Donate

Font chữ: + A   + A   + A   + A  

INTRODUCTION

One of the most distressing predicaments any earnest, open-minded spiritual seeker might face is the sheer difficulty of choosing from among the bewildering diversity of religious and spiritual teachings available. By their very nature, spiritual teachings make claims upon our allegiance that are absolute and all-encompassing. Adherents of a particular creed are prone to assert that their religion alone reveals the final truth about our place in the universe and our ultimate destiny; they boldly propose that their path alone offers the sure means to eternal salvation. If we could suspend all belief commitments and compare the competing doctrines impartially, submitting them to empirical tests, we would have a sure-fire method of deciding between them, and then our ordeal would be over. But it isn’t that simple. Rival religions all propose—or presuppose—doctrines that we cannot directly validate by personal experience; they advocate tenets that call for some degree of trust. So, as their tenets and practices clash, we run up against the problem of finding some way to decide between them and negotiate their competing claims to truth.

One solution to this problem is to deny that there is any real conflict between alternative belief systems. The adherents of this approach, which we might call religious universalism, say that at their core all spiritual traditions teach essentially the same thing. Their formulations may differ but their inner core is the same, expressed differently merely to accord with different sensibilities. What we need to do, the universalist says, when faced with different spiritual traditions, is to extract the kernel of inner truth from the pods of their exoteric creeds. From ground level our goals look different, but from the heights we will find the goal is the same; it is like the view of the moon from different mountain peaks. Universalists in matters of doctrine often endorse eclecticism in practice, holding that we can select whatever practices we prefer and combine them like dishes at a buffet.

This solution to the problem of religious diversity has an immediate appeal to those disillusioned with the exclusive claims of dogmatic religion. Honest critical reflection, however, would show that on the most vital issues the different religions and spiritual traditions take different standpoints. They give us very different answers to our questions concerning the basic grounds and goals of the spiritual quest and often these differences are not merely verbal. To sweep them away as being merely verbal may be an effective way of achieving harmony between followers of different belief systems, but it cannot withstand close examination. In the end, it is as little tenable as saying that, because they have beaks and wings, eagles, sparrows, and chickens are essentially the same type of creature, the differences between them being merely verbal.

It is not only theistic religions that teach doctrines beyond the range of immediate empirical confirmation. The Buddha too taught doctrines that an ordinary person cannot directly confirm by everyday experience, and these doctrines are fundamental to the structure of his teaching. We saw, for example, in the introductions to chapters I and II, that the Nikāyas envisage a universe with many domains of sentient existence spread out in boundless space and time, a universe in which sentient beings roam and wander from life to life on account of their ignorance, craving, and kamma. The Nikāyas presuppose that throughout beginningless time, Buddhas without number have arisen and turned the wheel of the Dhamma, and that each Buddha attains enlightenment after cultivating spiritual perfections over long periods of cosmic time. When we approach the Dhamma we are likely to resist such beliefs and feel that they make excessive demands on our capacity for trust. Thus we inevitably run up against the question whether, if we wish to follow the Buddha’s teaching, we must take on board the entire package of classical Buddhist doctrine.

For Early Buddhism, all the problems we face in deciding how far we should go in placing faith can be disposed of at a single stroke. That single stroke involves reverting to direct experience as the ultimate basis for judgment. One of the distinctive features of the Buddha’s teaching is the respect it accords to direct experience. The texts of Early Buddhism do not teach a secret doctrine, nor do they leave scope for anything like an esoteric path reserved for an élite of initiates and withheld from others. According to Text III,1, secrecy in a religious teaching is the hallmark of wrong views and confused thinking. The teaching of the Buddha shines openly, as radiant and brilliant as the light of the sun and moon. Freedom from the cloak of secrecy is integral to a teaching that gives primacy to direct experience, inviting each individual to test its principles in the crucible of his or her own experience.

This does not mean that an ordinary person can fully validate the Buddha’s doctrine by direct experience without special effort. To the contrary, the teaching can only be fully realized through the achievement of certain extraordinary types of experience that are far beyond the range of the ordinary person enmeshed in the concerns of mundane life. However, in sharp contrast to revealed religion, the Buddha does not demand that we begin our spiritual quest by placing faith in doctrines that lie beyond the range of our immediate experience. Rather than ask us to wrestle with issues that, for us in our present condition, no amount of experience can decide, he instead asks us to consider a few simple questions pertaining to our immediate welfare and happiness, questions that we can answer on the basis of personal experience. I highlight the expression “for us in our present condition,” because the fact that we cannot presently validate such matters does not constitute grounds for rejecting them as invalid or even as irrelevant. It only means that we should put them aside for the time being and concern ourselves with issues that come within the range of direct experience.

The Buddha says that his teaching is about suffering and the cessation of suffering. This statement does not mean that the Dhamma is concerned only with our experience of suffering in the present life, but it does imply that we can use our present experience, backed by intelligent observation, as a criterion for determining what is beneficial and what detrimental to our spiritual progress. Our most insistent existential demand, springing up deep within us, is the need for freedom from harm, sorrow, and distress; or, positively stated, the need to achieve well-being and happiness. However, to avoid harm and to secure our well-being, it is not sufficient for us merely to hope. We first have to understand the conditions on which they depend. According to the Buddha, whatever arises, arises through appropriate causes and conditions, and this applies with equal force to suffering and happiness. Thus we must ascertain the causes and conditions that lead to harm and suffering, and likewise the causes and conditions that lead to wellbeing and happiness. Once we have extracted these two principles—the conditions leading to harm and suffering, and the conditions leading to well-being and happiness—we have at our disposal an outline of the entire process that leads to the ultimate goal, final liberation from suffering.

One text offering an excellent example of this approach is a short discourse in the Aṅguttara Nikāya popularly known as the Kālāma Sutta, included as Text III,2. The Kālāmas were a people living in a remote area of the Ganges plain. Various religious teachers would come to visit them and each would extol his own doctrine and tear down the doctrines of his rivals. Confused and perplexed by this conflict of belief systems, the Kālāmas did not know whom to trust. When the Buddha passed through their town, they approached him and asked him to clear away their doubts. Though the text does not specify what particular issues were troubling the Kālāmas, the later part of the discourse makes it clear that their perplexities revolved around the questions of rebirth and kamma.

The Buddha began by assuring the Kālāmas that under such circumstances it was proper for them to doubt, for the issues that troubled them were indeed common sources of doubt and perplexity. He then told them not to rely on ten sources of belief. Four of these pertain to established scriptural authority (oral tradition, lineage of teaching, hearsay, and collections of texts); four to rational grounds (logic, inferential reasoning, reasoned cogitation, and the acceptance of a view after pondering it); and two to authoritative persons (impressive speakers and respected teachers). This advice is sometimes quoted to prove that the Buddha rejected all external authorities and invited each individual to fashion his or her own personal path to truth. Read in context, however, the message of the Kālāma Sutta is quite different. The Buddha is not advising the Kālāmas—who, it must be stressed, had at this point not yet become his own disciples—to reject all authoritative guides to spiritual understanding and fall back solely on their personal intuition. Rather, he is offering them a simple and pragmatic outlet from the morass of doubt and perplexity in which they are immersed. By the use of skillful methods of inquiry, he leads them to understand a number of basic principles that they can verify by their own experience and thereby acquire a sure starting point for further spiritual development.1

Always underlying the Buddha’s questions and their replies is the tacit premise that people are primarily motivated to act by a concern for their own welfare and happiness. In asking this particular set of questions, the Buddha’s purpose is to lead the Kālāmas to see that, even when we suspend all concern with future lives, unwholesome mental states such as greed, hatred, and delusion, and unwholesome actions such as killing and stealing, eventually redound to one’s own harm and suffering right here and now. Conversely, wholesome mental states and wholesome actions promote one’s long-term welfare and happiness here and now. Once this much is seen, the immediately visible harmful consequences to which unwholesome mental states lead become a sufficient reason for abandoning them, while the visible benefits to which wholesome mental states lead become a sufficient motivation for cultivating them. Then, whether or not there is a life after death, one has adequate reasons in the present life to abandon unwholesome mental states and cultivate wholesome mental states. If there is an afterlife, one’s recompense is simply that much greater.

A similar approach underlies Text III,3, in which the Buddha demonstrates how present suffering arises and ceases in correlation with present craving. This short sutta, addressed to a lay follower, concisely articulates the causal principle that lies behind the Four Noble Truths, but rather than doing so in the abstract, it adopts a concrete, down-to-earth approach that has a remarkably contemporary appeal. By using powerful examples drawn from the life of a layman deeply attached to his wife and son, the sutta makes a deep and lasting impression on us.

The fact that such texts as this sutta and the Kālāma Sutta do not dwell on the doctrines of kamma and rebirth does not mean, as is sometimes assumed, that such teachings are mere cultural accretions to the Dhamma that can be deleted or explained away without losing anything essential. It means only that, at the outset, the Dhamma can be approached in ways that do not require reference to past and future lives. The Buddha’s teaching has many sides, and thus, from certain angles, it can be directly evaluated against our concern for our present well-being and happiness. Once we see that the practice of the teaching does indeed bring peace, joy, and inner security in this very life, this will inspire our trust and confidence in the Dhamma as a whole, including those aspects that lie beyond our present capacity for personal verification. If we were to undertake certain practices—practices that require highly refined skills and determined effort—we would be able to acquire the faculties needed to validate those other aspects, such as the law of kamma, the reality of rebirth, and the existence of supersensible realms (see Text VII,4 §§23–24 and Text VII,5 §§19–20).

Another major problem that often besets spiritual seekers is the demands that teachers place upon their capacity for trust. This problem has become especially acute in our own time, when the news media gleefully spotlight the frailties of numberless gurus and jump at the chance to show up any modern-day saint as nothing better than a swindler in robes. But the problem of rogue gurus is a perennial one by no means peculiar to our age. Whenever one person exercises spiritual authority over others, it is only too easy for that person to be tempted to exploit the trust others place in him in ways that can be seriously detrimental to himself and his disciples. When a pupil approaches a teacher who claims to be perfectly enlightened and thus capable of teaching the path to final liberation, the pupil must have some criteria at hand for testing the teacher to determine whether the teacher truly measures up to the lofty claims he makes about himself—or that others make about him.

In the Vīmaṃsaka Sutta—Text III,4—the Buddha lays down guidelines by which a monk can test “the Tathāgata,” that is, the Buddha, to evaluate his claim to be perfectly enlightened. One benchmark of perfect enlightenment is freedom of the mind from all defilements. If a monk cannot directly see into the Buddha’s own mind, he can nevertheless rely on indirect evidence to ascertain that the Buddha is freed from defilements; that is, by evaluating the Buddha’s bodily deeds and speech he can infer that the Buddha’s mental states are exclusively pure, uninfluenced by greed, hatred, and delusion. In addition to such observational inference, the Buddha further encourages the monk to approach him and directly inquire about his mental states.

Once the pupil gains confidence that the Buddha is a qualified teacher, he then puts the Master to the ultimate test. He learns his teaching, enters upon the practice, and penetrates the Dhamma by direct knowledge. This act of penetration—here equivalent at minimum to the attainment of stream-entry—brings the gain of “invincible faith,” the faith of one who is established upon the irreversible path leading to final release.

Taken in isolation, the Vīmaṃsaka Sutta might give the impression that one acquires faith only after gaining realization of the teaching, and since realization is self-validating, faith would then become redundant. This impression, however, would be one-sided. The point the sutta is making is that faith becomes invincible as a result of realization, not that faith first enters the spiritual path only when one attains realization. Faith is the first of the five spiritual faculties, and in some degree, as trusting confidence in the Buddha’s enlightenment and in the main principles of his teaching, it is a prerequisite for the higher training. We see faith functioning in this preparatory role in Text III,5, a long excerpt from the Caṅkī Sutta. Here, the Buddha explains that a person who has faith in something “preserves truth” when he says “this is my faith.” He “preserves truth” because he merely states what he believes without jumping to the conclusion that what he believes is definitely true and anything else contrary to it false. The Buddha contrasts the “preservation of truth” (saccānurakkhanā) with the “discovery of truth” (saccānubodha), which begins by placing faith in a teacher who has proved himself worthy of trust. Having gained faith in such a teacher, one then approaches him for instruction, learns the Dhamma, practices it (according to a series of steps more finely calibrated than in the preceding text), and finally sees the supreme truth for oneself.

This does not yet mark the end of the road for the disciple, but only the initial breakthrough to the truth, again corresponding to the attainment of stream-entry. Having achieved the vision of truth, to reach the “final arrival at truth” (saccānupatti)—that is, the attainment of arahantship or final liberation—one must repeat, develop, and cultivate the same series of steps until one has fully absorbed and assimilated the supreme truth disclosed by that initial vision. Thus the entire process of training in the Dhamma is rooted in personal experience. Even faith should be rooted in investigation and inquiry and not based solely upon emotional leanings and blind belief. Faith alone is insufficient but is the door to deeper levels of experience. Faith serves as a spur to practice; practice leads to experiential understanding; and when one’s understanding matures, it blossoms in full realization.

III. APPROACHING THE DHAMMA

1. NOT A SECRET DOCTRINE

“These three things, monks, are conducted in secret, not openly. What three? Affairs with women, the mantras of the brahmins, and wrong view.

“But these three things, monks, shine openly, not in secret. What three? The moon, the sun, and the Dhamma and Discipline proclaimed by the Tathāgata.”

(AN 3:129; I 282–83)

2. NO DOGMAS OR BLIND BELIEF

Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was wandering on tour together with a large Saṅgha of monks when he arrived at a town of the Kālāmas named Kesaputta.2 Now the Kālāmas of Kesaputta heard: “It is said that the ascetic Gotama, the Sakyan son who went forth from a Sakyan family, has arrived at Kesaputta. Now a good report about that master Gotama has been circulating thus: ‘That Blessed One is an arahant, perfectly enlightened, accomplished in true knowledge and conduct, fortunate, knower of the world, unsurpassed leader of persons to be tamed, teacher of devas and humans, the Enlightened One, the Blessed One. Having realized with his own direct knowledge this world with its devas, Māra, and Brahmā, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, with its devas and humans, he makes it known to others. He teaches a Dhamma that is good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end, with the right meaning and expression; he reveals a spiritual life that is perfectly complete and purified.’ Now it is good to see such arahants.”3

Then the Kālāmas of Kesaputta approached the Blessed One. Some paid homage to him and sat down to one side; some exchanged greetings with him and, after their greetings and cordial talk, sat down to one side; some saluted him reverentially and sat down to one side; some remained silent and sat down to one side. Then the Kālāmas said to the Blessed One:

“Venerable sir, some ascetics and brahmins who come to Kesaputta explain and elucidate their own doctrines, but disparage, debunk, revile, and vilify the doctrines of others. But then some other ascetics and brahmins come to Kesaputta, and they too explain and elucidate their own doctrines, but disparage, debunk, revile, and vilify the doctrines of the others. For us, venerable sir, there is perplexity and doubt as to which of these good ascetics speak truth and which speak falsehood.”

“It is fitting for you to be perplexed, O Kālāmas, it is fitting for you to be in doubt. Doubt has arisen in you about a perplexing matter. Come, Kālāmas. Do not go by oral tradition, by lineage of teaching, by hearsay, by a collection of texts, by logic, by inferential reasoning, by reasoned cogitation, by the acceptance of a view after pondering it, by the seeming competence of a speaker, or because you think, ‘The ascetic is our teacher.’4 But when you know for yourselves, ‘These things are unwholesome; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; these things, if undertaken and practiced, lead to harm and suffering,’ then you should abandon them.

