The Greek youth Narcissus had never looked into a mirror. He never knew how handsome he was. One day he saw the reflection of his own face in a shady pond as he bent down to wash his face. He fell in love with the image, imagining it to be a nymph. He stretched his arms to embrace but the image disappeared through the ripples. He tried again and again but it was all in vain. Day after day he came to the pond and tried and tried and tried until he pined away and embraced Death.

Now this is the proverbial tragedy of self-love, born of unwise reflection. Sometimes we see a little bird pecking again and again at our dusty window panes. It is imagining a mate there but, all its attempts to get at the mate end up in a stalemate.

What that little bird does from outside, we have been doing throughout our samsaric existence, from inside our little house with its six dusty windows - the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body and the mind. We look out on the world from our little house through these six windows. Everytime we look, we seem to see a self. "Lust is the real dust, not the common dust" - says the Buddha, and this is the dust on our window-panes. This dust together with the murk of ignorance around, acts like mercury on the reverse of a mirror so we can’t see through. Like the shady pond of Narcissus our window-panes reflect our own prejudices - ’I’, ’ME’ and ’MINE’.

The cumulative effect of all our efforts in samsara to look out on the world through our dusty windows, is the five grasping groups - form, feeling, perception, preparations and consciousness.

Grasping or holding on to these five groups, one unwisely reflects, hoping to sort out the identity of the self, with the question ’Who am I?’ One does not realize that one is simply begging the question. So one comes back again and again to the same question in the form of repeated birth in its three dimensions of decay, disease and death.

The Arahant, the Venerable Punna Mantaniputta takes up the simile of the mirror to expose the fallacy of such questions as ’WHO AM I’! He explains to Venerable Ananda that AM is a conceit born of the very dependence in holding on to the five groups.

"Owing to dependence, friend Ananda, comes the conceit ’AM’ not without dependence. Depending on what comes the conceit ’AM’? Depending on form, on feeling, on perception, on preparations, on consciousness. Just as, friend, Ananda, a young woman or young man fond of self adornment, in gazing at the image of her or his face in a clean spotless mirror or in a bowl of clear water, does so, depending on something, and not without depending. Even so,friend, Ananda, depending on form comes the conceit AM, not otherwise. Depending on feeling, on perception, on preparation, on consciousness, comes the conceit AM, not otherwise"

‘Ananda’ - Sanyuktta Nikaya, Volume 111 - Page 105 (P.T.S.) The emphatic negation, "without dependence," is a pointer to those who raise. Such fallacies questions as "Who Am I?" They are not aware of the mirror they are looking into.

This obsession with self is so powerful, that it easily impels one to transgress the moral laws prevailing in the universe. Unwise reflection prompts one to seek one’s own selfish ends by hook or by crook. The inevitable result is suffering brought about as moral retribution by the law of kamma or karma. Wise reflection is therefore essential for ethical perfection. The Buddha once instructed the little novice Rahula on the simple criterion of wise reflection in one’s bodily verbal and mental action, making use of the mirror-simile.

"What do you think Rahula? What is the purpose of a mirror?" "For the purpose of reflection, Venerable Sir"

"Even so, Rahula, after repeated reflection you should do an action with the body; after repeated reflection you should do an action by speech; after repeated reflection, you should do an action by mind."

"Rahula whenever you wish to do an action with the body, you should reflect upon that same bodily action - ‘Would this action that I wish to do with the body lead to my own affliction or to the affliction of others, or to the affliction of both? Is it an unskillful bodily action with painful consequences with painful results?’ Upon reflection if you know; that it is such an action then you should definitely not do such an action with the body. But if you know upon reflection that it would not lead to your own affliction or to the affliction of others or to the affliction of both, that it is a skillful bodily action with pleasant consequences with pleasant results, then you may do such an action with the body."

The Buddha advises that this form of reflection should also be done while doing an action and even after the action is done. While doing an action if the reflection reveals those negative aspects, the action should be suspended then and there. After the action is done, if the reflection reveals the negative aspects, confession and restraint for the future must be undertaken.

The same procedure is to be followed in the case of verbal and mental action. This detailed programme of repeated reflection is obviously meant for narrowing down the margin of error and for checking self-deception. With small beginnings as from the little novice Rahula it can go a long way and this is precisely the final assurance of the Buddha.

"Rahula, whatever recluses and brahmins in the past purified their bodily action, their verbal action and their mental action, all did so by repeatedly reflecting thus. Whatever recluses and brahmins in the future will purify their bodily action, their verbal action, their mental action, all will do so by repeatedly reflecting thus. Whatever recluses and brahmins in the present are purifying their bodily action, their verbal action and their mental action, all are doing so by repeatedly reflecting thus. Therefore Rahula, you should train thus: "We will purify our bodily action, our verbal action and our mental action by repeatedly reflecting upon them.