Guarding, a pointer for studying the truth of Reality (1st part)

-


1st part - 1m (2nd part here)

Vincent: The question is about the Sukhavihara sutta from Itivuttaka, the section of The Two beginning by The six door are well guarded, the faculties, the indriyas are all well-guarded, and so they live in comfort, that's the conclusion, but before reaching a conclusion, moderate in eating was mentioned particularly and i just wondered if "moderate in eating" had any significant meaning.

A. Sujin: Usually when we use these words, eating food, what do you think about?.

V. Usually is for two purposes, enjoying the food, or feeling hungry, to remove the dukkha.

Su. So, for the person who guards the doors, what happens?

V. That person is well aware, with sati-sampajañña.

Su. Yes, so we have to understand the point of reading any sutta: just to understand. Not just to understand the word, but the reality of that word. Not just its meaning, but its truth. So what about the meaning of that word, and the true nature of it, and the understanding of that, according to the Teachings of the Buddha? We have to consider all in order to have real understanding of what we've heard, and to understand the truth of that which is now and when is there, as the Buddha taught in that sutta. So, what is the first line of that sutta?

V. The eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and likewise the mind. A bhikkhu who has these doors well guarded.

Su. Okay, so, is there any understanding of eye, ear, nose, tongue and body, to be guarded? And what is that which guards? Otherwise it's only understanding the meaning of the word, but not the truth of it. Understanding just the word, not its truth, one cannot understand the Teachings of the Buddha, one cannot know what Buddha meant. So without understanding of what the eye is, can there be the moment of guarding it? And now there is the eye, what about the understanding of that moment, of it. There is eye for sure at this very moment. It seems, when we talk about the eye, that there is already the understanding of what the eye is, but actually it isn't there at all. No understanding of the eye, no understanding of that which guards, and so, what about the Teachings? Because the point, the benefit of listening to the words of the Buddha is just to understand, that's all.

It's not just reading and think that we understand all, like we know what the eye is, what's the guarding, what is meant by it, but actually no understanding of its truth at all. For example, everyone knows that there is the eye now, but what is it? Does it arise and then fall away instantly? And how to guard, and what is the truth of that which guards, and what is the benefit of guarding it? Without wise considering, to understand the truth, no one can understand the enlightenment of the Buddha at all. Talking about the eye, it doesn't mean that there is already the understanding of that which we call the eye. To guard, it seems like we understand the words, but what about the truth of each one? So anyone who reads the Teaching without understanding the subtlety of each word, its truth, takes it [to be] so very easy: just guard the eye. That cannot be the Teachings of the Enlightened One who took quite a long, long time to become enlightened in the truth of what we take for being very easy.

So what is the truth of that which we call the eye? If there is no understanding, can there be guarding it? And what is guarding, what for? Who's guarding? So, is there enough understanding of the eye, that it's conditioned? It cannot experience anything but it's a reality, it's there, conditioned by kamma, at that very moment, arising and falling away instantly.

Without understanding, what can guard the nature of that which arises and falls away? Each word of the truth conditions the right understanding of the truth, otherwise it's useless. So, what is that which guards? Not the eye, can the eye guard? What for?

V. The one that guards is the sati and for the benefit, for the sake of understanding. It is to understand.

Su. It is easy to say that it's sati, but what is it? Is there sati now? And if there's no understanding, can sati arise to guard? So it's not just rushing to understand whatever, but to have confidence of the truth, which is so very deep, and study carefully, to understand actually what we're talking about. That's why we have to understand its meaning, its truth. Not just the meaning of the word, but what is the truth of it. So when we use the word sati what is IT? Is it enough to understand sati? Or it's just the beginning to hear about this word, about that reality, which is different from other realities. Just talking about the quality of sati is not enough to understand IT when it's there, it's a pointer for studying the truth of Reality. So, what is sati, what is the eye, what is guarding, what for? Is there enough understanding to just take it very easy? To do, or to think that that is the understanding of what we have said, like eyes, and guarding, and sati? If it's just like this it's not studying the Teachings about the truth of whatever is there now, to really understand that it is so true, it's there as what we've heard.

So, the moment of listening to the Teachings of the Buddha is the moment of beginning to understand the truth of what is heard, one by one, little by little. So, is there the eye now? Can there be the moment of guarding the eye? So, when there is the word "guarding the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue,..." what does it mean? The word is "guarding", but what is that, what does it mean? And can that reality just arise to guard? And what about seeing, can it be guarded too? Can it be the object of guarding? The truth is the truth, it is true at any moment, anytime, anywhere. If there is no understanding of whatever is to be guarded, can the guard be there at that moment? Arising and performing the function of guarding? That's why, listen carefully to understand the truth of it, little by little, otherwise there will never be the understanding of that which is now appearing, to be guarded. Is there any question?


  • Audio of the entire discussion: