                               Chapter II
                               ==========
  
  
                    "Fire burns with clinging,
                    and not without clinging."
  
  
  
    Although the compilers of the Pali Canon were not concerned with 
  teaching the physical sciences, there are frequent passages where they 
  cite the behavior of the physical universe, in similes or examples, to 
  illustrate points of doctrine.  A number of these passages discuss 
  questions of heat, motion, meteorology, the etiology of diseases, and 
  so forth, in enough detail to show that a common theory underlies 
  their explanation.  That theory centers around the concept of 'dhatu,' 
  property or potential.  The physical properties presented in this 
  theory are four:  those of earth (solidity), liquid, heat, & wind 
  (motion).  Three of them--liquid, heat, & wind--are potentially 
  active.  When they are aggravated, agitated or provoked--the Pali term 
  here, 'pakuppati', is used also on the psychological level, where it 
  means angered or upset--they act as the underlying cause for activity 
  in nature.  Fire, for example, is said to occur when the heat property 
  is provoked.
  
  
  
       There comes a time when the external heat property is 
       provoked, and consumes village, town & city, countryside & 
       rural area, and then, coming to the edge of a green 
       district, the edge of a road, the edge of a rocky district, 
       to the water's edge, or to a lush, well-watered area, goes 
       out from lack of sustenance.  
  
                      M 28
  
  
  
    Once a fire has been provoked, it needs 'upadana'--commonly 
  translated as fuel--to continue burning.  Upadana has other meanings 
  besides fuel, though--one is the nourishment that sustains the life & 
  growth of a tree--and as we shall see below, wind can also function as 
  a fire's upadana.  Thus, 'sustenance' would seem to be a more precise 
  translation for the term.
  
  
  
       'How do you construe this, young man:  Which fire would be 
       more brilliant, luminous, & dazzling--that which burned in 
       dependence on a sustenance of grass & timber, or that which 
       burned in dependence on having relinquished a sustenance of 
       grass & timber?'
       
       'If it were possible, Gotama, for a fire to burn in 
       dependence on having relinquished a sustenance of grass & 
       timber, that fire would be the more brilliant, luminous, & 
       dazzling.'
       
       'It's impossible, young man, there is no way, that a fire 
       could burn in dependence on having relinquished a sustenance 
       of grass & timber, aside from a feat of psychic power....'
  
                      M 99
  
  
  
       'Just as a fire, Vaccha, burns with sustenance, and not 
       without sustenance, even so I declare the rebirth of one who 
       has sustenance, and not of one without sustenance.'
       
       'But, Venerable Gotama, at the moment a flame is being swept 
       on by the wind and goes a far distance, what do you say is 
       its sustenance then?'
       
       'Vaccha, when a flame is being swept on by the wind and goes 
       a far distance, I say that it is wind-sustained.  The wind, 
       Vaccha, is its sustenance at that time.'
       
       'And at the moment when a being sets this body aside and has 
       not yet attained another body, what do you say is its 
       sustenance then?'
       
       'Actually, Vaccha, when a being sets this body aside and has 
       not yet attained another body, I say that it is 
       craving-sustained.  Craving, Vaccha, is its sustenance at 
       that time.'
  
                      S xliv.9
  
  
  
    Another meaning for upadana is clinging, which suggests that, just 
  as a tree clings to the soil that provides its sustenance, fire clings 
  to its fuel.  Thus the above passage could also read, 'fire burns with 
  clinging and not without clinging'--a characteristic of fire that was 
  observed in other ancient Asian traditions, such as the Chinese I 
  Ching, as well.
    
    The clinging nature of fire is reflected in a number of other 
  idioms used by the Pali Canon to describe its workings.  For one, an 
  object that catches fire is said to get 'stuck' (passive) or to 
  'stick' (active):  Adherence is a two-way process.
  
  
  
       Just as a wing bone or tendon parings, monks, thrown into a 
       fire don't catch fire (lit: 'stick' or 'get stuck'), keep 
       apart, turn aside, and are not drawn in; even so the heart 
       of a monk who spends time often with a mind accustomed to 
       focusing on the repulsive, doesn't stick to the (thought of 
       ) engaging in the sexual act, keeps apart, turns aside and 
       is not drawn in, and remains either indifferent or repelled.
  
