| |
Venerable
Ajahn Sumedho -
Suffering Should Be Welcomed
From a
Dhamma Talk given by Luang Por Sumedho during the Vassa at Amaravati,
2001; Intended for inclusion in a proposed book of his teaching,
Intuitive Awareness.
One of the epithets for the Buddha we chant is lokavidu, knower of the
world. We can see this is a quality of the Buddha. But it is also a way
of reflecting on the world, the situation that we are experiencing now;
that is to reflect on life as it is experienced rather than describing
how life should be. If we're just rationalists then we have theories
about how things should be. But in reflective awareness we're noticing
how things are.
With breathing, we're not saying you should breathe a certain way, that
there's some standard of breathing that is ideal, but rather that
breathing is like this. We can begin to notice the fact that the human
body - this body that we're in with its eyes, ears, nose, tongue, the
body itself - is sensitive and 'sensitivity is like this.' Then we look
inward. What is it like just being sensitive? We're now noticing what it
is to feel, to see, to hear, to smell, to taste or touch, to think, to
remember. We can have ideas about being sensitive, or we can try and
make ourselves insensitive because we see it as a sign of weakness, but
right now we're not placing any judgement on sensitivity rather noticing
'it's like this'.
This is very important to recognise and to know - that the world is the
world. Having a human body is a continuous experience of being
irritated. Consciousness is in a human body which is made up of the four
elements, earth, water, fire and air, from birth to death. From the time
you are born, the moment you're out of your mother's womb, you start
screaming. And impingements keep coming to this sensitive form until it
dies. I encourage you to contemplate this rather than to judge it
according to whatever ideals you might have. This is then called the
state of awakened awareness. To wake up means to know the world as it
is; it's not a judging of the world. When we are coming from ideals,
usually quite high standards of 'if everything were perfect...' then we
have ideas of how countries should be, governments should be, our
parents, partners or whatever should be. But this realm's perfection
doesn't lie in taking conditioned experience to some kind of ideal.
Notice how irritating it is just to be able to see, hear, taste, smell
and touch. There's always something that isn't quite right. It's too
cold or too hot, we have a headache or backache, unwanted noises, odours
and things like this impinge or come in contact with this form, and then
we experience its beauty, its ugliness, pleasure and pain. But even
pleasure is irritating when you think about it. We like pleasure, but
just having a lot of pleasure is also very exhausting and irritating.
This is not a criticism; it's just noticing that, 'having a human body
is like this,' 'breathing is like this,' 'consciousness is like this.'
How sensitive we are just to words and thoughts. We can say things and
upset everybody just through a certain tone of voice, or the use of
certain words can be very distressing. We can remember things of the
past that are pleasant or unpleasant. We can obsess our minds about
things we shouldn't have done in the past; we can feel a lot of guilt
and remorse or self-aversion because of mistakes, failures or unskilful
acts in the past that we remember. We can get really neurotic, because
in the present moment we can be totally obsessed with the thing we
shouldn't have done twenty years ago. We can drop ourselves into real
states of depression and despair.
Some people think it's good kamma to just have an easy ride, to be born
with wealthy parents and high status, a beautiful appearance,
intelligence, an easy life, all the blessings, all the good things. It's
good merit, good parami and all that. But when I look at my own life,
incredible challenges have come to me that have shaken me, that really
upset me, and disappointed me to the point where I have contemplated
suicide - 'I just want to get this over with. I don't want to spend more
and more years in this realm. I can't take it.' But awakening to that I
realised, that I'm quite willing to take what life presents and learn
from it. That's the challenge to see that this is an opportunity that we
have as human beings, as conscious beings. If you put it in the context
of knowing the world as the world, we can take anything. We have
incredible abilities to learn from even the most unfair, miserable,
painful and nasty conditions. These are not the obstructions to
enlightenment; it's whether we awaken or not.
Now the teachings of the Lord Buddha are teachings pointing to this.
They're to awaken you rather than to condition you. We're not trying to
grasp them as doctrinal positions to take, but expedient means to use to
develop awakened awareness, mindfulness and intuition, to not fear
sensitivity, to really open to it. Be fully sensitive rather than trying
to protect yourself endlessly from possible pain or misfortune.
Knowing the world as the world is not a resignation in a negative way -
'Oh, you know how the world is!' - as if it were bad, that there's
something wrong with it. That's not knowing the world as the world.
