July 20 AN 4.24 - Kaleka Sutta -Delson Armstrong

Do you see my screen? Yep, yeah, looks good. Okay, good. This was requested by one of you. This is Anguttara Nikaya 4.24, the Kalaka Sutta, or the Kalaka Rama Sutta, and this is the Bhikkhu Bodhi translation. I think you guys are all aware of the new group that everybody's getting part of, so if there are any requests for suttas to be studied and read and explored, you can just make a request and let us know. So let me start here.

Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was living at Saketa, at Kalaka's Park. There the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus. "Venerable sir," the bhikkhus replied. The Blessed One said this: "Because in this world with its devas, Mara and Brahma, among this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its devas and humans, whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, reached, sought after, examined by the mind, that I know."

"Because in this world with its devas, Mara and Brahma, among this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its devas and humans, whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, reached, sought after, examined by the mind, that I have directly known. It has been known by the Tathagata, but the Tathagata did not become subservient to it." This is a very important statement. Here the Buddha is saying whatever is there in terms of being experienced through the sense bases, through the process of cognition, through all the limits of samsara, so to speak, through all experience, the Buddha says and claims that he knows. He has seen the furthest reaches of what the eyes are capable of, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body are capable of, what the mind is capable of. What the mind is capable of is beyond the process of thinking and conceptualizing.

The mind can do many more things, insofar as the siddhis are concerned, insofar as experiencing jhanas are concerned, insofar as being, becoming, liberated, and so. The Buddha has known that. And then he says he has directly known that. So one is to understand and see or know on an intellectual level. But the other is to be able to actually experience it for oneself, to be able to see for oneself the limits of samsara. And that is the links of dependent origination. That is the Four Noble Truths.

And that is the ultimate siddhi, so-called siddhi. We have all of these ways of doing things through so-called psychic faculties, like being able to use the divine eye, being able to use the divine ear, knowing one's past lives, seeing the arising and passing away of beings in different realms, all kinds of things, telepathy, and moving from one place to the other in an immediate moment, and all these fanciful things. There's a potential for that to happen. But the Buddha lists that the greatest psychic faculty of all is the destruction of the taints, and when the taints are destroyed the mind doesn't need any other psychic faculties. It is just free of all the limitations of samsara vis-a-vis ignorance, conceit, and craving.

So he says it has been known by the Tathagata, but the Tathagata does not become subservient to it. So one understands it, or he understands it, he sees it, he experiences it, but he does not get subject to it. He is not subject to it. He is independent. And it's interesting he uses the word Tathagata to refer to himself. Tathagata means, tatha is that, that what we call suchness, which is the realization and experience of emptiness. It's the realization of nibbana for oneself. He has gone there, to the farthest reaches, to the other shore, and come back. Gata means to go and agata means to come back. So it could be the thus-gone one or thus-returned one, insofar as the Tathagata means so.

It's the thought, and really what he's pointing out is that he has experienced it. He has seen it for himself, and he has understood that all of this is an impersonal process, and therefore his mind doesn't become subject to the fetters of craving and ignorance and conceit. His mind is free from that, and it is not rooted in greed, hatred, and delusion. He has what is known as the akuppa cetovimutti, which is the unshakable liberation of the mind. I've done a sutta on this before, the Godata Sutta, where we talk about this: that the unshakable liberation of mind is that which is the immeasurable, because greed is a maker of measurement, hatred is a maker of measurement, delusion is a maker of measurement. It is the signless liberation of the mind, because

greed can be a maker of signs, hatred can be a maker of signs, and delusion can be a maker of signs. And it is the liberation of mind through nothingness, because greed is a something, hatred is a something, and delusion is a something. But the mind also is liberated through emptiness, insofar as the mind is empty of greed, empty of hatred, empty of delusion. Such a mind is essentially said to be signless, undirected, and empty. It doesn't make anything into an object. It doesn't reify anything. Such a mind is free of any personalized intentions, and so it is undirected. It is desireless, and such a mind doesn't take anything personally and doesn't come from a standpoint of me, mine, or myself, and therefore it's empty. So he says, because if I were to say, in this world with its devas and so on, whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, reached, sought after, examined by the mind, that I do not know,

that would be a falsehood on my part so he's saying if i said that i didn't know these things or i didn't understand these things it would be a falsehood if i were to say in this world with its devas and so on whatever is seen heard sense cognize reach sought after examined by the mind that i both know and do not know that too would be the same it would be a falsehood but But if I were to say, and if I were to say, in this world with its devas and so on, whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, reached, sought after, examined by the mind that I either know nor do not know, that would be a fault in my part.

