The Second Treatise on the Perfections – 2864
neither a foe nor friend (
majjhatta-puggala
); on the contrary, it is easy to direct
loving-kindness towards a friend (
piya-puggala
). Loving-kindness that has as its
object neither a foe nor neither foe nor friend but only a friend is loving-
kindness of no value, no matter how often it is developed, because it is just a
performance of an easy task.
If one desires to fulfil the perfection of loving-kindness properly, one should
develop loving-kindness directed towards oneself first. Since such a
development is in one’s own interest, loving-kindness arises easily and fully
without fail. This loving-kindness which is complete, as it is developed for one’s
own self, should serve as an example. Hence, loving-kindness should be directed
towards oneself first.
When loving-kindness is directed towards a foe, neither friend nor foe and a
friend, one should do so all alike without any discrimination, in the same
manner one has done towards oneself. Could it be easily done? No, it could not
be. Indeed, it is difficult to develop loving-kindness even towards a friend the
way one does towards oneself, let alone towards a foe or a neutral person; as has
been instructed by the Buddha, there is no person like oneself that one loves
(
atta-samaṁ pemaṁ natthi
) (see SN 1.13,
passim
). Only when loving-kindness,
which is so difficult to develop towards a friend, can be developed not only
towards a friend but also towards the other two persons on a par with oneself
and without the slightest difference, can it become genuine perfection of loving-
kindness.
This suggests how difficult it is to develop genuine loving-kindness and how
great its value is. On account of the development of this form of loving-kindness,
as has been stated above, Suvaṇṇasāma was loved by wild beasts like tigers, lions,
etc. It is even more difficult to develop equanimity (
upekkhā
) as a perfection
than to develop loving-kindness for the same purpose.
It is not easy to develop equanimity
even towards a neutral person of the three
types. People would say: “I remain equanimous with regard to him now,” or “In
this matter, I adopt the attitude of he is the owner of his own productive deeds
(
kammassakā
),” and so on. As such a saying signifies unconcern and disinterest,
equanimity
appears to be of little importance. In reality, equanimity
presupposes
paying attention to, and taking interest in, the object of contemplation, but as a
neutral observer.