“What do you think, Kālāmas? When greed, hatred, and delusion arise in a person, is it for his welfare or harm?”5—“For his harm, venerable sir.”—“Kālāmas, a person who is greedy, hating, and deluded, overpowered by greed, hatred, and delusion, his thoughts controlled by them, will destroy life, take what is not given, engage in sexual misconduct, and tell lies; he will also prompt others to do likewise. Will that conduce to his harm and suffering for a long time?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”

“What do you think, Kālāmas? Are these things wholesome or unwholesome?—”Unwholesome, venerable sir.”—“Blamable or blameless?”—“Blamable, venerable sir.”—“Censured or praised by the wise?”—“Censured, venerable sir.”—“Undertaken and practiced, do they lead to harm and suffering or not, or how is it in this case?”—“Undertaken and practiced, these things lead to harm and suffering. So it appears to us in this case.”

“It was for this reason, Kālāmas, that we said: Do not go by oral tradition.…

“Come, Kālāmas. Do not go by oral tradition, by lineage of teaching, by hearsay, by a collection of texts, by logic, by inferential reasoning, by reasoned cogitation, by the acceptance of a view after pondering it, by the seeming competence of a speaker, or because you think, ‘The ascetic is our teacher.’ But when you know for yourselves, ‘These things are wholesome; these things are blameless; these things are praised by the wise; these things, if undertaken and practiced, lead to welfare and happiness,’ then you should engage in them.

“What do you think, Kālāmas? When nongreed, nonhatred, and nondelusion arise in a person, is it for his welfare or harm?”—“For his welfare, venerable sir.”—“Kālāmas, a person who is without greed, without hatred, without delusion, not overpowered by greed, hatred, and delusion, his thoughts not controlled by them, will abstain from the destruction of life, from taking what is not given, from sexual misconduct, and from false speech; he will also prompt others to do likewise. Will that conduce to his welfare and happiness for a long time?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”

“What do you think, Kālāmas? Are these things wholesome or unwholesome?—”Wholesome, venerable sir.”—“Blamable or blameless?”—“Blameless, venerable sir.”—“Censured or praised by the wise?”—“Praised, venerable sir.”—“Undertaken and practiced, do they lead to welfare and happiness or not, or how is it in this case?”—“Undertaken and practiced, these things lead to welfare and happiness. So it appears to us in this case.”

“It was for this reason, Kālāmas, that we said: Do not go upon oral tradition….

“Then, Kālāmas, that noble disciple—devoid of covetousness, devoid of ill will, unconfused, clearly comprehending, ever mindful—dwells pervading one quarter with a mind imbued with loving-kindness, likewise the second quarter, the third, and the fourth.6 Thus above, below, across, and everywhere, and to all as to himself, he dwells pervading the entire world with a mind imbued with loving-kindness, vast, exalted, measureless, without hostility and without ill will.

“He dwells pervading one quarter with a mind imbued with compassion … with altruistic joy … with equanimity, likewise the second quarter, the third, and the fourth. Thus above, below, across, and everywhere, and to all as to himself, he dwells pervading the entire world with a mind imbued with equanimity, vast, exalted, measureless, without hostility and without ill will.

“When, Kālāmas, this noble disciple has thus made his mind free of enmity, free of ill will, uncorrupted and pure, he has won four assurances in this very life.

“The first assurance he has won is this: ‘If there is another world, and if good and bad deeds bear fruit and yield results, it is possible that with the breakup of the body, after death, I shall arise in a good destination, in a heavenly world.’

“The second assurance he has won is this: ‘If there is no other world, and if good and bad deeds do not bear fruit and yield results, still right here, in this very life, I live happily, free of enmity and ill will.

“The third assurance he has won is this: ‘Suppose evil befalls the evil-doer. Then, as I do not intend evil for anyone, how can suffering afflict me, one who does no evil deed?’

“The fourth assurance he has won is this: ‘Suppose evil does not befall the evil-doer. Then right here I see myself purified in both respects.’7

“When, Kālāmas, this noble disciple has thus made his mind free of enmity, free of ill will, uncorrupted, and pure, he has won these four assurances in this very life.”

“So it is, Blessed One! So it is, Fortunate One! When this noble disciple has thus made his mind free of enmity, free of ill will, uncorrupted and pure, he has won these four assurances in this very life.

“Magnificent, venerable sir! Magnificent, venerable sir! The Blessed One has made the Dhamma clear in many ways, as though he were turning upright what had been overthrown, revealing what was hidden, showing the way to one who was lost, or holding up a lamp in the darkness so those with good eyesight can see forms. We now go for refuge to the Blessed One, to the Dhamma, and to the Saṅgha of monks. Let the Blessed One accept us as lay followers who have gone for refuge from today until life’s end.”8

(AN 3:65; I 188–93)

3. THE VISIBLE ORIGIN AND PASSING AWAY OF SUFFERING

On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at a town of the Mallans named Uruvelakappa. Then Bhadraka the headman9 approached the Blessed One, paid homage to him, sat down to one side, and said to him: “It would be good, venerable sir, if the Blessed One would teach me about the origin and the passing away of suffering.”

“If, headman, I were to teach you about the origin and the passing away of suffering with reference to the past, saying, ‘So it was in the past,’ perplexity and uncertainty about that might arise in you. And if I were to teach you about the origin and the passing away of suffering with reference to the future, saying, ‘So it will be in the future,’ perplexity and uncertainty about that might arise in you. Instead, headman, while I am sitting right here, and you are sitting right there, I will teach you about the origin and the passing away of suffering. Listen and attend closely, I will speak.”

