Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. “Going for refuge” gets a sharp practical reframe at the opening of this 47-minute session by Ven Jampa Gendun: real refuge means sitting with your pain rather than reciting formulas, and he uses loneliness — the urge to call a friend rather than face it — as a concrete example. He then traces Śākyamūni Buddha’s life from the palace crisis at twenty-nine through six years of asceticism to enlightenment under the bodhi tree, and the first teaching of the Four Noble Truths at Deer Park, Sarnath. The session’s sharpest insight is that suffering in Buddhism is a method, not a theory — a motivational tool, not pessimism — illustrated through an anorexia analogy and a Thai monastery food meditation. Suitable for newcomers.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 01 1987 07 17 4 NT.mp3
UUID: c5e3addb-01c2-44ac-b2f8-9b1764712e57
Teacher: Ven Jampa Gendun
Collection: Four Noble Truths (Ven Jampa Gendun)
Date: 1987-07-17
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 46.6 minutes
Words: ~5,485
The spiritual community, to the Buddha, who are we going for refuge to? We’ve been going for refuge our entire lives. It’s not a new thing to go for refuge. What we’re trying to do now is to find a new refuge, an effective refuge, a refuge that works. Ultimately, it’s our own wisdom, our own sanity, our own mental health, our intelligence, which is going to save us from our problems.
Nothing outside of ourselves is going to save us from our problems. It’s our responsibility. We go for refuge to the Buddha. Ultimately, within sphere of our own wisdom, if we bring our problems to that sphere, we resolve them once and for all. We don’t have to live in the prisons of recurring patterns of unsatisfactory existence.
We’re making a mistake. And we can correct this mistake if we apply our own wisdom to our everyday problems. If we don’t, our problems are never going to end. You know, we can repeat words. We can repeat this refuge formula one hundred million times.
Maybe a little benefit, maybe a little benefit. Not much, though. But if we actually go for refuge one time, we can transform our lives. Just one time. There’s some movement in the mind.
What do you do? People talk about loneliness, for example. It’s a very practical problem, isn’t it? We’re not talking abstract philosophy. You’re lonely.
You’re at home at night, and you don’t want to be lonely because it’s painful. And you say, Oh, I’ve got to call somebody. I’ve got to get somebody over here. I can’t stay. I’m not going I can’t stay in this house all night.
So, what do you do? Get on the phone, and you call somebody and say, please, could you come over? I’m not so happy tonight. Things aren’t going so well. Or maybe I’ll come over there.
And maybe you go over to your friend’s house, and you talk about, a good friend, you talk about loneliness, and you have a very deep philosophical talk about loneliness, and you look at all or whatever, and you have a very meaningful dialogue about loneliness. And you feel very spiritually uplifted. And you go home feeling much better. But have you resolved anything? Have you solved your problem of loneliness?
Or have you simply camouflaged, distracted your mind from this basic problem of loneliness? You know, have you gone for refuge to your own wisdom, to your own sanity? It’s doubtful. You know, we run away. Sometimes the way we run away is quite skillful and we can deceive ourselves into thinking that we’re actually growing or solving our problems.
But if the pattern keeps reoccurring, have we solved anything? Or have we just merely alleviated the symptoms temporarily? The basic problem has remained. To go for refuge means you confront your problems and you apply your wisdom. This is real refuge, not the words that we just read.
We don’t have to talk about Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. This is Buddha, your own wisdom. Confronting your problems, being realistic and honest with yourself, and having the courage to face your pain which is not very pleasant. No one said practicing Dharma is pleasant. If you think practicing Dharma is the avoidance of pain, you’re making a big mistake.
But by accepting pain voluntarily, we can finally bring an end to it. If we don’t accept pain, we’re going to suffer anyway. And it’s never going to end. What can you do? We had this practical problem, I’m lonely.
Now, everyone experiences loneliness. Something very real. But have you ever tasted loneliness? Have you ever sat there with it and became loneliness? Instead of running away from it, get to know it.
What is it? How does it feel like? What does it taste like? What does it sound like? As you sit there quietly in your own home and you embrace this emotion which you’ve been running away from your entire life and see if there’s really anything there to be afraid of.
See if you can’t bring your own basic sanity to bear on the problem of loneliness. This is going for refuge. It’s what’s finally going to solve the problem of the suffering of loneliness. Nothing else. Nothing outside of yourself.
