Wrong Thought (12)“Other people may have wrong thoughts, but we will have right thoughts and thereby lessen our defilements.”
That is what the Pāli text says. There are three kinds of wrong thoughts: thoughts arising from sensual
desires, i.e., the thought to possess the object of one’s desire (kāmavitakka), thoughts arising from ill-will or the thought to ruin another person (vyāpādavitakka), and thoughts arising from aggressive desire or the thought to hurt another person (vihimsavitakka). Nowadays people harbour many wrong thoughts, the most common of which is that stemming from
sensual desire. People are usually intent on getting the objects of their desire — delicious food, fashionable clothes, beautiful houses, cars, land, gardens, and so forth. They plan to fulfil their ambitions, social relations, professions, families, maintenance of property, etc. In brief, they are pre-occupied with sensual desires for almost the entire day. Of these thoughts, the self-serving thought may be called right thought. However, since it is based on
unwholesome sensual desire, it is termed wrong thought from the point of view of the Dhamma. However, the thought to seek lawfully the necessities of life is not very harmful. Even bhikkhus who are devoted to the Dhamma have to seek food, etc., and it is quite proper to think of doing lawfully what is unavoidable. However, the meditator should not harbour such thoughts for a long time. They should be noted and rejected. What is seriously harmful is the thought to get something that one does not deserve unlawfully, or in the case of those who deserve it, obsession with desire. These kind of sensual thoughts prolong samsāra even if they do not lead to the lower realms. The best thing to do is to reject sensual thoughts. The bhikkhus and meditators who have a high
regard for morality based on restraint of the senses should avoid sensual thoughts about the opposite sex. Bhikkhus and male meditators should avoid thoughts about women and nuns, and female meditators should not think about men. Such sensual thoughts impede concentration, insight-knowledge, and mental development, so they should be noted carefully, and rejected. Again, when we think of someone whom we hate, we tend to bear ill-will. We blame them for having
done us harm, of having obstructed our plans, so we long for their destruction and ruin. We may even think of killing them. This is hatred arising from ill-will. The object of ill-will is not necessarily a human being. When we seek to destroy snakes, scorpions, mosquitoes, bugs, etc., we are also motivated by ill-will. We may justify our attempt to kill snakes, tigers, etc., but the unwholesome karmic volition
involved leads to suffering, so every thought of killing for any reason is a wrong thought. If the intention is not to kill one’s enemy, but only to ill-treat him, it is called violence. Here one intends to beat, abuse, scold, or otherwise cause suffering to another. If one is motivated by good-will
in his intention, there is no karmic result. However, the aggressive thought that stems from hatred is karmically unwholesome, and the karmic result is grave in proportion to the moral purity of the person who is hated. Right ThoughtRight thought is the opposite of wrong thought, and is of three kinds: thoughts of renunciation (nekkhammavitakka), thoughts of non-hatred (avyāpādavitakka) and thought of harmlessness (avihimsāvitakka). Of these, the thought of renunciation is the intention to liberate oneself from
sensual desire defilements and the cycle of life. According to the Commentary, entering the Sangha is renunciation. So too are the practices of charity, morality, tranquillity, insight meditation, and attaining nibbāna. Thoughts about entering the Sangha, developing concentration, attaining nibbāna, going to a meditation centre, observing the moral precepts, giving alms, listening to the Dhamma — each of these
is a thought of renunciation. Every thought of renunciation presupposes the right view regarding kamma. This right view is also involved at the time of transforming thoughts into actions. Thus, when you cultivate right thought, you also cultivate right view, and the converse is also true. The other path factors are also cultivated simultaneously. The thought of non-violence is the opposite of violent thoughts. It is concern for the welfare of all
living beings based on good-will and kindness. Thought of harmlessness is the opposite of thought of harmfulness. It is the thought arising from compassion and sympathy. People usually have regard only for those who are associated with them. They tend to ill-treat any person who oppose them. In this world of such moral degradation it is very noble to think of the welfare of all living beings universally
with love and compassion. Here we will cite the story of Bodhisatta Sumedha’s thought of renunciation that is so memorable. Bodhisatta Sumedha was born ninety-one aeons ago. His parents died when he was young. The family’s treasurer handed over to the young man all of the wealth that had been accumulated by seven
generations of his forefathers. Sumedha reflected on the mortality of his forefathers who had left all their wealth in the hands of others. They could not come and look after their property. They could not use any of their former property nor could they take it away with them. Now Sumedha hoped to take away his wealth in the form of karmic effect by giving it away. In other words, he hoped
to gain merit by alms-giving. Merit is called anugāmika property because it always follows the donor throughout samsāra. There are four kinds of property: movable (jangama), immovable (thāvara), one’s own limbs (angasama) and accompanying (anugāmika). The Commentary describes slaves, cattle, and other living things as
