|
The clarion
call of our present age is, without doubt, the call for
freedom. Perhaps at no time in the past history of
mankind so much as at present has the cry for freedom
sounded so widely and so urgently, perhaps never before
has it penetrated so deeply into the fabric of human
existence.
In response
to man's quest for freedom, far-reaching changes have
been wrought in almost every sphere of his activity —
political, social, cultural and religious. The vast
empires which once sprawled over the earth, engulfing
like huge mythical sea-monsters the continents in their
grasp, have crumbled away and disintegrated, as the
peoples over whom they reigned have risen up to
repossess their native lands — in the name of
independence, liberty and self-rule.
Old
political forms such as monarchy and oligarchy have
given way to democracy — government by the people —
because every man demands the right to contribute his
voice to the direction of his collective life.
Long-standing social institutions which kept man
enthralled since before the dawn of history — slavery,
serfdom, the caste-system — have now disappeared, or are
rapidly disappearing, while accounts of liberation
movements of one sort or another daily deck the
headlines of our newspapers and crowd the pages of our
popular journals.
The arts,
too, bear testimony to this quest for greater freedom:
free verse in poetry, abstract expression in painting,
and atonal composition in music, are just a few of the
innovations which have toppled restrictive traditional
structures to give the artist open space in his drive
for self-expression. Even religion has not been able to
claim immunity from this expanding frontier of
liberation. No longer can systems of belief and codes of
conduct justify themselves, as in the past, on the
grounds that they are commanded by God, sanctified by
scripture, or prescribed by the priesthood. They must
now be prepared to stand out in the open, shorn of their
veils of sanctity, exposed to the critical thrust of the
contemporary thinker who assumes himself the right to
free inquiry and takes his own reason and experience for
his court of final appeal. Freedom of speech, freedom of
the press, and freedom of action have become the
watchwords of our public life, freedom of thought and
freedom of conscience the watchwords of our private
life. In any form in which it obtains, freedom is
guarded as our most precious possession, more valuable
than life itself. "Give me liberty or give me death," an
American patriot exclaimed two hundred years ago. The
succeeding centuries have echoed his demand.
As though in
response to mankind's call for wider frontiers of
freedom, the Buddha offers to the world His Teaching,
the Dhamma, as a pathway to liberation as applicable
today as it was when first proclaimed twenty-five
centuries ago.
"Just as in
the great ocean there is but one taste — the taste of
salt — so in this Doctrine and Discipline
(dhammavinaya) there is but one taste — the taste of
freedom": with these words the Buddha vouches for the
emancipating quality of His doctrine.
Whether one
samples water taken from the surface of the ocean, or
from its middling region, or from its depths, the taste
of the water is in every case the same — the taste of
salt. And again, whether one drinks but a thimble-full
of ocean water, or a glass-full, or a bucket-full, the
same salty taste is present throughout. Analogously with
the Buddha's Teaching, a single flavor — the flavor of
freedom (vimuttirasa) — pervades the entire
Doctrine and Discipline, from its beginning to its end,
from its gentle surface to its unfathomable depths.
Whether one samples the Dhamma at its more elementary
level — in the practice of generosity and moral
discipline, in acts of devotion and piety, in conduct
governed by reverence, courtesy, and loving-kindness; or
at its intermediate level — in the taintless
supramundane knowledge and deliverance realized by the
liberated saint, in every case the taste is the same —
the taste of freedom.
If one
practices the Dhamma to a limited extent, leading a
house-hold life in accordance with righteous principles,
then one experiences in return a limited measure of
freedom; if one practices the Dhamma to a fuller extent,
going forth into the homeless state of monkhood,
dwelling in seclusion adorned with the virtues of a
recluse, contemplating the rise and fall of all
conditioned things, then one experiences a fuller
measure of freedom; and if one practices the Dhamma to
its consummation, realising in this present life the
goal of final deliverance, then one experiences a
freedom that is measureless.