The Zen masters have an expression, If you see the Buddha on the road, kill him. If you see the Buddha outside yourself, kill him. We go for refuge to the Dharma and the techniques, the methods, if you like the truth to reality. And if we can get in harmony with the way things actually are, if we can live in accordance with with the actual nature of our being, then we can solve our problem. And the method is what we call Dharma.
There are various dharmas. There’s the Buddha Dharma, the Christian Dharma, Islam Dharma, the Judaistic Dharma, the Dharma of atheists. So you find one that works for you. We’re not selling Buddhism here. We’re just trying to make available a method to help solve your problem, to give you some real refuge that you can work with your pain effectively to once and for all transcend it.
And we go over refuge to the Sangha or the spiritual community. You know, the people who are actively engaged in spiritual growth, This is an important part of their life. We go to them for support. They act as an example. They can help us by encouraging us, by giving us teachings, by sympathizing.
Individuals. We are related. And we begin to fulfill this relationship within the spiritual community so that we can expand upon this to include everything that lives, all sentient life. We must begin somewhere so we begin within a spiritual community and they can act as this real refuge, as a protection. In the formula that we just recited, there was a second part.
It talks adjusting the motivation, developing altruistic aspiration to achieve sanity, sanity, to get yourself together so you can help somebody else effectively rather than using, manipulating, making other people objects for your pleasure. Through the merit that you create by listening to this talk may attain Buddhahood for the sake of all sentient beings. That’s a difficult jump, isn’t it? That’s a what do you say a quantum leap. You need to go from me First.
You know, there was a book I heard that was written a few years ago. It was a bestseller in the States called Getting Mine First or something like that. And it went over very well in the States. But it’s the antithesis of what will bring you peace. We don’t believe this, you know.
We have been trying as best we can for as long as we remember to fulfill every wish that we ever generate in spite of other people’s peace of mind, other people’s happiness. Somehow, you know, we don’t believe the Buddhas, don’t believe Jesus Christ, we don’t believe the Dalai Lama, we don’t believe Mother Teresa. We believe a guy on television who says, You buy this car, you’re going to have bliss forever. We believe him. Or we believe the beautiful lady on the television who says, You buy this perfume and all your dreams will come true.
And so you run out and you spend one hundred dollars an ounce to fulfill your dreams. And why is it we believe these people? Don’t believe Jesus Christ when He said, Love your enemy. We don’t believe the Buddha when He said, If you wish to fulfill your aims and cherish others. We don’t believe Mother Teresa when she says that if you want happiness, then you must see all sentient beings as Christ.
And we don’t believe the Dalai Lama who says, If you want happiness, then generate love and compassion. And if you want to bring happiness to others, then generate love and compassion. We don’t want to grow, because growth entails taking responsibility not only for oneself, but ultimately for everyone else. And we’re afraid of this task. We’ll do anything we can to break off the struggle.
It takes a bit of character, a bit of courage to go beyond your self-cherishing, your selfishness, your exaggerated self concern. But if we ever want to be truly happy, we have to make the effort. So we’re going to talk about the Four Noble Truths. There was a young man who lived twenty five hundred years ago. He was born in a place called Lumbini between the Nepali and Indian border, the present border.
He was born into a rich family. It’s called the Shakya clan, Shakya family. And they were very well off. And he had everything he wanted. He was protected from ugliness, everything that would bring him down, you might say.
He was given every luxury, every advantage. He was dissatisfied. It finally grew to where he had a crisis in his life at the age of twenty nine. You know, we all have crises in our life, don’t we? We all come to some point in our lives where life just seems rather meaningless.
It’s kind of hardly worth the trouble. Nothing has any value. We reach a crisis where all our old values no longer work. It’s a very fertile time in our lives, that great growth period, the possibility for growth. Now, it’s said that this crisis came about in Prince Siddhartha because he saw four signs when he went outside his palace.
He saw aging, that is he saw an old man. He saw disease, he saw a sick person, and he saw a corpse being carried to the funeral pyre. So he saw death. And then he saw an ascetic monk who was at peace. I’m not sure if this actually happened.