Rather it's studying and taking an interest, examining experience, and
being willing to look at and feel the negative side. It's not just
seeking pleasurable experiences, but seeing even your most disappointing
ones, your worst failures as opportunities to learn, as a chance to
awaken; as devadutas or 'messengers' that tap us on the shoulder and
say, 'Wake up!' That's why in Buddhism getting old, sickness,
disabilities and loss are not seen as things to fear and despise, but as
devaluates or 'heavenly messengers'. This word devaduta is a Pali word;
duta means a messenger of some sort, deva is 'angelic' or 'heavenly'; so
heavenly messengers sent to warn us. A Christian asked me once if we had
angels in Buddhism. 'We have angels in Christianity; all kinds of white
and beautiful beings that play harps; they're very radiant, light
beings.' I replied, 'Well, Buddhist angels are not that way. They're old
age, sickness and death!' The fourth devaduta is the samana, the human
being who has spiritual realisations.
> Old people you can see as devaluates. Like me: I'll be sixty-seven in
a few days. Not only a devaduta on the level of a samara, but an old man
too. As I get sick and senile, I'll be even more of a devaduta; and when
I'm dead, I'll be four all in one! For reflecting in this way, to see
how to use life, the malleability of our human mind is endless.
> We can be so set and conditioned by dualistic thinking. For example, I
was brought up in a very dualistic way of looking at everything. Things
were absolutely right or wrong, good or evil. These were very fixed ways
of looking at everything. I had this very limited use of my mind because
it tended to move between these two extremes.
> Are we going to become inflated egotistical monsters if we admit that
we love good things? Why did I become a Bhikkhu? I could give you
reasons like 'I've got to shape up and get my act together. I can't do
it any other way.' I can look it in terms of weakness and inability,
that I need the support from external conditions because I can't do it
by myself. Or I can look at it in terms of being attracted to what is
good, virtuous and beautiful. Both have their points to make; it's not
that I'm so good, that I just gravitate to everything that's light and
beautiful, I've certainly had my fascinations for that which isn't, but
I would say that my preference leans towards the light and the good, the
true and the beautiful. This is the movement that I'm interested in and
that's something to respect. I see that this is something very good in
my character.
Learning to be honest, to admit and make a conscious appreciation of
your own humanity and your individuality helps to give you a confidence
that you don't have if you're too obsessed with being critical and
seeing yourself through negative perceptions. This is being able to use
our critical mind, our discriminative abilities not just to analyse and
compare one thing with another, but to examine and investigate in terms
of experience. We awaken to the breath - 'It's like this,' - awaken to
the sensitive state that we're in - 'It's like this,' - awaken to the
irritations that we experience as conditions that contact and irritate
our senses. With our obsessions and emotional habits, whatever they
might be, we put them in perspective rather than seeing them as
something to get rid of. They're something to awaken to; this is a
change from pushing away, resisting and denying towards awakening,
accepting and welcoming.
In the First Noble Truth, the Buddha proclaimed that 'there is dukkha
(suffering).' It is put into the context of a 'Noble Truth' rather than
a dismal reality. If we look at it as a dismal reality, what happens?
'Life is just suffering, it's all just suffering. You get old, you get
sick and then die. You have to lose all your friends: "All that is mine,
beloved and pleasing, will become otherwise, will become separated from
me." That's all it's about; it's just dukkha from beginning to end'.
There's nothing noble in that, is there? It's just pessimistic and
depressing seeing it in terms of, 'I don't like it. I don't want
suffering. What a bad joke God played on us creating this mess. And me
being born in this mess, to live just to get old. What am I living for?
Just to get old, get sick and die'. Of course, that's very depressing.
That's not a Noble Truth. You're creating a problem around the way
things are. With the Noble Truth, 'there is suffering,' the advice to
deal with this suffering is to welcome it, to understand it, to open to
it, to admit it, to begin to notice it and accept it. It's a willingness
to embrace and learn from that which we don't like and don't want - the
pain and the irritation, whether it's physical, mental or emotional.