movable property, and lifeless things as immovable property. However, we will classify property in the traditional way. Gold, silver, clothing, etc., which are easily exchanged can be regarded as movable property. This kind of property is not durable. Although it is one’s own property, it is another person’s possession when it gets into the hands of a thief, a robber, or a swindler. For example, a fountain pen,
or pocket watch that is stolen by a pickpocket becomes his property. It is hard to recover unless it bears identification marks or someone can testify to your ownership. You cannot be said to own a thing permanently if it can change hands so easily. It may be yours at the moment, but it may belong to another in the next moment. Gold, silver, and money, which are of no immediate use, have to be exchanged for property such as
land or buildings. A building or land cannot be moved secretly, so it is more durable than movable property. Yet you may lose it if the legal owner claims it by right of inheritance. You may also lose it through change in your personal circumstances. You cannot always rely on keeping such property. The property that is part of your five aggregates is more dependable. You carry this property wherever
you go, just like your legs or hands. This kind of property means a person’s professional skill, such as painting, teaching, writing, dancing, medicine, or law. A person can earn a living by a profession, which cannot be stolen, so wise people spend money on the education of their children. However, even a vocational skill or knowledge may become worthless if changes in the law or the economy prevent its practice. More dependable than the property of a profession is property in the form of alms-giving, morality, etc. Nobody can steal it from you, or prevent it from producing its beneficial effects. It will always follow you throughout samsāra, and continue to provide benefits. The young man Sumedha thought of converting his wealth into the most dependable property that he could take with him after his death. Think thus, the Bodhisatta Sumedha gave away all of his wealth and became an ascetic. He was then only about sixteen or twenty years old. As a young ascetic, he developed concentration, trained his mind, and within seven days attained absorption and psychic-power. Later, he offered his body as a bridge at the feet of Dīpankara Buddha, who prophesied that he would become Gotama Buddha. The Bodhisatta’s intention to give away all of his wealth was the right thought of renunciation, as was his thought of becoming an ascetic and striving to attain absorption and psychic-powers. So too was his thought of seeking Buddhahood by offering his body to be used as a bridge by the Buddha. Likewise, the thought of making daily devotions before the shrine of the Buddha and observing the five
precepts, etc., is the thought of renunciation. So is the thought of observing the eight precepts on uposatha days or the thought of listening to the Dhamma and practising it. Here the practice of the Dhamma means renunciation of desirable and pleasant sense-objects. The Dhamma will be alien to those who are immersed in sensual pleasures. Although you urge them to practise it they will refuse to do so on one pretext or another. You have thoughts of non-hatred when you diffuse love and good-will toward a person or persons; or when you are concerned about their welfare; or when you work for their welfare verbally or physically; or when as a leader you do something for the welfare of your followers. You have thoughts of harmlessness when you avoid harming a person out of compassion and
sympathy; or when you think of saving or helping a suffering person. Such compassionate thoughts occur often in nurses and doctors who attend the sick kind-heartedly. It is with compassion and thoughts of harmlessness that we pray for the end of suffering among other people. Let us cultivate compassion especially towards those who are sick, distressed or wailing over their misfortunes. During the practice of insight meditation every moment of mindfulness means the rejection of three
kinds of unwholesome thought and the cultivation of the three kinds of wholesome thought. If, at the moment of seeing, the visual object is noted and its true nature realised — i.e. the three characteristics of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and not-self — there can be no sensual thoughts,
no hateful thoughts, and no harmful thoughts. The same may be said of the state of consciousness at the moment of hearing or eating, etc. Every moment of mindfulness means the development of wholesome thoughts as opposed to unwholesome thoughts. In other words, the right thought in itself that is involved in mindfulness helps to develop thoughts of renunciation, thereby excluding sensual thoughts. Ill-will and aggressive thoughts are removed in the same way. If you are aware of the
impermanence of everything at every moment of mindfulness, how can there be the desire for an impermanent object or malicious and aggressive thoughts on account of it? Meditators develop the three kinds of right thought at each moment of mindfulness. As their insight-knowledge develops and becomes perfect, they see nibbāna and attain the noble path. Right thought
on the level of a noble one helps the meditator to overcome the unwholesome thoughts progressively. At the first stage it removes the sensual thoughts that lead to the lower realms. At the second stage it removes the gross forms of sensual thoughts, etc. At the third stage the subtle forms of sensual thoughts are eradicated while at the final stage, i.e., Arahantship, right thoughts root out unwholesome thoughts arising from the desire for the realm of forms and the formless realm.
