Of thrones and heirs

 

The Buddha elaborates on five subjects for contemplation or regular reviewing in the Abhiṇhapaccavekkhitabbaṭhānasutta (ref: Pañcakanipāta of the Numerical Discourses of the Buddha). They are as follows: i) I am subject to aging, have not gone beyond aging, ii) I am subject to illness, have not gone beyond illness, iii) ‘I am subject to death, have not gone beyond death, iv) will grow different, separate from all that is dear and appealing to me, and v) I am the owner of my actions, heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator; whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall heir.

Such reflection, the Buddha says, generates ‘the path’ and those who pursue the path, develop and cultivate it enable the abandonment of fetters and the uprooting of underlying tendencies.

Such reflection, clearly, can temper ego and arrogance while enhancing the quality of humility. The last, which alludes to thrones that are hardly laudable and the inevitable heirs, essentially alludes to the paṭiccasamuppāda (the chain, or law, of dependent origination, or the chain of causation). Put simply, we are inevitable recipients of the consequences of our actions be they in body, word or thought. ‘Karma’ has evolved into a catch-all shorthand. It obviously lacks nuance and therefore is rather crude, but that’s alright. Just think, ‘one reaps what one sows.’

Not all actions occur in full public view. Even if among the teeming multitude, for example, vile thoughts will certainly go unseen. Then again there are words that are heard, actions that are noticed. Words said and the tones used to speak them are not only heard but can be re-heard thanks to social media. People not only hear the claims, arguments and promises, but note even that which is not said; for example, the absence of self-criticism, retraction, recantation and remorse.

The fifth, above, then, can be elaborated as follows:

‘I am the owner of my actions and inaction, heir to my actions and inaction, born of my actions and inaction, related through my actions and inaction, and have my actions and inaction as arbitrators; whatever I do or desist from doing, for good or for evil, to such things will I fall heir.’

In other words, the word ‘action’ includes its lack.

What are these fetters that the Buddha alludes to? They are the attachments that inhibit liberation. Where there is little or no reflection on action, there can be little or no remorse and course-correction. There certainly will be no uprooting of the underlying tendencies that generate and strengthen these fetters.

What are these underlying tendencies? I can think of ignorance and arrogance. One can, arguably, lie deliberately or utter falsehoods in good faith. ‘Good faith’ because what is said was conveyed to the utterer by someone who is absolutely trusted. ‘Good faith’ because facts are taken at face value without mentioning contexts simply because their existence is not known rather than not recognised. In other words, ignorance can blind one to selectivity. Reflection opens one to the possibility that one could be wrong. That itself can clear ground for the cultivation of humility.

What does reflection do? Contemplation of actions and their sources not only cultivates humility but makes for more circumspect engagement in all things, including words, tones, decision-making and all manner of action whether in public or otherwise. The one caveat, though, is good faith.

In general, the degree of arrogance directly impacts the readiness to retract and express regret. It gets in the way of regaining trust lost on account of uttering falsehoods, being selective, ignoring contexts and making promises that cannot be kept. When arrogance is recognised and shed, trust is regained. When ignorance is recognised and honest effort expended to be more critical of facts, information and analysis that are of the ‘goes without saying’ kind, the tendency to err is mitigated.

Things are said and done, things go unsaid and undone. Some can be wholesome and some unhealthy. They all have consequences; the doer and utterer (or the non-doer and silent) are heirs to these things. The crown, resplendent or made of thorns, they have to wear.

It must be kept in mind that when something is said, it is heard. When something is not said, the silence is noted. If word (or silence) and action (or non-action) is in part the product of ignorance, the listener or recipient could very well take them at face value, simply because good faith is assumed. However, when time or incident calls such things to question, there are inevitable questions.

Why was a falsehood uttered? Why was there silence when it was imperative that things be said? Why (if that be the case) was context ignored? Why a half truth (that is also a half lie)? The ‘action equivalents’ will generate similar questions.

The result is, as mentioned, a decaying of trust. And if trust is desired, then course-correct is a must. And course-correction requires reflection, the cultivation of humility, and a coming-clean of one kind or another.

Fetters, as such are generated by the unwholesome as discussed above, are a burden that makes walking on an already broken path that much harder. The heavier the load, the greater the chance of tripping and falling, whether or not the journey is a purely personal kind (self-realisation for example) or a component of a collective effort (for example, one that seeks wholesome social transformation).

The same goes for the recipients. They too are fettered to the unwholesome they embraced ‘in good faith’ and it’s even worse if the recipient proceeds to disseminate the ‘good news’ received. They too are heirs, on account of how they take the ‘good news.’ They too have to deal with consequences. And they too can reflect on the five subjects explicated in the Abhiṇhapaccavekkhitabbaṭhānasutta. They too, in this way, can sever the fetters and uproot underlying tendencies.

And that, pinvathuni, in a nutshell, is how kings are made and dethroned, heirs rise above their circumstances or are crippled by them.

 

[This article was published in the Daily News under the weekly column title 'The Recurrent Thursday']