“Yes, venerable sir,” Bhadraka replied. The Blessed One said this:

“What do you think, headman? Are there any people in Uruvelakappa on whose account sorrow, lamentation, pain, dejection, and despair would arise in you if they were to be executed, imprisoned, fined, or censured?”

“There are such people, venerable sir.”

“But are there any people in Uruvelakappa on whose account sorrow, lamentation, pain, dejection, and despair would not arise in you in such an event?”

“There are such people, venerable sir.”

“Why is it, headman, that in relation to some people in Uruvelakappa sorrow, lamentation, pain, dejection, and despair would arise in you if they were to be executed, imprisoned, fined, or censured, while in regard to others they would not arise in you?”

“Those people in Uruvelakappa, venerable sir, in relation to whom sorrow, lamentation, pain, dejection, and despair would arise in me if they were to be executed, imprisoned, fined, or censured—these are the ones for whom I have desire and attachment. But those people in Uruvelakappa in relation to whom they would not arise in me—these are the ones for whom I have no desire and attachment.”

“Headman, by means of this principle that is seen, understood, immediately attained, fathomed, apply the method to the past and to the future thus: ‘Whatever suffering arose in the past, all that arose rooted in desire, with desire as its source; for desire is the root of suffering. Whatever suffering will arise in the future, all that will arise rooted in desire, with desire as its source; for desire is the root of suffering.’”

“It is wonderful, venerable sir! It is amazing, venerable sir! How well that has been stated by the Blessed One: ‘Whatever suffering arises, all that is rooted in desire, has desire as its source; for desire is the root of suffering.’10 Venerable sir, I have a son named Ciravāsī, who stays at an outside residence. I rise early and send a man, saying, ‘Go, man, and find out how Ciravāsī is.’ Until that man returns, venerable sir, I am upset, thinking, ‘I hope Ciravāsī has not met with any affliction!’”

“What do you think, headman? If Ciravāsī were to be executed, imprisoned, fined, or censured, would sorrow, lamentation, pain, dejection, and despair arise in you?”

“Venerable sir, if Ciravāsī were to be executed, imprisoned, fined, or censured, even my life would seem futile, so how could sorrow, lamentation, pain, dejection, and despair not arise in me?”

“In this way too, headman, it can be understood: ‘Whatever suffering arises, all that arises rooted in desire, with desire as its source; for desire is the root of suffering.’

“What do you think, headman? Before you saw your wife or heard about her, did you have any desire, attachment, or affection for her?”

“No, venerable sir.”

“Then was it, headman, only when you saw her or heard about her that this desire, attachment, and affection arose in you?”

“Yes, venerable sir.”

“What do you think, headman? If your wife were to be executed, imprisoned, fined, or censured, would sorrow, lamentation, pain, dejection, and despair arise in you?”

“Venerable sir, if my wife were to be executed, imprisoned, fined, or censured, even my life would seem futile, so how could sorrow, lamentation, pain, dejection, and despair not arise in me?”

“In this way too, headman, it can be understood: ‘Whatever suffering arises, all that arises rooted in desire, with desire as its source; for desire is the root of suffering.’”

(SN 42:11; IV 327–30)

4. INVESTIGATE THE TEACHER HIMSELF

1. Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was living at Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Park. There he addressed the monks thus: “Monks!”—“Venerable sir!” they replied. The Blessed One said this:

2. “Monks, a monk who is an inquirer, not knowing how to gauge another’s mind,11 should make an investigation of the Tathāgata in order to find out whether or not he is perfectly enlightened.”

3. “Venerable sir, our teachings are rooted in the Blessed One, guided by the Blessed One, have the Blessed One as their resort. It would be good if the Blessed One would explain the meaning of these words. Having heard it from him, the monks will remember it.”

“Then listen, monks, and attend closely to what I shall say.”

“Yes, venerable sir,” the monks replied. The Blessed One said this:

4. “Monks, a monk who is an inquirer, not knowing how to gauge another’s mind, should investigate the Tathāgata with respect to two kinds of states, states cognizable through the eye and through the ear thus: ‘Are there found in the Tathāgata or not any defiled states cognizable through the eye or through the ear?’12 When he investigates him, he comes to know: ‘No defiled states cognizable through the eye or through the ear are found in the Tathāgata.’

5. “When he comes to know this, he investigates him further thus: ‘Are there found in the Tathāgata or not any mixed states cognizable through the eye or through the ear?’13 When he investigates him, he comes to know: ‘No mixed states cognizable through the eye or through the ear are found in the Tathāgata.’

6. “When he comes to know this, he investigates him further thus: ‘Are there found in the Tathāgata or not cleansed states cognizable through the eye or through the ear?’ When he investigates him, he comes to know: ‘Cleansed states cognizable through the eye or through the ear are found in the Tathāgata.’

7. “When he comes to know this, he investigates him further thus: ‘Has this venerable one attained this wholesome state over a long time or did he attain it recently?’ When he investigates him, he comes to know: ‘This venerable one has attained this wholesome state over a long time; he did not attain it only recently.’