It is said that Śākyamūni Buddha went through twelve deeds during the period of his existence on earth, and these deeds are symbolic. He reached a crisis, we can say that, where he saw he wanted to he questioned whether suffering was inherent to existence, whether we had to be in pain. This question occurred to him, and it would not give him any peace. Peace. Luckily, I heard a quotation.
He didn’t meet Malcolm Fraser, who said, Life was never meant to be easy. You know, if you had met Malcolm Fraser, we wouldn’t be here now. He would have said, Well, I could do it. A type of question which never quite leaves you. It’s like when a mother loses her child.
Whatever she does, whether she’s cooking or cleaning, there’s this heaviness, this sorrow that completely envelops her during the period of mourning. And I have a feeling that for Prince Siddhartha, this question almost became like a physical burden on his back. Is suffering inherent to life? Is it inherent life? He was dogged by this question all his life.
So at the age of twenty nine, he left his luxury. So we have some symbolism, right? We have a young man who has a crisis questioning suffering. He came from a very rich home, had all the advantages, very much like we do, to what I’ve seen in India, that we live very much like Prince Siddhartha did. Perhaps we don’t appreciate it.
So he dropped out and he began to search and he went to many masters that were present in India. And he studied and he meditated, he trained and he went as far as possible with each of his masters, each of his teachers. And though he progressed, he saw that none of their methods were going to solve his problem. At best, they could alleviate some of the symptoms, but still at the root of the problem remained. Was suffering inherent to existence?
This is the problem that was plaguing him. So he arrived at a place called Uruvela, which is near modern day Bodh Gaya. And there he joined five ascetics and practiced self torture. Eating one grain of rice a day, sitting in the hot sun and it gets very hot in Bodh Gaya, in the hot sun with four fires in each direction around him, going without sleep, trying to depart the spirit from the body to make the spirit free from all pain, which he thought connected with the body. He spent six years here at Uruvela torturing himself.
And finally he said this wasn’t working either. So he went from luxury to self deprivation and neither one of them brought the satisfaction. Neither one of those conditions solved his problem. And so he set off and he was walking near what is now modern day Bodh Gaya. And he sat beneath the tree and a young shepherd girl came to him and offered him some yogurt.
Some say it was sweet rice, I don’t know. Her name was Sujatha. Maybe some more symbolism, you know. Maybe he had gone too far in his asceticism and now he knew some creative aspect in the form of a young woman who brought him nourishment and brought him back to balance both in body and mind. And he felt greatly invigorated having eaten his yogurt.
And he went beneath a pippal tree, which is generally called a bodhi tree. And he prepared a seat of kusha grass and he determined from the depth of his heart, I am not going to arise from this seat until I have solved the problem of existence. That takes some determination, doesn’t it? How many of us have ever exercised, even in a small way, saying, I’m not going to rise from this seat for the next five minutes unless I solve the problem of loneliness, of my fear, or my attachment to my girlfriend. Five minutes.
I think maybe it takes such determination, but he had a problem to solve. We have no problems. So he sat through the night and is searching within himself, confronting his problem, the problem of pain, frustration, anxiety, dread, lamentation, sorrow. And why? Why do we have to be like this?
Is there a cause? Is there a way to eliminate the cause? And it’s said that upon the rise of the morning star he discovered the truth. He solved the problem of existence. He became Śākyamūni Buddha, an enlightened being.
So he confronted his problem and he solved it. He resolved it. He was free. And it’s said that many beings had heard that someone had gained enlightenment on this planet earth. And they came and they offered homage to the Buddha and they requested teachings.
They said that many sentient beings only had a light covering dust over their eyes and just a few words may be enough to wake them up, to enlighten them. And others who had more dust over their eyes could be brought along to higher stages along the spiritual path. So at first the Buddha was reluctant. You know, it’s more symbolism perhaps that we have to request a teacher. Traditionally, one does not teach without being requested.
It sets up the atmosphere, an environment, a receptivity in the student. He wouldn’t request if he thought he knew everything or if he knew more than the teacher. By requesting he’s saying, I lack some knowledge that you have, some understanding. He’s opening himself up to learning. So these various beings came and requested that he teach.
So it’s said that he agreed and he traveled to Sarnath, which is near Varanasi. And there were his former five ascetic companions. He thought, Of all people, first I should teach them, I should explain them what I have discovered. And the ascetics, they heard that their old companion was coming and they thought, well, even though he dropped out, He went the wrong way. He sold out, you might say.
