‘‘Not Sure!’’ - The Standard of the Noble Ones¹

This is a way of considering things which is very, very useful. For instance, say someone were to rush in and say, ''Luang Por! Do you know what so and so just said about you?'' or, ''He said such and such about you...'' Maybe you even start to rage. As soon as you hear words of criticism you start getting these moods every step of the way. As soon as we hear words like this we may start getting ready to retaliate, but on looking into the truth of the matter we may find that... no, they had said something else after all.

And so it's another case of ''uncertainty.'' So why should we rush in and believe things? Why should we put our trust so much in what others say? Whatever we hear we should take note, be patient, look into the matter carefully... stay straight.

It's not that whatever pops into our heads we write it all down as some sort of truth. Any speech which ignores uncertainty is not the speech of a sage. Remember this. As for being wise, we are no longer practicing. Whatever we see or hear, be it pleasant or sorrowful, just say ''This is not sure!'' Say it heavy to yourself, hold it all down with this. Don't build those things up into major issues, just keep them all down to this one. This point is the important one. This is the point where defilements die. Practicers shouldn't dismiss it.

If you disregard this point you can expect only suffering, expect only mistakes. If you don't make this a foundation for your practice you are going to go wrong... but then you will come right again later on, because this principle is a really good one.

Actually the real Dhamma, the gist of what I have been saying today, isn't so mysterious. Whatever you experience is simply form, simply feeling, simply perception, simply volition, and simply consciousness. There are only these basic qualities, where is there any certainty within them?

If we come to understand the true nature of things like this, lust, infatuation and attachment fade away. Why do they fade away? Because we understand, we know. We shift from ignorance to understanding. Understanding is born from ignorance, knowing is born from unknowing, purity is born from defilement. It works like this.

Not discarding aniccam, the Buddha - this is what it means to say that the Buddha is still alive. To say that the Buddha has passed into Nibbāna is not necessarily true. In a more profound sense the Buddha is still alive. It's much like how we define the word ''bhikkhu''. If we define it as ''one who asks⁶'', the meaning is very broad. We can define it this way, but to use this definition too much is not so good - we don't know when to stop asking! If we were to define this word in a more profound way we would say: ''Bhikkhu - one who sees the danger of samsāra.''

Isn't this more profound? It doesn't go in the same direction as the previous definition, it runs much deeper. The practice of Dhamma is like this. If you don't fully understand it, it becomes something else again. It becomes priceless, it becomes a source of peace.

When we have sati we are close to the Dhamma. If we have sati we will see aniccam, the transience of all things. We will see the Buddha and transcend the suffering of samsāra, if not now then sometime in the future.

If we throw away the attribute of the Noble Ones, the Buddha or the Dhamma, our practice will become barren and fruitless. We must maintain our practice constantly, whether we are working or sitting or simply lying down. When the eye sees form, the ear hears sound, the nose smells an odor, the tongue tastes a flavor or the body experiences sensation... in all things, don't throw away the Buddha, don't stray from the Buddha.

This is to be one who has come close to the Buddha, who reveres the Buddha constantly. We have ceremonies for revering the Buddha, such as chanting in the morning Araham Sammā Sambuddho Bhagavā... This is one way of revering the Buddha but it's not revering the Buddha in such a profound way as I've described here. It's the same as with that word ''bhikkhu.'' If we define it as ''one who asks'' then they keep on asking... because it's defined like that. To define it in the best way we should say ''Bhikkhu - one who sees the danger of samsāra.''

Footnotes

...¹

An informal talk given at Ajahn Chah's kuti, to some monks and novices one evening in 1980

...pātimokkha²

The central body of the monastic code, which is recited fortnightly in the Pāli language.

... angels³

Devaputta Māra - the Māra, or Tempter, which appears in a seemingly benevolent form.

...khandhas⁴

The five khandhas: Form (rūpa), feeling (vedanā), perception (saññā), conceptualization or mental formations (sankhārā) and sense-consciousness (viññāna). These comprise the psycho-physical experience known as the ''self''.

...anāgāmı⁵

Anāgāmī (non-returner): The third ''level'' of enlightenment, which is reached on the abandonment of the five ''lower fetters'' (of a total of ten) which bind the mind to worldly existence. The first two ''levels'' are sotāpanna (''stream-enterer'') and sakadāgāmī (''once-returner''), the last being arahant (''worthy or accomplished one'').

... asks⁶

That is, one who lives dependent on the generosity of others.

...anattā⁷

Transience, imperfection, and ownerlessness.

... year⁸

2522 of the Buddhist Era, or 1979 CE.