8. “When he comes to know this, he investigates him further thus: ‘Has this venerable one acquired renown and attained fame, so that the dangers [connected with renown and fame] are found in him?’ For, monks, as long as a monk has not acquired renown and attained fame, the dangers [connected with renown and fame] are not found in him; but when he has acquired renown and attained fame, those dangers are found in him.14 When he investigates him, he comes to know: ‘This venerable one has acquired renown and attained fame, but the dangers [connected with renown and fame] are not found in him.’

9. “When he comes to know this, he investigates him further thus: ‘Is this venerable one restrained without fear, not restrained by fear, and does he avoid indulging in sensual pleasures because he is without lust through the destruction of lust?’ When he investigates him, he comes to know: ‘This venerable one is restrained without fear, not restrained by fear, and he avoids indulging in sensual pleasure because he is without lust through the destruction of lust.’

10. “Now, monks, if others should ask that monk thus: ‘What are the venerable one’s reasons and what is his evidence whereby he says: “That venerable one is restrained without fear, not restrained by fear, and he avoids indulging in sensual pleasures because he is without lust through the destruction of lust”?’—answering rightly, that monk would answer thus: ‘Whether that venerable one dwells in the Saṅgha or alone, while some there are well behaved and some are ill behaved and some there teach a group, while some here are seen concerned about material things and some are unsullied by material things, still that venerable one does not despise anyone because of that.15 And I have heard and learned this from the Blessed One’s own lips: “I am restrained without fear, not restrained by fear, and I avoid indulging in sensual pleasures because I am without lust through the destruction of lust.”’

11. “The Tathāgata, monks, should be questioned further about that thus: ‘Are there found in the Tathāgata or not any defiled states cognizable through the eye or through the ear?’ The Tathāgata would answer thus: ‘No defiled states cognizable through the eye or through the ear are found in the Tathāgata.’

12. “If asked, ‘Are there found in the Tathāgata or not any mixed states cognizable through the eye or through the ear?’ the Tathāgata would answer thus: ‘No mixed states cognizable through the eye or through the ear are found in the Tathāgata.’

13. “If asked, ‘Are there found in the Tathāgata or not cleansed states cognizable through the eye or through the ear?’ the Tathāgata would answer thus: ‘Cleansed states cognizable through the eye or through the ear are found in the Tathāgata. They are my pathway and my domain, yet I do not identify with them.’

14. “Monks, a disciple should approach the Teacher who speaks thus in order to hear the Dhamma. The Teacher teaches him the Dhamma with its successively higher levels, with its successively more sublime levels, with its dark and bright counterparts. As the Teacher teaches the Dhamma to a monk in this way, through direct knowledge of a certain teaching here in that Dhamma, the monk comes to a conclusion about the teachings.16 He places confidence in the Teacher thus: ‘The Blessed One is perfectly enlightened, the Dhamma is well proclaimed by the Blessed One, the Saṅgha is practicing the good way.’

15. “Now if others should ask that monk thus: ‘What are the venerable one’s reasons and what is his evidence whereby he says, “The Blessed One is perfectly enlightened, the Dhamma is well proclaimed by the Blessed One, the Saṅgha is practicing the good way”?’—answering rightly, that monk would answer thus: ‘Here, friends, I approached the Blessed One in order to hear the Dhamma. The Blessed One taught me the Dhamma with its successively higher levels, with its successively more sublime levels, with its dark and bright counterparts. As the Blessed One taught the Dhamma to me in this way, through direct knowledge of a certain teaching here in that Dhamma, I came to a conclusion about the teachings. I placed confidence in the Teacher thus: “The Blessed One is perfectly enlightened, the Dhamma is well proclaimed by the Blessed One, the Saṅgha is practicing the good way.”’

16. “Monks, when anyone’s faith has been planted, rooted, and established in the Tathāgata through these reasons, terms, and phrases, his faith is said to be supported by reasons, rooted in vision, firm; it is invincible by any ascetic or brahmin or deva or Māra or Brahmā or by anyone in the world.17 That is how, monks, there is an investigation of the Tathāgata in accordance with the Dhamma, and that is how the Tathāgata is well investigated in accordance with the Dhamma.”

That is what the Blessed One said. The monks were satisfied and delighted in the Blessed One’s words.

(MN 47: Vīmaṃsaka Sutta; I 317–20)

5. STEPS TOWARD THE REALIZATION OF TRUTH

10. Then the brahmin Caṅkī,18 together with a large company of brahmins, went to the Blessed One, exchanged greetings with him, and sat down at one side.

11. Now on that occasion the Blessed One was seated finishing some amiable talk with some very senior brahmins. At the time, sitting in the assembly, was a brahmin student named Kāpaṭhika. Young, shaven-headed, sixteen years old, he was a master of the three Vedas with their vocabularies, liturgy, phonology, and etymology, and the histories as a fifth; skilled in philology and grammar, he was fully versed in natural philosophy and in the marks of a great man. While the very senior brahmins were conversing with the Blessed One, he repeatedly broke in and interrupted their talk. Then the Blessed One rebuked the brahmin student Kāpaṭhika thus: “The honorable Bhāradvāja19 shouldn’t break in and interrupt the talk of the very senior brahmins while they are conversing. He should wait until the talk is finished.”

When this was said, the brahmin Caṅkī said to the Blessed One: “Master Gotama shouldn’t rebuke the brahmin student Kāpaṭhika. This brahmin student is very learned; he has a good delivery; he is wise. He can well take part in this discussion with Master Gotama.”

