The Sermon at Benares
The Sermon at Benares
Before You Read (Page 1)
1. What is a sermon? Is it different from a lecture or a talk? Can this word also be used in a negative way or as a joke (as in “my mother’s sermon about getting my work done on time…”)?
Ans. A sermon is a religious or moral talk. It is different from a lecture, which is typically academic, or a talk, which can be on any subject. Yes, the word can be used negatively or as a joke to describe a long, boring, or preachy speech, like the example of a “mother’s sermon” about getting work done.
2. Find out the meanings of the words and phrases given in the box.
Ans. Based on the contextual meanings provided in the text margins:
* afflicted with: affected by suffering, disease or pain
* be composed: To become calm and settled (implied by the context “has become composed will obtain peace of mind”).
* lamentation: expression of sorrow
* desolation: an area which is filled with deep sorrow (as in “valley of desolation”)
* procure: To obtain or get (as in “promised to procure it”)
* be subject to: To be under the power of or affected by (as in “all are subject to death”)
3. Have you heard of the Sermon on the Mount? Who delivered it? Who do you think delivered a sermon at Benares?
Ans. The Sermon on the Mount was delivered by Jesus Christ. The sermon at Benares, as the text indicates, was delivered by Gautama Buddha.
Thinking about the Text (Page 3)
1. When her son dies, Kisa Gotami goes from house to house. What does she ask for? Does she get it? Why not?
Ans. Kisa Gotami goes from house to house asking her neighbours for medicine that will cure her dead son. She does not get it, because the boy is already dead and the people think she “has lost her senses”.
2. Kisa Gotami again goes from house to house after she speaks with the Buddha. What does she ask for, the second time around? Does she get it? Why not?
Ans. The second time, she asks for a handful of mustard-seed. The Buddha specified that the seed must come from a house “where no one has lost a child, husband, parent or friend”. She does not get this specific seed, because there was no house she could find where “some beloved one had not died”.
3. What does Kisa Gotami understand the second time that she failed to understand the first time? Was this what the Buddha wanted her to understand?
Ans. The second time, Kisa Gotami understands that death is “common to all” and that she was being “selfish in her grief”. She realized that the dead are “many,” while the living are “few”. This is exactly what the Buddha wanted her to understand: the universal and inescapable nature of death, which is the “inscrutable kind of suffering” his sermon addresses.
4. Why do you think Kisa Gotami understood this only the second time? In what way did the Buddha change her understanding?
Ans. Kisa Gotami understood this only the second time because the Buddha’s task forced her to confront the reality of loss for herself. Instead of just telling her that death is universal, he gave her a practical task that made her visit every house and personally discover that everyone shares the same grief. This experience, combined with watching the city lights “flicker up and were extinguished again,” made her realize that human life is also temporary. The Buddha changed her understanding by moving her focus from her personal, “selfish” grief to a universal truth.
5. How do you usually understand the idea of ‘selfishness’? Do you agree with Kisa Gotami that she was being ‘selfish in her grief ‘?
Ans. “Selfishness” usually means caring only about one’s own needs or desires without considering others. Kisa Gotami’s realization that she was “selfish in her grief” is a profound one. She was so completely absorbed in her own pain and her own loss that she was blind to the fact that everyone else around her had also suffered or was suffering the same kind of loss. In this context, her grief was “selfish” because it isolated her and made her believe her suffering was unique, rather than connecting her to the common human experience of sorrow.
Thinking about Language (Page 4)
I. This text is written in an old-fashioned style… try to rephrase them in more current language…
* give thee medicine for thy child
* Modern rephrase: “give you medicine for your child”
* Pray tell me
* Modern rephrase: “Please tell me”
* Kisa repaired to the Buddha
* Modern rephrase: “Kisa went to the Buddha”
* there was no house but someone had died in it
* Modern rephrase: “there wasn’t a single house where someone hadn’t died”
* kinsmen
* Modern rephrase: “relatives”
* Mark!
* Modern rephrase: “Listen!” or “Take note!”
II. …we can use a semicolon (;) or a dash (-) to combine two clauses. …Break up the sentence into three simple sentences.
* Original Sentence: “For there is not any means by which those who have been born can avoid dying; after reaching old age there is death; of such a nature are living beings.”
* Broken into three simple sentences:
* For there is not any means by which those who have been born can avoid dying.
* After reaching old age there is death.
* Of such a nature are living beings.
* Which has a better rhythm?
