sphere took up the cry until it reached beyond Great Brahma's Retinue in the Fine-Material Sphere. So indeed at that hour, at that very moment, the cry soared up to the World of Great Brahma. And this 10,000-fold world-system shook and quaked, and an unbounded radiance surpassing the very nature of the light beings was displayed throughout this entire world-system.

  

Then the Buddha exclaimed: "Kondañña knows! Kondañña knows!" And that is how that venerable one acquired the name Añña-Kondañña -- "Kondañña Who Knows."

• India's return to Riot Politics in Assam
• India resorts to Chinese-style Internet censorship
• Burma gives up China and India's Web censorship

Read More

The Dharma Police

There is a post over at my friend Kyle's new blog about the precepts. I posted a comment, which I wanted to turn into a post of my own here about the subject because it is one that interests me a lot. I firmly believe that one can still drink a beer now and then and still be a very good, kind and serious Buddhist. As well as still take the precepts seriously. I aspire to lose weight but I still eat a cookie now and then. Does that mean all my efforts to eat healthy the rest of the time a waste and insincere? Of course not. Not everyone is able to commit to the precepts completely. So is it fair to say people who don't steal, kill, misuse sex or lie but do drink or smoke a cigar or even a joint from time to time aren't serious Buddhist practitioners??? They may not be eligible for monk hood but how many of us can say that anyway?

If someone isn't ready to give up alcohol completely then leave them be. Wouldn't it be better to encourage their Buddhist practice in other ways where the are making progress? Rather than say it's black and white and since you still drink or smoke you're not a sincere Buddhist? To do so isn't realistic, compassionate and in fact it's hypocritical. How about not eating meat? I keep all the precepts quite well except for the occasional drink, cigar or joint. Yet someone else might keep them all except still eat meat, which in my view isn't in keeping with the first precept of not killing. However, I would never call someone who does eat meat an "insincere" or "bad Buddhist." I have no moral ground to stand on to make such an accusation nor do many in the Buddhist community.

Personally, I dislike eating meat, however, I don't jump into someone else's underwear to chastise them for eating meat. It's none of my business and I know I don't like people being the "Dharma Police" with me. So if we're going to play Dharma Police then pray tell me, which of the two people is a "better Buddhist?" The non-meat eater of the non-intoxicant taker? Neither. We all have struggles with at least one of the precepts. Except maybe the Dalai Lama but even many monks I'm sure can't keep them all. We need to remember that none of us are living how we should because if we were we won't be here in samsara right now. I do think the precepts are good and helpful but they are not commandments except perhaps for monks. Rather they are recommendations on how best to live so that we reduce suffering as much as possible.

The foundation of the fifth precept is about intoxication and not everyone who has a beer or two after work get intoxicated. Not everyone drinks to the point of acting like a fool and in a headless manner. Yes, it's true that it has that potential but there is such a thing as moderation and the majority of people who drink, smoke a cigar or joint do so responsibly. The other issue at hand here is that not everyone's body is the same. Some people can't ingest these substances without doing it to excess, however, many can handle them without acting stupidly. For example, I am able to drink or smoke a joint without going crazy. However, I know that caffeine is one substance that I can't ingest much because the caffeine can increase my bouts of mania or actually trigger one to where I get anxious to the point of real suffering.

So, I stay away from caffeine for the most part but do I condemn the thousands of monks and millions of practitioners who drink tea or coffee? Of course not--It's not my business nor do I believe responsible use of such substances is always bad or a hindrance to our practice. Caffeine is very much an intoxicant and addictive if misused yet traditionally Buddhists not only don't add it to the intoxicant list; It's encouraged to stay alert and awake for meditation. Drugs are drugs so if we're going to condemn people who drink alcohol or smoke marijuana then we need to say the same for caffeine drinkers. If you have a problem with a substance then don't ingest it and get help if you need it. However, not everyone who ingests these things is doing them irresponsibly or dangerously.

And what about people who over-eat, which is damaging their body to the point of risking heart disease, high cholesterol, high blood pressure and obesity, which can all be deadly. Food can be an intoxicant because chocolate for example is stimulant with all the sugar in it. Excessive sugar intake can cause diabetes, which is another serious and harmful disease, which like heart disease, etc. causes people a lot of suffering. Yet who amongst us would frown upon obese people from attentinding sangha or trying to practice the Dharma to the best of their abilities? Wouldn't it be better to see people find relief in the Dharma even if it's not total relief than compeltely alienate them by comdeming them and calling them insincere, irresponsible or immoral Buddhists???

It's not realistic or our place to say people don't take the precepts seriously if they can't keep all of them 100% of the time but have a weakness with one or two of them. Even if you think it's a "sin" I would remind you of what Jesus said to the crowd quick to stone a woman who, "sinned" "He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone." If we are following them as best we can but still falling short like most of us then how can we not be sincere Buddhists? Who can say that they honestly keep them all at every moment of every day? None of us. I'm not encouraging killing by any means but even murderers aren't turned away from the Dharma while they serve their sentence for their crime. There are prison sanghas who embrace these folks. Yet who would call their interest in the Dharma "insincere?" Who wants to cast the first stone? I bet we could look into your life and find some stuff that you're not proud of or that would be objectionable to someone.

If you're not keeping each one of those precepts all the time then you don't have a leg to stand on when being so harsh toward others. Why not spend our time bolstering each other's practice and finding where we can come together and inspire each other rather than going around and keeping track of who's "sincere" and who isn't based on how they live their life? If the precepts were to be followed by the letter of the law then they'd be commandments. We all have to be careful not to think we're squeaky clean when it comes to our behavior. Even IF you keep all the precepts all the time I can assure you that you're doing something else that isn't "Buddha-like." Or will do something like that at some point between now and when you die. If you were doing everything, "right" then you'd be enlightened on the edge of never being reborn. I doubt many of us are in THAT boat. At least those who might not be perfect in your eyes have found the Dharma in the first place, which while they might realize enlightenment in this life at least they are trying their best to better themselves.

We all do what we can and it's not our job to question the sincerity of others unless we're enlightened like Buddha. At the same time I think it's admirable that many keep the alcohol and intoxicant precept. Just don't get too holier-than-thou about it all or I might rescind my admiration. Ha!! The reason that I think that the precepts are recommendations is in part because Buddha knew that not everyone could keep them but he didn't want to turn people away from his teachings that would bring them relief from suffering regardless. Perhaps keeping the precepts 100% and 100% of the time is the ideal and something we should all aspire to. However, moderation is a key in Buddhism too. Buddhism doesn't require us to be perfect nor does it say the asceticism of completely giving up worldly pleasures is skillful either. Buddha taught moderation and those of us who do still enjoy some worldly pleasures should at least get some credit for doing it in moderation rather than condemned as "faux Buddhists" or whatever else nonsense might be said about us. Let's just try and be more kind and compassionate toward each other. We're all doing our best.

~Peace to all beings~

Read More