The Buddha urged his disciples to lessen their defilements by having right thoughts. We should cultivate right thoughts to avoid the wrong path of wrong thoughts for our spiritual growth and for the extinction of wrong thoughts. Wrong Speech (13)Wrong speech is speaking wrongly or improperly. It is of four kinds: lying, slander or divisive speech, abusing, and idle chatter. These kinds of speech may serve the interests of the speaker, so they may find justification for them, but they are harmful to others, and the speaker will have to suffer the harmful effects of wrong speech in future. Right SpeechRight speech means abstinence from wrong speech. Here the term sammāvācā refers not to what one says, but to the avoidance of lying, etc., whenever the occasion arises, which means abstention (virati). Those who are committed to the five precepts should avoid lying and wrong speech such as
slander, abuse, and idle chatter. Needless to say, the abstention from the four kinds of wrong speech is binding on those who have committed themselves to the eight precepts with right livelihood as the eighth (ājīvatthamaka).¹ During meditation, abstention is effected through overcoming by momentary abandonment (tadanga pahāna).² In effect, meditation involves abstention (virati) although it has little to do with speech. Then on the noble path the four kinds of wrong speech are rooted out through destruction (samucchedapahāna). Wrong Action (14)Wrong action is of three kinds — killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct. These acts may be justified by those who commit them, but they are by no means justifiable from the point of view of the victim.
How can you say that it is proper for a person to kill you for the benefit of others, to steal or rob you of your property, or to have illicit sex with your wife or daughter? Everyone will agree that these acts are evil and those who commit them will have to suffer in future for their unwholesome deeds. Right ActionHere, too, right action means abstinence from killing, etc. Those who have committed themselves to non-killing and so avoid killing are practising right action. Every moment of mindfulness during meditation leads to abstinence from killing, etc., although it involves no mental factor (cetasikā) as regards abstention (virati). On the noble path all wrong actions are eradicated through destruction. Wrong Livelihood (15)Wrong livelihood is to earn one’s living by obtaining money improperly.³ Some people commit unwholesome deeds such as killing to make their living. However, some commit unwholesome deeds not for economic reasons, but because of their greed or anger. Unwholesome deeds that have nothing to do with one’s living, but stem from anger or greed are not wrong livelihood, but wrong action or wrong speech. For example, the killing of mosquitoes, snakes, etc., or one’s enemy through anger is wrong
action. However, the killing of chickens, pigs, fish, etc., for the market or for one’s own consumption is wrong livelihood. As for stealing or robbing, it is usually done for economic reason and so most of these acts are to be classified as wrong livelihood. Stealing out of malice or through ill-will, habit or propensity is, of course, wrong action. Illicit sexual intercourse has usually nothing to do with one’s
living. To seduce a woman, however, for the sake of money or for one’s living is wrong livelihood. Telling a lie in a business transaction is wrong livelihood; but if you lie for another reason, it is wrong speech. The same may be said of slander. Nowadays some kinds of propaganda are defamation that fall
within the category of wrong livelihood. They are very harmful. Abusive language is not often used in business. However, there are many kinds of wrong livelihood in the form of idle chatter that we can find in fiction-writing, play acting, film-making and so forth. All kinds of wrong livelihood involve violation of the moral code that prescribes abstinence from killing,
etc. Those who observe the five precepts are free from the seven kinds of wrong livelihood that we have mentioned about. It is obvious that those who adhere to the eight precepts with right livelihood as the eighth are especially free from wrong livelihood. Right livelihood is to earn money lawfully with moral life untainted by any kind of wrong livelihood. Right Livelihood
To put it another way, right livelihood is to make one’s living without killing, stealing, etc. Wise men of ancient times described it as honest farming, honest trading and so forth. Obviously honest farming is cultivating crops or gardening by one’s own labour without ill-treating others. Honest trading is to buy
goods at a fair price without ill-treating, killing, stealing, robbing or cheating another person, and then to sell them at fair market prices. In ancient times there were few traders who made a profit of one kyat on something that was worth ten kyats. When business men become greedy some of them sell their goods at a profit of a hundred percent if they can. This is not honest trading. Honest trading means to sell goods of genuine quality at fair prices without any attempt at profiteering.
