The Sword of Song

THE SWORD OF SONG 52 Dhyanic consciousness includes it and denies it. No doubt “something called” acts as a kind of caveat to the would-be sceptic, though the phrase is bad, implying a “calling. ” B ut we can guess what Huxley means. No doubt Buddha’s scepticism does not openly go quite so far as mine—it must be remembered that “scepticism” is merely the indication of a possible attitude, not a belief, as so many good fool folk thing; but Buddha not only denies “Cogito, ergo sum”; but “Cogito, ergo non sum.” See Sabbasava Sutta, par. 10.* At any rate, Sakkyaditthi, the delusion of personality, is in the very forefront of his doctrines; and it is this delusion that is con- stantly and inevitably affirmed in all normal consciousness. That Dhyanic thought avoids it is doubtful; even so, Buddha is here repre- sented as giving precepts to ordinary people. And if personality be delusion, a lie is involved in the command of one to another. In short, we all lie all the time; w e are compelled to it by the nature of things themselves—para- doxical as that seems—and the Buddha knew it! THE FIFTH PRECEPT. At last we arrive at the end of our weary journey—surely in this weather we may have a drink! East of Suez,† Trombone-Macaulay (as I may surely say, when Browning writes Banjo-Byron‡) tells us, a man may raise a Thirst. No, shrieks the Blessed One, the Perfected One, the Enlightened One, do not drink! It is like the streets of Paris when they were placarded with rival posters— Ne buvez pas de l’Alcool ! L’Alcool est un poison ! and Buvez de l’Alcool ! L’Alcool est un aliment ! We know now that alcohol is a food up to a certain amount; the precept, good enough for a rough rule as it stands, will not bear close inspection. What Buddha really commands with that grim humour of his, is: Avoid Intoxication. But what is intoxication? unless it be the loss of power to use perfectly a truth-telling set of faculties. If I w alk unsteadily it is ow ing to nervous lies—and so for all the phenomena of drunkenness. But a lie involves the assump- * Quoted in “Science and Buddhism”, s. IV , note. † “Ship me somewhere East of Suez, where a man can raise a thirst.”—R. KIPLING. ‡ “While as for Quilp Hop o’ my Thumb there Banjo-Byron that twangs the strum-strum there.” —BROWNING, Pachiarotto (said of A. Austin) tion of some true standard, and this can no- where be found. A doctor would tell you, moreover, that all food intoxicates: all, here as in all the universe, of every subject and in every predicate, is a matter of degree. Our faculties never tell us true; our eyes say flat when our fingers say round; our tongue sends a set of impressions to our brain which our hearing declares non-existent—and so on. What is this delusion of personality but a profound and centrally-seating intoxication of the consciousness ? I am intoxicated as I address these words; you are drunk—beastly drunk !—as you read them; Buddha was as drunk as a British officer when he uttered his besotted command. There, my dear children, is the conclusion to which we are brought if you insist that he was serious! I answer No ! Alone among men then liv- ing, the Buddha was sober, and saw Truth. He, who was freed from the coils of the reat serpent Theli coiled round the universe, he knew how deep the slaver of that snake had entered into us, infecting us, rotting our very bones with poisonous drunkenness. And so his cutting irony—drink no intoxicating drinks! ———— When I go to take Pansil, * it is in no spirit of servile morality; it is w ith keen sorrow gnawing at my heart. These five causes of sorrow are indeed the heads of the serpent of Desire. Four at least of them snap their fans on me in and by virtue of my very act of receiving the commands, and of promising to obey them; if there is a little difficulty about the fifth, it is an omission easily rectified—and I think we should all make a point about that; there is great virtue in completeness. Yes! Do not believe that the Buddha was a fool ; that he asked men to perform the i mpos- sible or the unwise.† Do not believe that t he sorrow of existence is so trivial that easy rules * To “ take P ansil” i s t o v ow obedience to these Precepts. † I do not propose to dila te on the m oral truth which Ibsen has so long la boured to make clear: that no ha rd a nd fa st rule of life c an be universally applicable. Al so, as in the famous case of the lady who sa ved (suc cessively) the live s of he r husba nd, her f ather, an d h er b rother, t he p recepts cl ash. To allow to die is to kill—all this is obvious to the most ordinary thinkers. Th ese p recepts ar e o f co urse excellent general guides for the vulgar and ignorant, but you and I, dear reader, are wise and clever, and know better. Nichtwar? Excuse my being so burie d in “de ar Im manuel Kant” (as my friend Miss Br . c .1 would say) that this biting and pregnant phrase slipped out unaware. As a rule, of c ourse, I ha te the introduction of foreign tongues into an English essay.—A.C. 1 A fast woman who posed as a bluestocking.