We’ll welcome him back. It’s okay. We’ll forgive him. It’s okay. So, they said, Well, we’ll make a seat here just as high as everyone else and we’ll welcome him back to amongst us again.
And then Śākyamūni Buddha, he approached. And strangely enough, the five ascetics found themselves having some feeling of awe and wonder. You know, something had happened. His very presence created an atmosphere of respect and reverence. So they prepared a higher seat and they asked him to teach what he had discovered beneath the tree in Bodh Gaya.
So at Saranath, in a place called Deer Park, at the age of thirty five, Śākyamūni Buddha gave his first teaching. In Sanskrit, it’s called the Dharmachakra Pravartana Sūtra or the first turning of the wheel Dharma. He explained what it was he discovered which had brought unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment. He explained what it was which had made him a sane, healthy, loving human being. So first he said that we must avoid self indulgence and self torture, that we must practice a balanced path.
And he called this path the eightfold noble path. Perfect view, perfect realization, perfect speech, perfect action, perfect effort, perfect mindfulness, perfect livelihood, and perfect samadhi. These are the paths of practice. Practice. And he spoke of the four noble truths.
And in this way he set into motion the first turning of the wheel of Dharma. And if you look at the wheel of Dharma, it has eight spokes, eightfold noble path, and it’s usually encrusted with four jewels of four noble truths. The first turning of the wheel of Dharma. The first turning of the wheel of Dharma. The wheel and then there’s Dharma, the word Dharma.
The word Dharma was in common usage before the Buddha made use of it, but he gave it a new meaning. The word Dharma just simply meant what we would phenomena, anything. This cushion is a Dharma. This book is a Dharma. I am a Dharma.
The word Dharma means to hold. That which holds its own nature is a Dharma. That which holds its own nature is a Dharma. But the Buddha, he gave it the same word, a new twist. It still meant to hold, but it took on a new meaning.
It took on new perspective. It meant to hold back. So this word hold back can be taken on various levels of what we mean. We can talk about the three levels of capacities of being, sometimes called the three scopes of being. There’s the lesser and the middling and higher scopes or capacities of being.
The lesser or the small scope or small capacity being is interested in being held back from falling in the three lower realms hell beings, hungry ghosts and animals. But we can also talk about this in another way hell beings, hungry ghosts, and animals. Know, you ever seen a pig? You know, that’s what usually symbolizes in Tibetan iconography. It symbolizes stupidity, ignorance.
Goes right along eating whatever is in front of it without looking right to left. It’s completely insensitive to what’s around it, completely closed minded. Whatever you put in front of it, it goes right along and eats. This is the quality of animalism or ignorance. The dharma holds us back from that.
The hungry ghosts, the state of being frustrated, never finding satisfaction, tremendous desire but never being able to be content. hungry ghosts. We don’t have to die to go to these places. We go through these states every day of our lives. Held back from being a hell being, tremendous physical pain, mental agony, you know, nightmares that people go through. The dharma was a means of holding us back not only from the three lower realms, which are traditionally thought of, but also these very negative states of very strong suffering.
So the lesser or the small scope of sentient beings, he makes use of the dharma to hold him back, to protect him from these lower states. The middling scope or middling capacity being, he says anywhere in saṃsāra, you know what is saṃsāra? Samsāra is traditionally said to be cycles of rebirth, living, death, again rebirth, living, death under the influence of karma and afflictive emotions such as desire, hatred, ignorance. You know, we’re out of control, we have no freedom from this process. This reoccurring process is thought of as saṃsāra, this term cyclic existence.
But we go through cyclic existence within our own lives, don’t we? We keep repeating the same habitual patterns which keep bringing the same habitual suffering. We go through life making the same mistakes over and over over and over and over and again. No. This is cyclic existence.
You know, the only thing that changes is maybe we have a new wife, a new husband, new boyfriend, new car, new maybe we move to Melbourne or Sydney. Wherever we go, the same problems. You know, we bring the same old attitudes, but we change the name. But the same problems keep recurring. This is cyclic existence wherever we go.
So the person of middling capacity, middling scope, he wants to be held back from not only the three lower realms but also the three upper realms. We talk about six realms in cyclic existence. We talk about God realms. Now God realms at first glance might seem a nice place to visit or even live. But once you begin to understand that the sloth, the self indulgence, actually becomes somewhat boring, think.