12. Then the Blessed One thought: “Surely, since the brahmins honor him thus, the brahmin student Kāpaṭhika must be accomplished in the scriptures of the three Vedas.”

Then the brahmin student Kāpaṭhika thought: “When the ascetic Gotama catches my eye, I shall ask him a question.”

Then, knowing with his own mind the thought in the brahmin student Kāpaṭhika’s mind, the Blessed One turned his eye toward him. Then the brahmin student Kāpaṭhika thought: “The ascetic Gotama has turned toward me. Suppose I ask him a question.” Then he said to the Blessed One: “Master Gotama, in regard to the ancient brahmin hymns that have come down through oral transmission, preserved in the collections, the brahmins come to the definite conclusion: ‘Only this is true, anything else is wrong.’ What does Master Gotama say about this?”

13. “How then, Bhāradvāja, among the brahmins is there even a single brahmin who says thus: ‘I know this, I see this: only this is true, anything else is wrong’?”—“No, Master Gotama.”

“How then, Bhāradvāja, among the brahmins is there even a single teacher or a single teacher’s teacher back to the seventh generation of teachers who says thus: ‘I know this, I see this: only this is true, anything else is wrong’?”—“No, Master Gotama.”

“How then, Bhāradvāja, the ancient brahmin seers, the creators of the hymns, the composers of the hymns, whose ancient hymns that were formerly chanted, uttered, and compiled, the brahmins nowadays still chant and repeat, repeating what was spoken and reciting what was recited—that is, Aṭṭhaka, Vāmaka, Vāmadeva, Vessāmitta, Yamataggi, Angirasa, Bhāradvāja, Vāseṭṭha, Kassapa, and Bhagu20—did even these ancient brahmin seers say thus: ‘We know this, we see this: only this is true, anything else is wrong’?”—“No, Master Gotama.”

“So, Bhāradvāja, it seems that among the brahmins there is not even a single brahmin who says thus: ‘I know this, I see this: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’ And among the brahmins there is not even a single teacher or a single teacher’s teacher back to the seventh generation of teachers, who says thus: ‘I know this, I see this: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’ And the ancient brahmin seers, the creators of the hymns, the composers of the hymns … even these ancient brahmin seers did not say thus: ‘We know this, we see this: only this is true, anything else is wrong.’ Suppose there were a file of blind men each in touch with the next: the first one does not see, the middle one does not see, and the last one does not see. So too, Bhāradvāja, in regard to their statement the brahmins seem to be like a file of blind men: the first one does not see, the middle one does not see, and the last one does not see. What do you think, Bhāradvāja, that being so, does not the faith of the brahmins turn out to be groundless?”

14. “The brahmins honor this not only out of faith, Master Gotama. They also honor it as oral tradition.”

“Bhāradvāja, first you took your stand on faith, now you speak of oral tradition. There are five things, Bhāradvāja, that may turn out in two different ways here and now. What five? Faith, approval, oral tradition, reasoned cogitation, and acceptance of a view as a result of pondering it.21 These five things may turn out in two different ways here and now. Now something may be fully accepted out of faith, yet it may be empty, hollow, and false; but something else may not be fully accepted out of faith, yet it may be factual, true, and unmistaken. Again, something may be fully approved of … well transmitted … well cogitated … well pondered, yet it may be empty, hollow, and false; but something else may not be well pondered, yet it may be factual, true, and unmistaken. [Under these conditions] it is not proper for a wise man who preserves truth to come to the definite conclusion: ‘Only this is true, anything else is wrong.’”22

15. “But, Master Gotama, in what way is there the preservation of truth?23 How does one preserve truth? We ask Master Gotama about the preservation of truth.”

“If a person has faith, Bhāradvāja, he preserves truth when he says: ‘My faith is thus’; but he does not yet come to the definite conclusion: ‘Only this is true, anything else is wrong.’ In this way, Bhāradvāja, there is the preservation of truth; in this way he preserves truth; in this way we describe the preservation of truth. But as yet there is no discovery of truth.24

“If a person approves of something … if he receives an oral tradition … if he [reaches a conclusion based on] reasoned cogitation … if he accepts a view as a result of pondering it, he preserves truth when he says: ‘The view that I accept as a result of pondering it is thus’; but he does not yet come to the definite conclusion: ‘Only this is true, anything else is wrong.’ In this way too, Bhāradvāja, there is the preservation of truth; in this way he preserves truth; in this way we describe the preservation of truth. But as yet there is no discovery of truth.”

16. “In that way, Master Gotama, there is the preservation of truth; in that way one preserves truth; in that way we recognize the preservation of truth. But in what way, Master Gotama, is there the discovery of truth? In what way does one discover truth? We ask Master Gotama about the discovery of truth.”

17. “Here, Bhāradvāja, a monk may be living in dependence on some village or town. Then a householder or a householder’s son goes to him and investigates him in regard to three kinds of states: in regard to states based on greed, in regard to states based on hate, and in regard to states based on delusion: ‘Are there in this monk any states based on greed such that, with his mind obsessed by those states, while not knowing he might say, “I know,” or while not seeing he might say, “I see,” or he might urge others to act in a way that would lead to their harm and suffering for a long time?’ As he investigates him he comes to know: ‘There are no such states based on greed in this monk. The bodily and verbal behavior of this monk are not those of one affected by greed. And the Dhamma that he teaches is profound, hard to see and hard to understand, peaceful and sublime, unattainable by mere reasoning, subtle, to be experienced by the wise. This Dhamma cannot easily be taught by one affected by greed.’