So then here is the meat of the sutta. Having seen what can be seen, the Tathagata does not misconceive the seen, does not misconceive the unseen, does not misconceive what can be seen, does not misconceive one who sees. Having heard what can be heard, he does not misconceive the heard, does not misconceive the unheard, does not misconceive what can be heard, does not misconceive one who hears. Having sensed what can be sensed, he does not misconceive the sensed, does not misconceive the unsensed, does not misconceive what can be sensed, does not misconceive one who senses.

Having cognized what can be cognized, he does not misconceive the cognized, does not misconceive the uncognized, does not misconceive what can be cognized, does not misconceive one who cognizes. This is the crux of the sutta. Conceive and misconceive here, they are kind of used synonymously, or it could be inferred from this that what we're talking about is the mind that conceives. The word conceive is related to the word conceit, and conceit comes from the Pali word mana.

Mana really means to measure. So such a mind that has conceit in it will measure things up in relation to what is being experienced, and it happens implicitly, intrinsically. It's not something that one might consciously do. So we talk about comparison, and we always say comparison is the thief of joy. Once you have that sort of comparison of I'm here and that person is there, or I'm here and I should get there, right? So here the Buddha is talking in terms of the seen, in terms of the heard, in terms of the sensed. He's talking about all the sense bases, and then in terms of the cognized, which is the mind. What is it cognizing? Ultimately all the sense experiences are coming into the mind. So we'll just simplify it and talk about conceptualizing, or the process of conceiving in the mind. Actually, a couple of days ago David Kirsten and I had gone out to a restaurant and we were discussing this. We were talking about that process of the mind which

it's hearing things, it's seeing things, it's tasting things, it's touching, it's smelling. But in reference to that there is a basis of a me there. It's like there's a core essence of a me that's present, and this me is that which is misconceived as the one who sees, the one who hears, the one who smells, the one who tastes, touches, and thinks, recognizes. But if we were to just relax and let that go, then what we notice is when that sense of a me that is created, that is an illusion dependent upon the conceit, it's the intrinsic I am that says

when the I am arises, there arises this sense of I am seeing, I'm hearing, I am tasting, I'm thinking, I'm doing all these things. But when the mind lets go of that, then there is just the seen. There's just the heard. There's just the cognized. There's this, the sense, the cognized. And so, how does that arise? It arises because of lack of proper attention in any or every given moment.

It arises because the mind starts to think about this or that. And there is yoniso manasikara, that is to say, a mind that doesn't see reality as it is, and such a mind is coming from ignorance, and ignorance here is the lack of mindfulness of the Four Noble Truths in every given moment. So does that mean we need to keep noting all the time what's going on? Seeing, seeing, seeing, hearing, hearing, hearing, tasting, tasting, tasting, thinking, thinking, thinking? You could try it. You can see what that does for you. But what you will notice is then it just becomes this process by rote, rather than you actually just observing things and relaxing. Because if there is this thing that is looking at, seeing, seeing, seeing, hearing, hearing, hearing, tasting, tasting, tasting, thinking, thinking, thinking, then what is it that is doing that? There's still a center point of a sense of self that is observing that, right? But if you even relax that and just be able to trust in the natural luminous nature of the mind, which the Buddha has talked about

where he says that luminous is the mind of monks, luminous is the mind, but due to adventitious defilements the mind becomes obscured, and so our only goal, so to speak, is to let go of the obscurations, let go of the defilements, and that is as simple as just relaxing, relaxing into any experience and relaxing any subtle tension of the desire to control the experience, the desire to make the experience mine, the desire to be the one who is experiencing it. And whenever the mind notices it, it relaxes it, it lets it go. So when this happens the mind

