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.