At every
level the flavor of the Teaching is of a single nature,
the flavor of freedom. It is only the degree to which
this flavor is enjoyed that differs, and the difference
in degree is precisely proportional to the extent of
one's practice. Practice a little Dhamma and one reaps a
little freedom, practice abundant Dhamma and one reaps
abundant freedom. The Dhamma brings its own reward of
freedom, always with the exactness of scientific law.
Since the
Dhamma proposes to provide a freedom as complete and
perfect as any the modern world might envisage, a
fundamental congruence appears to obtain between man's
aspiration for expanding horizons of liberty and the
possibilities he might realize through the practice of
the Buddha's Teaching. Nevertheless, despite this
concordance of ends, when our contemporaries first
encounter the Dhamma they often find themselves
confronted at the outset by one particular feature
which, clashing with their familiar modes of thought,
strikes them intellectually as a contradiction and
emotionally as a stumbling block. This is the fact that
while the Dhamma purports to be a pathway to liberation,
a Teaching pervaded throughout by 'the taste of
freedom,' it yet requires from its followers the
practice of a regimen that seems the very antithesis of
freedom — a regimen built upon discipline, restraint,
and self-control. "On the one hand we seek freedom," our
contemporaries object, "and on the other we are told
that to reach this freedom our deeds, words, and
thoughts must be curbed and controlled." What are we to
make of this astonishing thesis the Buddha's Teaching
appears to advance: that to achieve freedom, freedom
must be curtailed? Can freedom as an end really be
achieved by means that involve the very denial of
freedom?
The solution
to this seeming paradox lies in the distinction between
two kinds of freedom — between freedom as license and
freedom as spiritual autonomy. Contemporary man, for the
most part, identifies freedom with license. For him,
freedom means the license to pursue undisturbed his
impulses, passions and whims. To be free, he believes,
he must be at liberty to do whatever he wants, to say
whatever he wants and to think whatever he wants. Every
restriction laid upon this license he sees as an
encroachment upon his freedom; hence a practical regimen
calling for restraint of deed, word, and thought, for
discipline and self-control, strikes him as a form of
bondage. But the freedom spoken of in the Buddha's
Teaching is not the same as license. The freedom to
which the Buddha points is spiritual freedom — an inward
autonomy of the mind which follows upon the destruction
of the defilements, manifests itself in an emancipation
from the mold of impulsive and compulsive patterns of
behavior, and culminates in final deliverance from
samsara, the round of repeated birth and death.
In contrast
to license, spiritual freedom cannot be acquired by
external means. It can only be attained inwardly,
through a course of training requiring the renunciation
of passion and impulse in the interest of a higher end.
The spiritual autonomy that emerges from this struggle
is the ultimate triumph over all confinement and
self-limitation; but the victory can never be achieved
without conforming to the requirements of the contest —
requirements that include restraint, control, discipline
and, as the final price, the surrender of self-assertive
desire.
In order to
bring this notion of freedom into clearer focus, let us
approach it via its opposite condition, the state of
bondage, and begin by considering a case of extreme
physical confinement. Suppose there is a man locked away
in a prison, in a cell with dense stone walls and sturdy
steel bars. He is tied to a chair — his wrists bound
together by rope behind his back, his feet locked in
shackles, his eyes covered by a blindfold and his mouth
by a gag. Suppose that one day the rope is unfastened,
the shackles loosened, the blindfold and gag removed.
Now the man is at liberty to move about the cell, to
stretch his limbs, to speak, and to see. But though at
first he might imagine that he is free, it would not
take him long to realize that true freedom is still as
distant as the clear blue sky beyond the stoned and
steel bars of his cell.
