18 June 2010

The Pscyhological Wasteland

waste land
A couple of years ago senior member of the Triratna Buddhist Order, Subhuti, studied the Cetokhila Sutta [1] and was talking about it with other senior order members. Although I did not have the chance to study the text at the time I was intrigued by what I heard, and I have now done my own translation. This translation is also a condensation because there is a huge amount of redundancy and repetition in the Pāli - what I have done is communicate the same message, in the same order, but in succinct English.

There are other translations of this text and in this case I needed to rely on that by Ñāṇamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi to understand parts of it. [2] There are other internet translations, though I think they struggle to communicate the message of the text because they are caught up in the Pāli syntax. 

The Cetokhila Sutta

Thus have I heard. One time the blessed one was staying in the Jeta Grove in Anāthapiṇḍika’s park outside Sāvatthī. There the blessed at one addressed the monks.

There are five psychological wastelands unrenounced, five emotional bindings not cut that make it impossible to produce increase, growth and fullness in this doctrine and discipline.

The five psychological wastelands are: doubting [kaṅkhati] and hesitating [vicikicchati] with respect to, and lack of faith and assurance in the teacher, the doctrine, the spiritual community, and the training; and taking offence, being angry, resentful and sulky towards one's companions in the spiritual life. In the psychological wastelands one's mind is not bent towards zeal, devotion, perseverance and making an effort.

The five emotional bindings are uncut passion, desire, love, longing, fever, and thirst for: sensuous pleasure, the body, and form; eating as much as one likes and being given to the pleasures of sleeping, lying about, and laziness; and living the spiritual life aspiring to heaven thinking: 'by this morality, this austerity, this spiritual practice I will become a god or go to heaven.' With these emotional bindings left uncut one's heart is not bent towards zeal, devotion, perseverance and making an effort.

For those who renounce the five psychological wastelands, and cut the five emotional bindings it is possible for them to produce increase, growth and fullness in this doctrine and discipline.

This samādhi of intention [chanda] with the forms of effort gives rise to the basis of success. This samādhi of vitality [vīriya] with the forms of effort gives rise to the basis of success. This samādhi of mind [citta] with the forms of effort gives rise to the basis of success. This samādhi of investigation [vīmaṃsā] with the forms of effort gives rise to the basis of success. Enthusiasm [ussoḷhi] is the fifth basis for success.

With these 15 factors including enthusiasm they are capable of a breakthrough [abhinibbida], capable of fully understanding [sambodha], capable of the unsurpassed attainment of the peace of union [anuttarassa yogakkhemassa adhigama].

Just as a bird with eight or ten or twelve eggs perfectly sitting on them, incubating them, and brooding them need not wish: "may my chicks, with beak and claw, safely break through their eggshell", because the chicks are well-equipped with beak and claw to pierce their eggshell and break through. So with these 15 factors including enthusiasm they are capable of a breakthrough, capable of fully understanding, capable of the unsurpassed attainment of the peace of union.

This is what the blessed one said. The monks were pleased and rejoiced in his words.
~o~

This is almost like two suttas mashed together, which appears to go off on a tangent by introducing the samādhi accompanied by effort, though perhaps it made sense to the compilers of the Canon. In my comments, therefore, I want to focus on the part about the psychological wasteland and the emotional binds. Firstly some of the main terms.

Cetokhila: a khila is a patch of barren or fallow land. Ñāṇamoli and Bodhi opt to render it 'wilderness'. I thought wasteland was a better fit because the metaphor is not of being lost in a wilderness, but of a place where growth is not possible. Ceto, and cetaso, are more or less the same as citta. Citta can be 'mind' generally; 'mind' as specifically the consciousness that arises in dependence on contact between sense organ and sense object; and it is also a synonym of 'heart' (hadaya) as the seat of the emotions. We usually get landed with either 'heart' or 'mind' because the two are distinct in English. My thought is that psychological covers both emotions and thoughts.

Cetsaso-vinibandha: the word vinibandha means 'bondage'. The plural 'bondages' sounded a little too 'Buddhist Hybrid English' to me, and not natural. Bindings seemed to fit. Here I have chosen 'emotional' to render cetaso because the items included under this heading are more clearly emotional. Although 'heart' is a well worn poetic cliché for emotion, I wanted to be specific and heart is used quite vaguely.

The basic message of the text is that if we don't have faith and confidence in the three jewels, if we are doubtful and unsure, then this is like a wasteland, a patch of barren land. A wasteland is not productive, not somewhere we expect crops to germinate, flourish and ripen; we cannot grow spiritually under these conditions. So this is an agricultural metaphor for a Buddhist life.