                      A vii.46
  
  
  
    The second side of the attachment--that fire, in sticking to 
  something, gets stuck--is reflected in yet another idiom in the Pali 
  Canon:  When it leaves a piece of fuel it has been clinging to, it is 
  said to be released.
  
  
  
       Just as fire...after being released from a house of reeds or 
       a house of grass, burns even gabled houses, plastered, 
       latched, shut against the wind; even so, all dangers that 
       arise, arise from fools, and not from wise men; all 
       disasters...all troubles that arise, arise from fools and 
       not from wise men.
  
                      M 115
  
  
  
    This sense of fire's being entrapped as it burns echoes the stanza 
  from the Svetasvatara Upanishad, quoted above (page 19), that refers 
  to fire as being 'seized' when ignited by the friction of fire sticks.  
  Apparently the Buddhists were not alone in their time in seeing 
  attachment & entrapment as they watched a fire burn.  And this would 
  account for the way early Buddhist poetry tends to couple the image of 
  an extinguished fire with the notion of freedom:
  
  
  
       like a flame's going out
       was the liberation  of awareness.
  
                      D 16
  
  
  
       as a flame overthrown by the force of the wind...
       so the sage freed from mental activity...
  
                      Sn v.6
  
  
  
    So, to summarize:  The image of an extinguished fire carried no 
  connotations of annihilation for the early Buddhists.  Rather, the 
  aspects of fire that to them had significance for the mind-fire 
  analogy are these:  Fire, when burning, is in a state of agitation, 
  dependence, attachment, & entrapment--both clinging & being stuck to 
  its sustenance.  Extinguished, it becomes calm, independent, 
  indeterminate, & unattached:  It lets go of its sustenance and is 
  released.
  
    This same nexus of events, applied to the workings of the mind, 
  occurs repeatedly in Canonical passages describing the attainment of 
  the goal:
    
    
    
       One attached is unreleased; one unattached is released.  
       Should consciousness, when standing (still), stand attached 
       to (a physical) form, supported by form (as its object), 
       established on form, seeking enjoyment, it would exhibit 
       growth, increase, & proliferation.  Should consciousness, 
       when standing (still), stand attached to feeling...to 
       perception... to mental processes...it would exhibit growth, 
       increase, & proliferation.  Were someone to say, 'I will 
       describe a coming, a going, a passing away, an arising, a 
       growth, an increase or a  proliferation of consciousness 
       apart from form, from feeling, from perception, from mental 
       processes,'  that would be impossible. 
       
       If a monk abandons passion for the property of form... 
       feeling...perception...mental processes...consciousness, 
       then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut 
       off, and there is no base for consciousness.  Consciousness, 
       thus unestablished, not proliferating, not performing any 
       function, is released.  Owing to its release, it stands 
       still.  Owing to its stillness, it is contented.  Owing to 
       its contentment, it is not agitated.  Not agitated, he (the 
       monk) is totally 'nibbana-ed' right within himself.  He 
       discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the 
       task done.  There is nothing further for this world.'
  
                      S xxii.53
  
  
  
    This being the set of events--stillness, independence,  
  unattachment--associated with the extinguishing of a fire and the 
  attainment of the goal, it would appear that, of all the etymologies 
  offered to explain the word 'nibbana,' the one closest to its original 
  connotations is that quoted by Buddhaghosa in The Path of Purification 
  (VIII, 247).  There he derives the word from the negative prefix 
  'nir,' plus 'vana,' or binding*:   'Unbinding'.  
    
    Modern scholars have tended to scorn this derivation as fanciful, 
  and they favor such hypotheses as 'blowing out,' 'not blowing' or 
  'covering.'  But although these hypotheses may make sense in terms of 
  modern Western ideas about fire, they are hardly relevant to the way 
  nibbana is used in the Canon.  Freedom, on the other hand, is more 
  than relevant.  It is central,  both in the context of ancient Indian 
  theories of fire, and in the psychological context of attaining the 
  goal:  'Not agitated, he is totally unbound right within.'
    
    So 'Unbinding' would seem to be the best equivalent for nibbana we 
  have in English.  What kind of unbinding?  We have already gained some 
  idea--liberation from dependency & limitations, from agitation & 
  death--but it turns out that nibbana is not the only term the Buddha 
  borrowed from the workings of fire to describe the workings of the 
  mind.  Upadana is another, and a survey of how he applied it to the 
  mind will help to show what is loosed in the mind's unbinding and how.