To understand suffering is to open to it. We say, 'We understand
suffering because it's...' We rationalise it, but that's not
understanding. It's in welcoming the suffering that we are experiencing
- our frustration, despair, pain, irritation, boredom, fear and desires
- just welcoming, opening, accepting. Then this is a Noble Truth, isn't
it? Our humanity then is being noble; it's an ariyan truth. This word
ariya means 'noble'. What is this English word 'noble'? It's a kind of
grand quality; it rises up. If you're noble, you rise up to things. You
don't just say 'Oh, life is misery and I want to hide away from it. I
can't bear it'. There's nothing noble in that; or in blaming - 'God, why
did you create this mess? It's your fault,' if you're brought up as a
Christian. I used to feel furious with God. I remember as a child
thinking that if I were God I wouldn't have created pain. You fall down
and hurt yourself and you think, 'Why does God allow this? Why did He
create a realm where there is so much pain?' My mother could never
answer that question very well, because the pain was seen as something
wrong. Or is pain a Noble Truth? Is loss, separation, all these
experiences that we all have to have in this human realm, a Noble Truth?
Seeing it in terms of a Noble Truth, rather than complaining and
blaming, this is what I'm pointing to.
We can look at things in different ways. We can choose. The programme
from the culture and family that we're born into might not be a very
good programme. Sometimes it is, but still it's limited. Now we have
this opportunity to explore, to investigate reality, to know it in a
direct way. Enlightenment is not something remote and impossible. You
can see it in terms of some very abstract state that you hold up and aim
for but that you don't think you'll ever achieve. That way of thinking
is based on what? If I depended on my personality, I couldn't do
anything, I'd never hope to get enlightened because my personality can't
possibly conceive myself as a person being enlightened. My personality
is conditioned to think of myself in terms of what's wrong with me,
coming from a competitive society where you are very much aware of who's
better and who's worse. So I can't trust that. My personal habits are
conditioned things, so they're not flexible in themselves. If we just
attach or interpret experience through those perceptions and never learn
to look at things in any other way, then we are stuck with a limited
view that can be a very depressing way to live a life.
Awakening; wake up and begin to see beyond the rigid dualism or the
initial programme that you acquire through your family and social
background. Trust in your own intuitive awakened sense. Don't trust in
your views and opinions about anything - about yourself, about Buddhism
or the world - they are oftentimes very biased. We get very biased views
about each other; we have racial prejudices, class identities, ethnic
biases and feelings of social superiority. These are not to be trusted.
We can look at things in many different ways. We don't have to look at
something always from the conditioning that we have acquired. So when
the Buddha talks about the Buddha-mind, it's very flexible and
malleable; it's universal. The mind has a radiant quality to it.
Consciousness has a radiance. So when we begin to let go of limiting
ourselves through the distortions of our conditioned mental states, then
we begin to understand, to see things as they really are, to know the
Dhamma - enlightenment. This is not something remote and impossible,
unless you want to hold to those views about it and about yourself as a
person, holding it so high that it's way beyond your personal ability to
achieve. Then you haven't awakened to what you're doing. You're merely
operating from a conditioned view of everything.
'There is dukkha', and 'dukkha should be welcomed'. This is my new
interpretation. Usually it's 'dukkha should be understood.' 'Dukkha
should be welcomed'; how's that? Try that one. You can experiment with
these different words. You don't have to say 'Pali scriptures say
"understand," they didn't say "welcome"!' Pali scriptures don't say
'understand', they use a Pali word that we translate as 'understand'.
Maybe we don't understand what 'understand' means. Did you ever think
about that? We're so limited to a particular narrow view of the word
'understand' that we can't expand it. That's why we can experiment with
the words. Just observe the effect. So I say 'welcoming' now. I'm not
interested in proving that I'm right, that my translations are the best,
but rather seeing how they work, what the effect is in the here-and-now.
I am sharing this with you as a way of encouraging you to have that
right and that freedom to know for yourself. You don't always have to
try and fit yourself into the views and opinions even of our tradition -
orthodox forms or definitions, our particular group's way of looking at
things.
'There is dukkha', and 'dukkha should be welcomed'. 'Dukkha has been
welcomed'. What is that like? Try that one. I don't know if it works for
you, but it does for me, because the tendency is to push dukkha away.