Those who trade honestly can still profit from their business. In 1952 in Zeygyo bazaar at Mandalay there was a grocer named Ko Nyan. He was a Burmese Buddhist. He spoke to his customers courteously, “Sir, what can I do for you?” He did not overcharge for his goods, but stated the exact price. If a customer haggled, he would say, “Sir, I cannot reduce the price: I only make a profit of two
percent.” Even if the buyer happened to be a child, he never thought of cheating over the price and quality of the goods. If the wrong article was sold by mistake, the buyer could change it for the right one. His four or five assistants were always busy, so all followed a form of right livelihood that was truly commendable. Again, a Government employee, a worker in a private business, or a porter who does his work dutifully
for a reasonable wage is earning a right livelihood. So is the driver or boatman who works conscientiously and charges a fair price for his services. Right and Wrong Livelihood for BhikkhusUnlike the laymen with their seven rules of conduct the bhikkhus have a wide variety of moral rules
binding on them. A bhikkhu should not ask for food, robes, or a dwelling unless the person asked is his relative or has invited him to ask. Neither he nor other bhikkhus should use anything that is received improperly. Asking for donations outright as is done nowadays is very unbecoming. A bhikkhu should not even hint or make indirect remarks that would induce a layman to offer food or robes. It is wrong livelihood for a bhikkhu to use anything obtained by begging,4 hinting, or scheming. Moreover, any effort on the part of a bhikkhu to make himself intimate with laymen or laywomen or to
endear himself to them by giving flowers, fruits, or food is an offence called “corruption of families (kuladūsana), which means destroying the faith of the laity. Giving flowers, etc., may help to win the affection of the recipients, but it will not contribute to their faith. Respect for a bhikkhu is genuine only if it is due to his moral purity and other virtues. Any attempt to cultivate intimacy by giving flowers,
etc., is harmful to the true faith that depends on the bhikkhu’s virtuous life. Lay followers may come to revere only monks who gives presents. They will no longer care for virtuous monks. The so-called reverence for the liberal monk is, in reality, nothing more than affection that we find among ordinary people — it has nothing to do with genuine faith. It is improper for a bhikkhu to offer gifts such as
flowers or food to his lay followers, to flatter them, to serve them, to care for their children, to practise medicine, to read their horoscopes, or to engage in any other forms of faith-destroying wrong livelihood. It is wrong livelihood for a bhikkhu to use anything obtained by such practices. A bhikkhu should avoid hypocrisy in regard to material goods and attainments in the practice of
meditation. Some bhikkhus pretend to have no desire for the robes or food offered by their lay followers. They refuse to accept it, “I do not want fine robes and delicious food. I am content with cast-off rags and food collected on almsround.” Their refusal strengthens the faith of their lay followers who repeatedly request them to accept offerings. Then they accept and never decline the offer of the lay followers on whom they have thus impressed their apparent distaste for the good
things of life. This is the way of earning one’s living wrongly by pretending to be an ascetic. A monk may say, “A bhikkhu who wears his robes like this or who dwells in such a place is usually a noble one, an Arahant or one who has attained absorption and psychic powers.” The description
conforms to the speaker’s mode of life, or the way that he wears the robe. This is another kind of wrong livelihood by a hypocritical monk. Some monks do not meditate, but they behave quietly and gently like a meditator. They stand, sit, lie down, bend or stretch their hands like a meditator absorbed in concentration. This is also wrong livelihood by making false pretences. Some pretend to be able to read the mind of another person. If a monk who is teaching says, “Ho! The woman over there is distracted. Be attentive and practise breathing,” there may indeed be some distracted women in the congregation. Such women might be greatly impressed and have a high opinion of the monk. If a monk says that he was a king and that such and such a woman was his
queen in a previous existence, he will be credited with psychic powers by some of his followers. This is also wrong livelihood by deception. A bhikkhu should not use anything offered by a lay disciple who has been deceived in such ways. He should live only on those things that he can obtain by right livelihood. If there is no one to offer him
food, he should go on almsround. If he has no proper robe, he should search for cast-off rags. Otherwise, he can stand in front of a lay supporter’s house, and if he is asked what he wants, he can express his need for a robe. It is not improper to say what one wants in response to an inquiry. To seek the requisities through bodily expression is right livelihood. Food, robes, etc., that a donor offers out of regard for the learning, spiritual life, and talks given by a
monk are of pure origin since the monk receives them lawfully. The Buddha urged his disciples to make their living honestly. Three Kinds of AbstentionRight speech, right action, and right livelihood are three wholesome abstentions. Each abstention is of
three kinds. First there is the case where a man abstains from a misdeed without having undertaken any precepts (sampatta virati). A man who has not undertaken the precepts may abstain from lying, stealing, or killing when faced with the temptation to do so. Secondly, a man who has undertaken the precepts ensures that his morality remains pure (samādāna virati). The third case is the natural morality of noble ones, which eradicates defilements from the root (samuccheda virati).
Of these three kinds of abstentions, the last is not associated with any thought of abstention. The meditator’s mind is focussed on nibbāna, so from the time of attaining the noble path no desire to do unwholesome deeds ever arises. Evil desires become totally extinct, which means complete abstention.
Similarly, while meditating, the mindful meditator realises the three characteristics of all sense-objects and so he or she has no unwholesome desire to kill, steal, lie, etc., which naturally means abstention from misdeeds. Insight meditation thus effectively includes the three kinds of abstention. When meditation is perfect there is abstention on the level of a noble one, then all wrong action, speech, and livelihood are eradicated. |