The single sentence using semicolons has a better rhythm. The semicolons connect three closely related ideas, allowing the thought to flow like a single, powerful declaration, which is appropriate for a sermon. The three separate sentences sound more choppy and disconnected.
Speaking and Writing (Pages 4-6)
These sections ask for discussion and writing based on the chapter’s themes. Here are sample responses.
Speaking (Page 4)
The Buddha’s ideas absolutely continue to hold meaning. [cite_start]His sermon teaches the acceptance of suffering (specifically death) as a universal and inescapable part of life [cite: 29-31]. [cite_start]He argues that peace comes not from grieving, which only causes more pain, but from overcoming sorrow by “drawing out the arrow of lamentation”.
The modern texts approach grief from a psychological and practical standpoint. They validate the feelings of grief, like sadness, anger, and guilt [cite: 62-65], which the Buddha’s sermon identifies as the “arrow” to be removed. [cite_start]The modern texts focus on coping and support, advising us to “be patient” and focus on “what survivors… are bound to do for one another”.
The approaches complement each other. The Buddha provides the ultimate philosophical goal (acceptance of reality), while modern guides provide the practical, emotional, and community-based tools to help us get there.
Writing (Page 6) [cite: 90-92]
Below is a sample response for the second topic.
Helping Each Other to Get Over Difficult Times
Helping someone get through a difficult time is rarely about finding a “cure” for their pain. [cite_start]When Kisa Gotami was lost in grief, she desperately sought medicine for her son, but no such medicine existed. The Buddha wisely understood that what she needed was not a magical solution but a new perspective. He gave her a task that showed her she was not alone in her suffering.
This idea is mirrored in modern approaches to grief. We cannot “fix” someone’s loss, but we can help them carry the burden. Amitai Etzioni, writing about the loss of his wife and son, found solace not in abstract stages of grief but in the practical “what”. This meant “calling each other”, spending time with the widow, and focusing on supporting one another. This is the essence of helping: being present, patient, and available to talk or just sit in silence.
Ultimately, the Buddha teaches that peace comes from accepting reality and overcoming selfish sorrow. We help others reach that peace not by preaching to them, but by standing with them, sharing their sorrow, and gently guiding them back to the world of the living, reminding them (as Kisa Gotami learned) that life and loss are common to all.
For Anne Gregory
Thinking about the Poem (Page 9)
1. What does the young man mean by “great honey-coloured / Ramparts at your ear?” Why does he say that young men are “thrown into despair” by them?
Ans. The “great honey-coloured / Ramparts” refer to Anne’s beautiful yellow hair.
* He calls her hair “ramparts” (which are defensive walls on a castle) because he sees her external beauty as a barrier. This beauty is so distracting that it prevents men from seeing her for who she truly is.
* He says young men are “thrown into despair” because they are so captivated by her external beauty (the “yellow hair”) that they find it impossible to love her “for herself alone”.
2. What colour is the young woman’s hair? What does she say she can change it to? Why would she want to do so?
Ans. Her hair is yellow (“honey-coloured”).
* She says she can dye it “Brown, or black, or carrot”.
* She would want to do this to prove that men are shallow. She hopes that by changing her hair colour, she might find a man who will “love me for myself alone / And not my yellow hair”.
3. Objects have qualities which make them desirable to others… what qualities would you emphasise?
Ans. This question asks for personal reflection. If one were trying to sell a car, for example, the qualities to emphasize would be its fuel efficiency, safety rating, speed, or luxury features like leather seats and a premium sound system. These qualities are what make it desirable to a buyer.
4. What about people? Do we love others because we like their qualities… Or is it possible to love someone “for themselves alone”?
Ans. The poem argues that it is nearly impossible for humans to love someone “for themselves alone.”
* The young man states that men love Anne for her yellow hair.
* Anne wishes for a man who would love her despite her hair.
* The poem concludes with the religious man’s text, which says “only God… / Could love you for yourself alone”.
This suggests that humans are unable to separate a person from their qualities (like beauty), and only a divine being is capable of true, unconditional love.
5. …Is it possible to separate ‘the person himself or herself’ from how the person looks, sounds, walks, and so on?
Ans. The poem suggests it is not possible. Yeats’s other question, “How can we separate the dancer from the dance?”, gets to the heart of the matter. A person’s identity (“the dancer”) is expressed through their physical being and actions (“the dance”). We cannot know a person except through how they look, sound, and act. Therefore, the “self” and the physical/behavioral qualities are inseparably linked. As a person changes over the years, our relationship with them also changes, because the “person” we love is a combination of both their inner self and their external expression.