That's my conditioning, my personality. Suffering? Push it away; I don't
want it. With somebody else's suffering , I don't want to go near them,
I want to push away from them. There's a problem - 'Ajahn Sumedho, I've
got a problem' - I don't want a problem. This is my character tendency,
to do that. I don't want to know about suffering; tell me about the good
things. 'How are you today?' 'I'm fine, Ajahn Sumedho. I just love it
here at Amaravati. I love being a monk. I just adore the Dhamma and the
Theravada form and the Vinaya. I love the whole thing.' Oh, that makes
me feel so good. Tell me more. And I go to somebody else -'How are you
this morning?' 'Ugh! This life is such a dreary, miserable thing. I'm
fed up. I want to disrobe.' I don't want to hear that; don't tell me
that. We go around trying to make people make us feel good. Tell me the
good things, because that makes me feel good. Don't tell me the bad
stuff, because that makes me feel bad. I don't want to feel bad. I don't
want suffering; I don't welcome it, I want to get rid of it. Therefore,
I'm going to try and live my life so that I can get as much of the good
stuff as I can and push away the bad stuff. But in this new translation
of 'There's suffering and suffering should be welcomed,' it changes,
doesn't it? You see the suffering, your own, or somebody else's
problems, as things to welcome rather than as things to run away from or
push away.
We've been on retreat for the past week: I really like formal practice.
I like to sit here and face the shrine. I like the temple; it's a very
pleasant place to sit. I sit on a triangular cushion that supports the
spine, so I can sit very comfortably for long periods of time. I look at
the shrine and the mind goes very still and quiet. Then when I look
around and face you... What happens when I'm looking at all of you? This
is just a way of contemplating. When I look at the shrine, all the
things on the shrine bring peace and calm; the candles, incense and
Buddha image, they aren't dukkha for me, they inspire, they're pleasing.
They aren't irritating or causing me any kind of unpleasant feelings. If
I don't particularly want to look at them, I can just close my eyes and
not look at anything. But then turning around and you're all here - what
happens? It brings up a sense of there being so many possibilities, with
all these different people, some of whom I don't even know. I've got
views about some of you - you're like this and you're like that. Each
person will bring up certain memories, some pleasant, some unpleasant;
you have different ways of moving and saying things that brings up
different feelings in my mind. If I think, 'Oh, I can't bear this.' I
have to immediately turn around and look at the shrine again. Or if I'm
looking at the shrine, I can begin to allow awareness to take me to
non-grasping, to the reality of non-attachment, and really know this;
not merely depend on the lack of stimulation for this or turning away
from the community in order to get it, but really turning towards the
community and realising it's something here. It's not dependent on
facing any direction. So beginning to awaken to reality rather than
being dependent upon a conditioned experience.
The refuge in Sangha we can define in terms of the four pairs, the eight
kinds of noble beings. How many of you fit into that description? How
many of your egos can think of yourself as sotapanna-magga,
sotapanna-phala, sakadagami-magga, sakadagami-phala, anagami-magga,
anaagami-phala, arahatta-magga, arahatta-phala*? Which one are you? How
can I take refuge in 'four pairs and eight kinds of noble beings'? It's
very abstract; sages, ideal beings who are somewhere - maybe. Or are
they here: this monk, or that nun? What's the refuge in Sangha then? Is
it up to me to decide who's a sotapanna, sakadagami and so forth, to
figure out who I can take refuge with? Then it's just a matter of my ego
again. Here I am trying to decide what somebody else is. Rather take
these words like Sangha and make them work for you. Make it practical.
Our refuge is in Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, not in personal attitudes or
habits, or views and opinions. When we see each other in terms of Sangha
or as devaluates, it's a way of looking at each other that is beginning
to appreciate, respect and get beyond just personal preference and
reactivity. But we're not trying to annihilate those either because the
dukkha we welcome is this personal reactivity. Why I feel angry, why I
feel jealous or why I feel rejected; it's not trying to dismiss this.
But as we trust in this awakened state, then we can welcome our own
feelings - foolish feelings or neurotic habits - we can welcome these
things in terms of a Noble Truth rather than as personal faults.
(*These are the 8 kinds of noble beings, in respective order - One
realising the path of stream-entry, one realising the fruition of
stream-entry; one realising the path of once-return, one realising the
fruition of once-return; one realising the path of non-return, one
realising the fruition of non-return; one realising the path of
arahatship, one realising the fruition of arahatship.)
Forest Sangha Newsletter: October 2002, Number 62
back |