Not much to do but lay around and be blissful all day. And then there’s the lower realms beneath that for the demigods who are, though they have things very well, better than humans, they’re involved, caught up in jealousy, competitiveness. And then there’s human realm and we know a lot about that. So being of middling capacity, he also wants to be protected from these three upper realms. He wants to get out of the whole system.
He wants to exit the system. The Buddha was one of the first system analysts. He saw a system where no one saw a system before and he found a way to exit the system. This is I’ve been studying computers a bit of yet. Then there’s the dharma which is made use of by the being of highest capacity.
What’s his problem? Why does he need the dharma? He not only doesn’t want to exist in saṃsāra, in a cyclic existence, he wants out of that, but also he doesn’t want to fall into the extreme of passive nirvana, passive peace. He sees this as also a fault. Both saṃsāra and nirvana, cyclic existence in the state beyond sorrow, are seen as undesirable.
He wants to because if he falls into passive peace, he cannot help anyone. He can no longer identify with the sufferings of other sentient beings. And not identifying with their suffering, he is never motivated to help them. And above all, the being of highest capacity wants to work for the benefit of others. So therefore, both saṃsāra and nirvana are seen as faulty states of existence.
He uses the dharma dharma to protect him, to hold him back from both of these extremes, extremes of saṃsāra and nirvana. When discussing the dharma, we talked a little bit about turning the wheel of dharma. In the first turning of the wheel of dharma, the main subject was the Four Noble Truths. In discussing the Dharma, think it’s very important that we make a distinction from the very beginning. It’s a distinction which is quite often not made, which causes many people to have the mistaken impression of what Buddhadharma is about.
All this suffering business and now we’re talking about suffering this and suffering that. It sounds like a bunch of dirty old men trying to take away your fun. Buddhism is just purely pessimistic. It just looks at suffering, just looks at the black side of things. We do look at suffering.
That’s true. Now some people, they answer to this well meaningly enough. Yes, it is true we look at suffering, that we look at suffering and examine it. But ultimately, we hold in Buddhism that all sentient beings will someday be enlightened. This is true.
It’s true enough. It’s a position of the final thought of the Buddha that someday all sentient beings will attain Buddhahood. But this begins to miss the point of why we look at suffering and the way we use suffering. In study of Dharma we must make a distinction, distinction between doctrine and method, if you like, metaphysics, methodology, practice and theory, wisdom, method many, many words that we can use to get an idea of what this pair is about. We’re talking about theory and method, theory and method.
It is not a theory of Buddhism that life is suffering. Life is not suffering. Many people have very happy lives. Life is not ugly. Many people see a great deal of beauty in life.
But it is a method of Buddhism. We use this method. We want to come to some sort of balance. If we take an example, a mental what would you say, psychological problem that some people get, especially women, called anorexia. And this was quite common among ballet dancers.
Anorexia is a a fear or repulsion from food. For example, ballet dancers, they had to be very thin, the skinnier the better. And so if they looked in the mirror one day and they saw they were putting on one pound, they would freak out because they would lose their career because they wanted skinny ballet dancers. So they developed a fear of gaining weight, even a half a pound, and they developed a repulsion of food. And this could be carried to the place where actually some of them died of mal malnutrition.
There was an imbalance. There was a psychological problem. Now a good Buddhist psychologist, he might say, this woman who was suffering from anorexia, she comes up to him and he says, Okay, let’s look at your problem now. Look at this food. Look how delicious it looks.
It’s a nice texture. How pleasant its appearance, how nicely it’s decorated. And you take a piece and, ah, they really get into the flavor. Isn’t that nice? Isn’t that pleasant?
You know? So what’s he doing? He’s trying to create some balance, isn’t he? He’s trying to she’s going to an extreme. He’s trying to pull her back.
He’s using a method of the attractiveness of food. Now, I was in Thailand last year, and I would go my alms round and come back with my bowl, my alms bowl full of food, we’d sit there and all the monks, I guess they’re supposed to look in this bowl and they’re supposed to say, Oh, this is disgusting. Wow, look at this is repulsive. They’re almost supposed to throw up. They have to force themselves to eat this food.