But suppose,
next, that we release the man from prison, set him up as
a middle-class householder, and restore to him his full
body of rights as a citizen of the state. Now he can
enjoy the social and political freedom he lacked as a
prisoner; he can vote, work, and travel as he likes, can
even hold public office. But there still remains — in
the form of his responsibilities, his burden of duties,
his limitations of power, pleasure, and prestige — a
painful discrepancy between the freedom of mastery for
which he might personally yearn, and the actuality of
the situation which circumstances has doled out to him
as his drearisome lot. So let us, as a further step,
lift our man up from this middle-class routine, and
install him, to his pleasant surprise upon the throne of
a world monarch, a universal emperor exercising
sovereignty over all the earth. Let us place him in a
magnificent palace, surrounded by a hundred wives more
beautiful than lotus-flowers, possessed of limitless
resources of gold, land, and gems, endowed with the most
sublime pleasures of the five senses. All power is his,
all enjoyment, fame, glory, and wealth. He needs only
express his will for it to be taken as command, need
only utter a wish for it to be translated into deed. No
obstruction to his freedom of license remains. But still
the question stands: is he truly free? Let us consider
the issue at a deeper level.
Three kinds
of feelings have been pointed out by the Buddha:
pleasant feeling, painful feeling, and neutral feeling,
i.e., feeling which is neither pleasant nor painful.
These three classes exhaust the totality of feeling, and
one feeling of one class must be present on any given
occasion of experience. Again, three mental factors have
been singled out by the Buddha as the subjective
counterparts of the three classes of feeling and
described by him as anusaya, latent tendencies
which have been lying dormant in the subconscious mental
continua of sentient beings since beginningless time,
always ready to crop up into a state of manifestation
when an appropriate stimulus is encountered, and to
subside again into the state of dormancy when the impact
of the stimulus has worn off.
These three
mental factors are lust (raga), repugnance
(patigha), and ignorance (avijja),
psychological equivalents of the unwholesome roots of
greed (lobha), hatred (dosa), and delusion
(moha). When a worldling, with a mind untrained
in the higher course of mental discipline taught by the
Buddha, experiences a pleasant feeling, then the latent
tendency to lust springs up in response — a desire to
possess and enjoy the object serving as stimulus for the
pleasant feeling. When a worldling experiences a painful
feeling, then the latent tendency to repugnance comes
into play, an aversion toward the cause of the pain. And
when a worldling experiences a neutral feeling, then the
latent tendency to ignorance — present but recessive on
occasions of lust and aversion — rises to prominence,
shrouding the worldling's consciousness in a cloak of
dull apathy.
On whatever
occasion the three latent tendencies to lust,
repugnance, and ignorance are provoked by their
corresponding feelings from their dormant condition into
a state of activity, if a man does not make an effort to
dispel them, does not strive to restrain, remove, and
abandon them and bring them to nought, then they will
persist in consciousness. If, as they persist in
consciousness, he repeatedly yields to them, endorses
them, and continues to cling to them, they will gather
momentum, come to growth, and like a ball of flame flung
upon a haystack, flare up from their initial phase as
feeble impulses into powerful obsessions which usurp
from a man his capacity for self-control. Then, even if
a man be, like our hypothetical subject, an emperor over
the earth, he is inwardly no longer his own master but a
servant at the bidding of his own defilements of mind.
Under the
dominance of lust he is drawn to the pleasant, under the
dominance of hate he is repelled by the painful, under
the dominance of delusion he is confused by the neutral.
He is bent up by happiness, bent down by sorrow, elated
by gain, honor, and praise, dejected by loss, dishonor,
and blame. Even though he perceives that a particular
course of action can lead only to his harm, he is
powerless to avoid it; even though he knows that an
alternative course of action is clearly to his
advantage, he is unable to pursue it. Swept on by the
current of unabandoned defilements, he is driven from
existence to existence through the ocean of samsara,
with its waves of birth and death, its whirlpools of
misery and despair. Outwardly, he may be a ruler over
all the world, but in the court of consciousness he is
still a prisoner. In terms of license he may be
completely free, but in terms of spiritual autonomy he
remains a victim of bondage in its most desperate form:
bondage to the workings of a defiled mind.