does not misconceive what is being experienced. It doesn't relate to it from a sense of this is me, this is mine, this is myself. It does not misconceive what is not experienced. So, in that moment, there is no conceit present. It does not misconceive what can be experienced. It does not misconceive that there is one who experiences. There's just a process of experience going on. You could try this right now, in this moment, if you just let the mind relax, notice where the inkling of I comes, notice it as a thought, this is me, or the thought of I, and if you relax that, there's that clear space

it's the sky mind, it's the blue cloudless sky that is the experience of the signless. The mind doesn't objectify anything, doesn't reify anything, because there's no one there to objectify it. It's just the process. The mind doesn't have an intention towards controlling something. It is just desirelessness. The mind remains, it stops, it stops trying to do anything, and the mind is empty of any sense of conceptualizing from a sense of self, from a sense of this is me, mine, or myself. It is just mind, pure mind, luminous, naturally aware

free of any kind of ignorance, craving or conceit, and this is natural mindfulness. It's not a mindfulness that is fabricated, in I have to be aware of thinking, thinking, thinking, seeing, seeing, seeing. It's just the purity of mindfulness, due to equanimity, which is dependent upon just relaxing, and the mind becomes naturally collected in whatever is happening. Thus, because being ever stable among things seen, heard, sensed and cognized, the Tathagata is a stable one.

And I say there is no stable one more excellent or sublime than that stable one, and then he breaks out into verse: amid those who are self-constrained, the stable one would not posit as categorically true or false anything that is seen, heard or sensed, clung to and considered truth by others, since they have already seen this dart to which people cling and adhere, saying, I know, I see, it is just so. That the one that does cling to nothing. Another way of looking at it is that there is no desire to reify to the point of saying that this is the ultimate, that this is the ultimate truth, or that this is categorically true or categorically false. This can be very nuanced, because a person looking at this could look at it as, oh, is this talking about eel wriggling? Are we saying that this is neither true or false? What are we doing? We're not putting a position on anything. What we're saying is we're letting go of all views altogether, we're letting go of any kind of establishment of

an opinion about something, because when you relax that conceit and the mind is completely naturally aware, naturally mindful, naturally collected, it doesn't have an opinion about anything. It doesn't have a viewpoint about this or that. It is just pure experience. So to call it false or call it true comes from a conceptualizing standpoint, a process of prapancha, which is proliferation of concepts, proliferation of opinions and views. Instead, amid those who are self-constrained, which means those who are caught up in the sense of self, the stable one, the one who has realized this

would not posit as categorically true or false anything that is experienced, clung to, or considered truth by others. So it's not about saying that this is false. It's realizing that things are arising dependent upon causes and conditions. When those causes and conditions are no longer present, those experiences go away, so in those moments they are experienced and in other moments they pass away. This is the core essence of the Buddha's understanding of reality and what he teaches: that through causes and conditions things arise, and when they are no longer present they pass away. This realization leads to the understanding, not just the intellectual understanding but the actual experience of impermanence, which, when we think about the Pali, is really instability, and that's what conceit is. Conceit is the desire to find stability from a sense of self in a naturally unstable reality, in an unstable world.

And so if we let go of that and understand the instability, the impermanence, we also realize that any intention coming from a sense of self ultimately leads to some kind of suffering, some kind of disappointment, some kind of ending of an experience. And so one becomes desireless naturally. And seeing everything as an impersonal process, even the sense of self coming up as dependent upon causes and conditions, the mind lets go completely, becomes disengaged from that, disenchanted, disengaged, dispassionate, and then is liberated from that experience. So then the mind just rests in that signless, undirected, empty space,

which is the luminous mind. And so one clings to nothing. One doesn't cling to any views. One doesn't cling to any standpoint, doesn't cling to any opinions. The mind is just experiencing things as they are and doesn't have to even reify the mind itself that is experiencing things as they are. Doesn't reify it as, oh, it's the great luminosity, it's this and that. That's just for the thinking mind, the conceptualizing mind, to find stability. And I have found the ultimate, this is what I am, or this is what we're all looking for. Let's go of even that. It just rests. There's nothing else that needs to be done but just rest. So that's the super.