I used to sit there and say, well I’ll eat that first and then I can’t. Because you usually get too much food, so you have to, and if you’re meditating the worst thing you can do is try to sit with a full stomach, so you have to peace yourself with your food. First off you have a nutritional requirement, so I have to get a little vegetable and then you figure out what the nutritional requirements are and then I figure it out. I shouldn’t say we. And then I’m looking at the flavors and I’ve got it all ordered out how much I’m going eat of each one.
So the fact is they’re using a method that food is repulsive in order to avoid attachment. Food is not repulsive. It’s not the theory of Buddhism that food is repulsive. It be rather delicious. But we use the method of looking at food in a repulsive manner, seeing that when you eat it, you you spit something back in your hand, it looks disgusting, right?
And what it must look like in your stomach and then when it comes out and all the sentient beings that had to be killed to make this food, you know, and just get kind of revolted. You get kind of fed up in order to act as an antidote to attachment. It’s a method. It’s not a theory. It’s not the theory of Buddhism that there’s anything wrong with food.
Food is rather neutral, right? It’s like a knife. Knife in the hand of a surgeon can be beneficial. It can save lives. That same knife in the hand of a thief or murderer can be harmful.
It can kill. In this way, things are neutral. It’s the mind which makes it so. This is why William Blake could say, The mind is in its place and in its way, can create a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven. It’s the mind which is the determining factor.
What these things outside of us, whether they’re going to bring us harm or whether they’re going to bring us benefit, whether they’re ugly or beautiful, repulsive or attractive. They’re not inherently any of these things. If we begin to make this distinction, we can see that we can talk about suffering as a method to help us develop motivation to finally end our suffering, but never in the sense that it is a theory of Buddhism that’s suffering, that life is suffering, even though Malcolm Fraser may say so. Yeah. So the Buddha, he emphasized suffering as a method to help us develop the determination to renounce the cause of suffering.
This word renunciation also has a lot of negative associations with it, doesn’t It sounds pretty heavy. The word renunciation, it sounds like hair shirts and flagellation and giving up hot fudge sundaes for Lent or something. Actually, we don’t renounce anything. We don’t give up anything. We grow up.
When I was a child, I played with the toys of a child. But when I grew up, I set aside my toys. No one had to pull them out of my hand. No, I didn’t have to wrench myself away from them. I just set them aside.
So, we grow up. We grow if we confront our problems, if we confront our problems, if we look at the reality of the situations. You know, from the point of view of, you know, we’re talking about theory and practice. From the point of view of theory, you know, if we talk about suffering, pain and pleasure can never be separated. We want to know pleasure, we have to know pain.
If we want to know what far is, we have to know what near is. If we want to know what short is, we have to know what low is. This is the conceptual nature of a dualistic world, isn’t it? This is the theory of Buddhism, if you want to understand it with respect to pain and pleasure. They always come together.
We can only know pleasure by understanding pain. And they’re quite relative, aren’t they? There was a in Tibet there was a story about a woman. She came up to a Lama, a teacher, and she was quite frantic. She was freaking out.
And she said, Lama, I can’t take it anymore. I can’t stand my house anymore. We’ve got grandchildren. We’ve got great grandchildren, we’ve got my father, his mother, we’ve got three brothers, four sisters. They’re all living together in the same house.
It’s only two rooms. I can’t stand the noise. I can’t stand the running around. And she was extremely upset. So he said, Don’t worry.
It’s gonna work out okay. I’ll take care of it. I want you to do one thing. Want you Do you have any chickens? She said, Yes, yes.
He said, Take all the chickens and move them in the house with you. So she moves all the chickens in the house with her, and they’re flying, fluttering around, you know, up on the rafters, perched up there, and they’re usually things are getting bad, you know, the toilet and everything, and it’s getting worse and worse. And she comes back a week later and says, Lama, Lama, it’s getting worse and worse. There’s the feathers and the dirt and the noise and I can’t sleep at night. It’s getting terrible.
I can’t I said, It’s okay. Do you have any goats? Yeah, yeah, we have some goats. Take the goats and put them in the house. She has great faith, this woman.
She says, Okay. So she goes back home, and she puts the goats in the house. And of course, now, you know, the clucking of the chickens and the bear, what are the goats? The rat? Rat?
The Oh, man. That’s good. The man of the heart.