TWO NATURES KNOWN as small stories and big stories prevail in the world. Big or small, the story forms as a result of a ‘mind’ (a thought) that arises and passes away. Based on the extent of attachment or resentment towards that mind, the story turns out to be big or small. Caused by a single mind, a human being would laugh, or cry, or hold expectations. Since the mind that arose was damped with craving―tanhā, concatenations of more and more minds would proliferate, on occasion even to the extent of leading oneself to commit suicide. Laughing is a small story. Committing suicide is a big story. For both, though, the seed was a single mind that arose and passed away; a succession of minds that arose on account of becoming attached to that mind. The story ended up being big or small depending on the nature of attachment or resentment for the mind arisen. That a human being suffers in the fourfold hell for eons, or wallows in pleasures in the fortunate destinations of rebirth, is owing to a ‘mind’ moistened with craving. Look how a single mind dampened with ignorance (avijjā) lures you away to tell a big story, a long story that endows you with suffering[i] for eons on end.

Beings languishing in the fourfold hell, suffering insufferable pain, have wound up in that state simply owing to a single mind soaked in greed, hatred and delusion[ii] that formed in them at some point in time. If so, then it’s a real tragedy that one has to experience such horrendous suffering over an elongated period of eons because of a mind that simply doesn’t belong to oneself; that is a stranger to oneself; that momentarily arose and passed away; that is damped with greed, hatred and delusion. An elongated story it is, caused by a brief mind.

Having trained in letting go and having practised seeing the impermanence of the mind, however, supposing you cultivated an insightful perception that a mind of attachment or resentment would simply make you a wanderer weaving long stories. Or supposing you entered the path to extinguishment[iii] with a sincere belief that you’d somehow escape the world, the suffering. Then, at some decisive moment a single arising-passing mind, bearing the fruits of insight vision, would bring you the wonderful freedom and lightness of extinguishment.

Just as what extinguishes you from the world by ending the story is a mind, what weaves bigger stories by becoming involved in the world, too, is a mind―that [same] stranger of a mind of yours. Cultivating mindfulness and living within the remit of Dhamma-Vinaya with mindfulness and clear comprehension, try to find solace by having discerned this stranger.

Looking at society, all the stories we ever see are long stories. Why every story lengthens is because ignorance has strengthened. If a young man were to glance at a young woman, it would end in marriage. With children and grandchildren. With the bond called family. And upon passing away having clung to those things, [would end] in fourfold hell or fortunate destinations of rebirth.

If somebody were to scowl at another, or accidentally bump against someone, or make a simple mistake, a slight slip, it would end in having suffered years of imprisonment for murder; in having endured eons of suffering in hell. If a revered Sinhala person were to accidentally bump into a revered Tamil person or vice versa, it would end in terrible civil strife between two ethnic groups; in disaster; in an intense hatred born out of clinging to notions such as ‘my country,’ ‘my nationality.’ Even concerning [one's] country or nationality, if it was but hatred that arose, the result would indeed be suffering. If one died bearing a mind of hatred, the inheritance would indeed be the fourfold hell.

If some revered person were to ordain as a monk in the Buddhist Order, that monkhood would end in making ‘mine’ the knowledge, fame, gain and hospitality, sect, monastery, forest, kuṭi, moral precepts (sīla), concentration (samādhi), fruits of the path (magga phala), the radio, TV, the propagation of Dhamma… That monkhood would end in making all these things ‘mine.’ The irony is that he would even make Buddha’s teaching―which embodies the essence of, and insightfully penetrates, the nature of ‘nature,’ the nature of ‘natural phenomena’―his own. Not a single thing noted down here belongs to the Bhikkhu who authors it. Rather, what merely happened here was that Bhikkhu gave an account of the nature of the world and recounted the experiences gained in the course of insightfully penetrating the nature of the world. None of these facts belongs to Bhikkhu. They belong to the world. The world belongs to suffering, to impermanence. If one were to make these things ‘mine,’ what he or she claimed as ‘mine’ would be the world, the suffering, the impermanence.

Such is the nature of long stories of a sequence of minds that a single arising-passing mind spawned. Despite having the ability to turn each such long story into a brief, conciliatory one, due to becoming attached to or resenting the mind arisen, due to damping the mind with craving, due to making the mind ‘mine,’ rather than being on course to extinguish the suffering by dint of letting go, [one] turns them into long stories by becoming attached. You, too, strive to free yourself from the world, escaping the ignorance.

[i]     Though the translation users the term ‘suffering’, the Pāli term dukkha has a broader meaning consisting of the suffering of birth, decay and death, the suffering of sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair; and in general, the unsatisfactory nature of all conditioned phenomena (including pleasurable experiences) which, due to their impermanence, are all liable to suffering. Hence 'unsatisfactoriness' or 'liability to suffering' are more adequate renderings. ‘The noble truth of suffering’ does not deny the existence of pleasurable experience, as is sometimes wrongly assumed. (see dukkha).

[ii] Greed, hatred, delusion ― rāga, dosa, moha.

[iii] The state of liberation from all suffering and defilements; the state of absolute extinction of suffering. (see Nibbāna).