Spiritual
freedom, as the opposite of this condition of bondage,
must therefore mean freedom from lust, hatred, and
delusion. When lust, hatred, and delusion are abandoned
in a man, cut off at the root so that they no longer
remain even in latent form, then a man finds for himself
a seat of autonomy from which he can never be dethroned,
a position of mastery from which he can never be shaken.
Even though he be a mendicant gathering his alms from
house to house, he is still a king; even though he be
locked behind bars of steel, he is inwardly free. He is
now sovereign over his own mind, and as such over the
whole universe; for nothing in the universe can take
from him that deliverance of heart which is his
inalienable possession. He dwells in the world among the
things of the world, yet stands in perfect poise above
the world's ebb and flow. If pleasant objects come
within range of his perception he does not yearn for
them, if painful objects come into range he does not
recoil from them. He looks upon both with equanimity and
notes their rise and fall. Toward the pairs of opposites
which keep the world in rotation he is without concern,
the cycle of attraction and repulsion he has broken at
its base. A lump of gold and a lump of clay are to his
eyes the same; praise and scorn are to his ears empty
sounds. He abides in the freedom he has won through long
and disciplined effort. He is free from suffering, for
with the defilements uprooted no more can sorrow or
grief fall upon his heart; there remains only that
perfect bliss unsullied by any trace of craving.
He is free
from fear, from the chill of anxiety which even kings
know in their palaces, protected by bodyguards inside
and out. And he is free from disease, from the sickness
of the passions vexing and feverish that tie the mind in
knots, from the sickness of samsara with its rounds of
defilement, action, and result. He passes his days in
peace, pervading the world with a mind of boundless
compassion, enjoying the bliss of emancipation, or
teaching fellow way-farers the path he himself has
followed to the goal, in the calm certain knowledge that
for him the beginningless trail of repeated births and
deaths has been brought to a close, that he has reached
the pinnacle of holiness and effected the cessation of
all future becoming.
In its
fullness, the freedom to which the Buddha points as the
goal of His Teaching can only be enjoyed by him who has
made the realization of the goal a matter of his own
living experience. But just as salt lends its taste to
whatever food it is used to season, so does the taste of
freedom pervade the entire range of the Doctrine and
Discipline proclaimed by the Buddha, its beginning, its
middle, and its end. Whatever our degree of progress may
be in the practice of the Dhamma, to that extent may the
taste of freedom be enjoyed. It must always be borne in
mind, however, that true freedom — the inward autonomy
of the mind — does not descend as a gift of grace. It
can only be won by the practice of the path to freedom,
the Noble Eightfold Path.
The Buddhist
Publication Society
The Buddhist
Publication Society is an approved charity dedicated to
making known the Teaching of the Buddha, which has a
vital message for people of all creeds.
Founded in
1958, the BPS has published a wide variety of books and
booklets covering a great range of topics. Its
publications include accurate annotated translations of
the Buddha's discourses, standard reference works, as
well as original contemporary expositions of Buddhist
thought and practice. These works present Buddhism as it
truly is — a dynamic force which has influenced
receptive minds for the past 2500 years and is still as
relevant today as it was when it first arose.
BUDDHIST
PUBLICATION SOCIETY
P.O. Box 61
54, Sangharaja Mawatha
Kandy
Sri Lanka
http://www.bps.lk
Bodhi
Leaves
No. 71
Copyright © 1976, 1994 Buddhist Publication Society
For
free distribution only.
You may re-format, reprint, translate, and
redistribute this work in any medium,
provided that you charge no fees for its
distribution or use.
Otherwise, all rights reserved.
Transcribed from the print edition in 1994 by W.D.
Savage under the auspices of the DharmaNet Dharma
Book Transcription Project, with the kind permission
of the Buddhist Publication Society. |