Monday, October 7, 2013

A short note on metaphor and literalism.

In the Kathavatthu ("Points of Controversy"), there is a controverted point, XXIII.5 dealing with the nature of the aggregates, elements and such. It states that, on the basis of the declaration by the Bhikkhuni Vajira, that only suffering is conditioned.

Vajira's verse is a beautiful reply to the machinations of Mara to disturb her meditation.

Here are the lines in question

By whom has this being been created?
Where is the maker of the being?
Where has the being arisen?
Where does the being cease?
Then it occurred to the bhikkhuni Vajira: "Now who is this that recited the verse — a human being or a non-human being?" Then it occurred to her: "This is Mara the Evil One, who has recited the verse desiring to arouse fear, trepidation, and terror in me, desiring to make me fall away from concentration."
Then the bhikkhuni Vajira, having understood, "This is Mara the Evil One," replied to him in verses: 
Why now do you assume 'a being'?
Mara, have you grasped a view?
This is a heap of sheer constructions:
Here no being is found. 
Just as, with an assemblage of parts,
the word 'chariot' is used,
So when the aggregates are present,
There's the convention 'a being'. 
It's only suffering that comes to be,
Suffering that stands and falls away.
Nothing but suffering comes to be,
Nothing but suffering ceases.
The fact that this is poetry should be the first clue that this is not meant to be taken literally. Vajira is making a point about not taking any of the aggregates in whole or part to be her self. This in addition to the Patisambhidamagga's note that somethings can be "misinterpreted by misapprehension." (Ps ii 195)

Among the difficulties plaguing the reading of a religious text so far removed from it's cultural and temporal contexts is understanding what is, and isn't, to be taken literally. For my part, I think it's obvious.

May all beings be happy and free from suffering.

No comments:

Post a Comment