Note that the tone of the text changes with respect to our companions in the spiritual life. With the Three Jewels we can be confident that they will never let us down. With respect to other people, other Buddhists, the text does not suggest that we have faith them. It assumes that they will let us down, that they will fall short, and it requires of us that we not harbour ill-will and resentment towards them when they do let us down. We are not to take offence. This is much harder than it sounds because when people do let us down we usually assume the worst, we assume that they hurt us on purpose. We do not see them as conditioned beings responding habitually or unconsciously. So we blame them for their behaviour. In the Christian morality that underlies Western societies blame implies guilt, and guilt demands punishment. In Christianity vengeance is the Lord's province, but in anger Christians often pre-empt Him by harming the person who has offended them and calling this "justice". Similarly Buddhists profess to believe in karma, but are reluctant to allow karma time and space to work, but want to hurt the person who has hurt them. So we unreliable humans are constantly lashing out at each other. It is not a failing of religion, as militant atheists suggest, but a failing of people. Atheists are not less likely to lash out, but only to rationalise their lashing out in different ways.

The emotional bonds that prevent us from making progress draw on a different metaphor. Here passion, desire, etc are chords that tie us in emotional knots. The wasteland is more about aversion, and the bonds are about attraction. The main thing we desire is pleasure. As I have argued before: people mistake pleasure for happiness, and the pursuit of happiness becomes a pursuit of pleasure, which is disastrous for us, for the societies we live in, for humans generally, and for the planet. Despite the abject failure of the pursuit of pleasure to produce positive results we find it difficult to imagine any other way. This was true in the Buddha's day also. One of the most refined and pernicious aspects of this pursuit of pleasure is the idealised heaven. The text pays particular attention to using practice as a means to rebirth in heaven. Many culture's have heavens (even Buddhists) and you can tell a lot about that culture from the heaven they imagine: whether it is perfectly flat surfaces and jewelled trees, numbers of virgins, or a father's uninterrupted attention and love, heaven tends to contain the things that will give a man the most pleasure they can imagine. I say "man" advisedly here, because I think it's clear that 'official' heavens of the big religions were imagined by men. Unlike the Islamic heaven, in both Buddhist and Christian heavens there is no sex, and no sexuality. [3] Make of that what you will.

Perhaps it is the contrast between aversion and attraction that lead to the inclusion of stock phrases on the samādhi's accompanied by effort - which appear to refer to meditation accompanied by the four right efforts. Unravelling this paragraph on its own is next to impossible. Neither the Pāli commentary summary (MA 2.67), nor the longer explanation in the Visuddhimagga it refers you to, are very helpful as they are almost equally cryptic. I only understood it when I chanced on a reference in the notes to Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation of the Saṃyutta Nikāya. [4] This pointed to the Chandasamādhi Sutta (SN 51.13 ) which untangles the long compounds in a way that makes sense. It is interesting that the Chandasamādhi appears to be a commentary on other texts which refer to the four bases for success (iddhipāda). The cryptic phrasing of this part of the text suggests to me a sophisticated intellectual milieu, and a written rather than oral medium. To find a commentary already in the Canon is intriguing.

The last image more or less speaks for itself. If you have faith in the three jewels, are tolerant of you companions, and cut the bindings of pleasure-seeking, and apply yourself to right effort, then you don't need to worry about breaking through. What we do as Buddhists is set up conditions for practice, and get on with practice. Wishing for Enlightenment is only useful to the extent that it gives us what Sangharakshita calls 'continuity of purpose'. We need to keep on committing ourselves, to keep on making the right kind of effort, but if we do that, then we can be confident of making progress. In fact doubt in, and of, this process prevents us from growing.


Notes
  1. MN 16, PTS M i.101. A pdf of my translation accompanied by extensive notes is available on my website: The Psychological Wasteland: a Translation of the Cetokhila Sutta.
  2. Ñāṇamoli and Bodhi. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha. p.194ff.
  3. This is arguable. The Book of Enoch (which may originally have been in Aramaic or Hebrew, but survives only in Ethiopian) was originally part of the Canon of both Jews and early Christians, but was excised in the 4th century. In Enoch the sin of the fallen angels was not pride, but lust - they had sex with and fathered children with human women. See for instance: Link, Luther. The Devil : the Archfiend in Art from the 6th to the 16th century. Harry N. Abrams Inc, 1995. (see especially pg. 27f)
  4. Bodhi The Connected Discourses, p.1939, n.246.

image: lots of copies of this around the net. I copied it from www.motherearthnews.com.

7 comments:

JonJ said...

Very interesting text; thanks very much for the translation.

The admonition against trying to get to heaven is particularly interesting; I haven't seen that idea in any other Buddhist texts, at least in such a clear expression. That in itself apparently eliminates 90% of most people's religious aspiration in this culture, and probably others!

Jayarava said...

