The Following is the second half of my slightly fictionalised, loose translation of Madhupindika Sutta: The Honeyball Sutta (MN18), the purpose of which is to facilitate understanding for students of the Buddhadharma. I didn’t complete it for you on New Year’s Eve, remember? You can find a more conventional rendering, for comparison, here.
∞
The story so far: A mendicant had, on behalf of his fellow mendicants, asked the Nikāya Buddha, “What did you mean, Sir, when you said: ‘someone not beset by perceptions’? And, what does that have to do with ‘not arguing with others’?”
The Buddha answered: “Practitioner, if, when encountering multiplicity, there is no ‘thing’ there to find delight in, no ‘thing’ to welcome and get hold of, then right there, that will be the end of underlying unhealthy tendencies. That is the end of the habitual, deep-seated tendency to desire becoming, and it is the end of ignorance. This is where all the violence ends – no arguments and quarrels, no accusations and tale-bearing, no falsities, and no taking up weapons. This is where all these harmful things cease.”
Then the teacher, without a word more, got up from his seat, and went into his own hut, leaving the young mendicants in silence. They went, then, to find Mahākaccāna, who was widely respected by the senior practitioners; to get an explanation of this teaching.
The esteemed Great Kaccāna said this to those monks who had sought him out: “The flourishing one made that short statement to you, and then he went into his dwelling without further analysis of the statement. As I understand it, he said:
‘About the perceptions and categories of division which assail a person, if there is nothing there to find delectable, to welcome, or latch onto, then this is the ending of the trance of views, doubts, conceit, resistance, and passion; the end of obsessing about becoming, and all the fixations of ignorance. So, it is the end of disputes, quarrels, arguments, slander and false speech; and of taking to weapons. This is where all these evil, unbeautiful things cease, without remainder.”
The mendicants listened in silence.
“You want to know how this can be. So, listen. Depending on eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises. These three together we call ‘contact.’ With contact as a condition, feeling-tones arise. And, what one feels, one recognises (perceives). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one divides up. Based on this dividing up, the elaborate perceptions and categories of the object-world assail a person, all involving such past, present and future states as are dependent on the eye.
“So it is with the other channels: With ear and sounds, ear-consciousness arises; with nose and smells, nose-consciousness arises; with the tongue and flavours, tongue-consciousness arises; with body and bodily sensations, body-consciousness arises; and, depending on the intellect and ideas, mind-consciousness arises.
“In all cases, the process of these three together – organ, sense-experience, and consciousness – is ‘contact.’ With contact as a necessary condition, there are the feeling-tones (pleasant, unpleasant and neutral). And, what one feels, one recognises. What one recognises, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one divides up. Based on this dividing up, the perceptions and categories of division assail a person, involving the past, present, and future concepts accumulated through the particular sense channels.
“Understand, so far?”
They assented with silence.
“So, where there is the eye, and forms, and eye-consciousness, then it is possible to separate out a category called ‘contact.’ When we can separate out ‘contact,’ it is possible for one to separate out ‘feeling-tones.’ When such a separating out of feeling-tones is possible, it is possible that a separating out of perception will be possible. With a separating out of perception, it is possible that forms of thought will be separated out. With a separating out of thinking, it is possible to separate out of the experience of ‘being beset by the perceptions and categories of the object-world.’ And, so it is for: the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body, and the intellect. Right?”
They were satisfied so far.
“Now, when there is no eye, no form, and no eye-consciousness, is it not possible that a category of experience ‘contact’ would be separated out. Then, if there is no separating out of contact, it will be impossible that one would separate out feeling-tones. If there is no separating out of feeling-tones, it is impossible that a person will separate out perceptions. If there is no separating out of perception, it is impossible that someone will perceive a separate process of thinking. If there is no separating out of thinking, it is impossible that the separating out of the experience of ‘being beset by the perceptions and categories of the object-world’ will happen.
“So it is for the other organs: the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body, and the intellect.
“This is how I understand the detailed meaning of the brief statement made by the flourishing one – let me remind you:
“‘About the perceptions and categories of division which assail a person, if there is nothing there to find delectable, to welcome, or latch onto, then this is the ending of the trance of views, doubts, conceit, resistance, and passion; the end of obsessing about becoming, and all the fixations of ignorance. So, it is the end of disputes, quarrels, arguments, slander and false speech; and of taking to weapons. This is where all these evil, unbeautiful things cease, without remainder.”
“Now, go to him, and question him about this. Check with him; and, whatever he answers, that is how you must remember it.”
So, these mendicants, delighting and approving of the Mahākaccāna ‘s words, rose from their place and went in search of the flourishing one. On arrival, after bowing down to him, they sat to one side. And there, they told him what had happened after he had retired into his hut; saying: “Then honourable Mahākaccāna showed us the meaning of these words, statements, and phrases.” And, they recounted Mahākaccāna’s elucidation.
“Mahākaccāna is wise, Practitioners. He is a person of great discernment. If you had asked me about this matter, I would have answered in the same way. The import of my statement is as he said. That is how you should remember it.”
When this was said, the esteemed Ānanda, who was there, and who remembers all the flourishing one’s teachings, said: “Sir, this is as though a person, overcome by hunger, weakness, and thirst, were to come upon a honeyball; and tasting it, he would experience a delicious, sweet taste.
“Wherever a mendicant is in a state of consciousness capable of exploring the meaning of this dhamma discourse, she or he would experience a similar satisfaction, and would experience faith in the dhamma. What is the name of this dhamma discourse?”
“Ānanda,” the flourishing one said, “you can remember this dhamma discourse as the ‘Honeyball Discourse.” Ānanda delighted at that.