The teachings in the Honey Cake sutta are quite accessible, effective and may serve as a link or bridge into the perfection of wisdom teachings found throughout much of Buddhism. With freedom from labels comes freedom from proliferation of thought and all the associated behaviors that come along with it. The sutta points to the role concepts of identity play in conflict and vexation and encourages realizing freedom from them. Quotes are below:
…What does the ascetic teach? What does he explain?
…Sir, my teaching is such that one does not conflict with anyone in this world with its gods, Māras, and Brahmās, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its gods and humans. And it is such that perceptions (labels) do not underlie the brahmin who lives detached from sensual pleasures, without doubting, stripped of worry, and rid of craving for rebirth in this or that state. That’s what I teach, and that’s what I explain…
…Mendicant, a person is beset by concepts of identity that emerge from the proliferation of perceptions. If they don’t find anything worth approving, welcoming, or getting attached to in the source from which these arise, just this is the end of the underlying tendencies to desire, repulsion, views, doubt, conceit, the desire to be reborn, and ignorance. This is the end of taking up the rod and the sword, the end of quarrels, arguments, and disputes, of accusations, divisive speech, and lies. This is where these bad, unskillful qualities cease without anything left over…
…Eye consciousness arises dependent on the eye and sights. The meeting of the three is contact. Contact is a condition for feeling. What you feel, you perceive. What you perceive, you think about. What you think about, you proliferate. What you proliferate about is the source from which a person is beset by concepts of identity that emerge from the proliferation of perceptions. This occurs with respect to sights known by the eye in the past, future, and present…
…When there is the eye, sights, and eye consciousness, it’s possible to point out what’s known as ‘contact’. When there is what’s known as contact, it’s possible to point out what’s known as ‘feeling’. When there is what’s known as feeling, it’s possible to point out what’s known as ‘perception’. When there is what’s known as perception, it’s possible to point out what’s known as ‘thought’. When there is what’s known as thought, it’s possible to point out what’s known as ‘being beset by concepts of identity that emerge from the proliferation of perceptions…
…When there is no eye, no sights, and no eye consciousness, it’s not possible to point out what’s known as ‘contact’. When there isn’t what’s known as contact, it’s not possible to point out what’s known as ‘feeling’. When there isn’t what’s known as feeling, it’s not possible to point out what’s known as ‘perception’. When there isn’t what’s known as perception, it’s not possible to point out what’s known as ‘thought’. When there isn’t what’s known as thought, it’s not possible to point out what’s known as ‘being beset by concepts of identity that emerge from the proliferation of perceptions…
Reference:
- MN 18 Madhupiṇḍikasutta