Hi JonJ

Yes. I think the idea of a creator god is lampooned in many places, but the idea of practising in order to get into heaven may well be unique. I'll have a poke around and see if I can see any others.

Regards
Jayarava

Anonymous said...

So if I understand correctly the text says that we should allow Karma to take it course. Yet we are not to be the agents of Karma? Is my understanding correct? I am sure that you can you see how this would relate to a criminal justice system? Should there not be a criminal justice system or should Buddhists just not take part in it? Not taking part in a criminal justice system would be consistent, or should I dare say even required with a pacifist philosophy. So will not having a criminal justice system relieve suffering? Is there room for pragmatism on this issue?
Curt

Jayarava said...

Hi Curt

I had not thought of this text relating to karma at all. And I would say that the issue of justice is entirely unrelated to this post. If you are intending to comment on a previous post please comment on the post in question. Thanks, Jayarava

David Chapman said...

I'm curious about "no sex and no sexuality in Buddhist heaven" -- wondering which Buddhism(s) and which heaven(s) you had in mind.

The Buddhist Tantras are generally set in "heavens" that consist mainly of vast non-stop orgies; and the Buddha delivers the text of the Tantra whilst having sex.

Tantra is anomalous of course. But my vague recollection is that in the Mahayana scriptures, some "heavens" also involve sex. The heaven of the "form realm" devas, for example.

I have just done a little googling to see if I could find references for that, and found instead that Buddhist conceptions of "heaven" appear to be hopelessly contradictory and confused. (As with almost any point of Dharma, they have been elaborated by many different sects in different places and times.)

Anyway... By "no sex" you also meant "no male or female beings"? And that would seem to be true only of the Formless Realm? Which seems to have been pretty much a theoretical abstraction. In terms of the imagination and practice of actual Buddhists, "gods" were/are almost always centrally important, and imagined as male or female. And in later Mahayana & Tantra, important gods get their own personal heavens, to which one can aspire to be reborn in.

Obviously I don't take any of this seriously as cosmology. But I think it's important in terms of what Buddhists should aspire to. Particularly, extinguishing desire for sex is a goal for some forms of Buddhism, but definitely not for others.

Jayarava said...

Hi David

It's a fair question.

I had in mind the heavens referred to in the text I was translating, i.e. the devalokas and the brahmalokas as they are understood in the Pāli. As far as I know the beings there are androgynous. When commenting I try to stay at one level, unless I am deliberately following an historical thread. Otherwise the mutual contradictions become confusing.

But I also had in the back of my mind the pure lands of Amitābha et al where there is no sex, and people are born spontaneously in lotus flowers. I have not come across the Mahāyāna texts you refer to, perhaps you could be more specific?

I wouldn't say that Tantra is anomalous, but you are right to say that it has a different attitude to sex. I'm more familiar with the Tantra of Japan where the sexual yoga is not so prominent - absent in many cases. There are disagreements on whether to take the sexual yoga as literal or symbolic. I think the idea in Tantra is that the sexual urges, along with other emotions such as anger, disgust, grasping, etc are sublimated and the energy involved transformed into vīrya (which btw is cognate with 'virile'), which is then used to transcend such dichotomies.

If you read about the sexual yogas, say in the Hevajra Tantra which has been translated into English, then it does not read like an orgy, or indeed as indulging in sex for pleasure or procreation. One is harnessing the intense emotion and feelings towards the goal of liberation, one is not simply fucking. It's worth getting hold of the Hevajra and reading through it to get a clearer picture (to the extent the text is clear) of how sex is used in these practices. I think the New Age ideas about Tantra and sex (i.e. simply using techniques to enhance pleasure) have muddied the waters considerably. Even in the sexual yoga's one is not pursuing simply pleasure, but the Mahāsukha, the Great Bliss, the ultimate pleasure. And part of the process is to break taboos, especially sexual taboos. So, as a for instance, you might find yourself, having just watched your guru and consort having sex, ingesting their combined sexual fluids as a consecration. Then you get to have sex with your consort yourself - a woman whose touch you consider to be deeply repulsive and physically polluting. This would be deeply ritually polluting in mainstream Indian culture - shockingly so. And it would require long ritual purification. One also partakes of other polluting substances and practices (drinking alcohol, eating meat etc). So you have to overcome your deep conditioning in the process. Of course this context doesn't apply in many other cultures, so sexual yoga hardly makes sense elsewhere and elsewhen.

That whole area is rather complex and convoluted and I usually don't go there.

Anyway I hope that's answered the question you asked.

Best Wishes
Jayarava

Jayarava said...

Curt,

Please refer to my comments policy. Your comments are way off topic. I don't have the time, energy, or inclination for that kind of online discussion.

Jayarava

Related Posts with Thumbnails