18. “When he has investigated him and has seen that he is purified from states based on greed, he next investigates him in regard to states based on hate: ‘Are there in this monk any states based on hate such that, with his mind obsessed by those states … he might urge others to act in a way that would lead to their harm and suffering for a long time?’ As he investigates him, he comes to know: ‘There are no such states based on hate in this monk. The bodily and verbal behavior of this monk are not those of one affected by hate. And the Dhamma that he teaches is profound … to be experienced by the wise. This Dhamma cannot easily be taught by one affected by hate.’

19. “When he has investigated him and has seen that he is purified from states based on hate, he next investigates him in regard to states based on delusion: ‘Are there in this monk any states based on delusion such that, with his mind obsessed by those states … he might urge others to act in a way that would lead to their harm and suffering for a long time?’ As he investigates him, he comes to know: ‘There are no such states based on delusion in this monk. The bodily and verbal behavior of this monk are not those of one affected by delusion. And the Dhamma that he teaches is profound … to be experienced by the wise. This Dhamma cannot easily be taught by one affected by delusion.’

20. “When he has investigated him and has seen that he is purified from states based on delusion, then he places faith in him; filled with faith he visits him and pays respect to him; having paid respect to him, he gives ear; when he gives ear, he hears the Dhamma; having heard the Dhamma, he memorizes it and examines the meaning of the teachings he has memorized; when he examines their meaning, he accepts those teachings as a result of pondering them; when he has accepted those teachings as a result of pondering them, desire springs up; when desire has sprung up, he applies his will; having applied his will, he scrutinizes; having scrutinized, he strives; resolutely striving, he realizes with the body the supreme truth and sees it by penetrating it with wisdom.25 In this way, Bhāradvāja, there is the discovery of truth; in this way one discovers truth; in this way we describe the discovery of truth. But as yet there is no final arrival at truth.”26

21. “In that way, Master Gotama, there is the discovery of truth; in that way one discovers truth; in that way we recognize the discovery of truth. But in what way, Master Gotama, is there the final arrival at truth? In what way does one finally arrive at truth? We ask Master Gotama about the final arrival at truth.”

“The final arrival at truth, Bhāradvāja, lies in the repetition, development, and cultivation of those same things. In this way, Bhāradvāja, there is the final arrival at truth; in this way one finally arrives at truth; in this way we describe the final arrival at truth.”

22. “In that way, Master Gotama, there is the final arrival at truth; in that way one finally arrives at truth; in that way we recognize the final arrival at truth. But what, Master Gotama, is most helpful for the final arrival at truth? We ask Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for the final arrival at truth.”

“Striving is most helpful for the final arrival at truth, Bhāradvāja. If one does not strive, one will not finally arrive at truth; but because one strives, one does finally arrive at truth. That is why striving is most helpful for the final arrival at truth.”

23. “But what, Master Gotama, is most helpful for striving? We ask Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for striving.”

“Scrutiny is most helpful for striving, Bhāradvāja. If one does not scrutinize, one will not strive; but because one scrutinizes, one strives. That is why scrutiny is most helpful for striving.”

24. “But what, Master Gotama, is most helpful for scrutiny? We ask Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for scrutiny.”

“Application of the will is most helpful for scrutiny, Bhāradvāja. If one does not apply one’s will, one will not scrutinize; but because one applies one’s will, one scrutinizes. That is why application of the will is most helpful for scrutiny.”

25. “But what, Master Gotama, is most helpful for application of the will? We ask Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for application of the will.”

“Desire is most helpful for application of the will, Bhāradvāja. If one does not arouse desire, one will not apply one’s will; but because one arouses desire, one applies one’s will. That is why desire is most helpful for application of the will.”

26. “But what, Master Gotama, is most helpful for desire? We ask Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for desire.”

“Accepting the teachings as a result of pondering them is most helpful for desire, Bhāradvāja. If one does not accept the teachings as a result of pondering them, desire will not spring up; but because one accepts the teachings as a result of pondering them, desire springs up. That is why accepting the teachings as a result of pondering them is most helpful for desire.”

27. “But what, Master Gotama, is most helpful for accepting the teachings as a result of pondering them? We ask Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for accepting the teachings as a result of pondering them.”

“Examination of the meaning is most helpful for accepting the teachings as a result of pondering them, Bhāradvāja. If one does not examine their meaning, one will not accept the teachings as a result of pondering them; but because one examines their meaning, one accepts the teachings as a result of pondering them. That is why examination of the meaning is most helpful for accepting the teachings as a result of pondering them.”

28. “But what, Master Gotama, is most helpful for examination of the meaning? We ask Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for examination of meaning.”

“Memorizing the teachings is most helpful for examining the meaning, Bhāradvāja. If one does not memorize a teaching, one will not examine its meaning; but because one memorizes a teaching, one examines its meaning.”

29. “But what, Master Gotama, is most helpful for memorizing the teachings? We ask Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for memorizing the teachings.”

“Hearing the Dhamma is most helpful for memorizing the teachings, Bhāradvāja. If one does not hear the Dhamma, one will not memorize the teachings; but because one hears the Dhamma, one memorizes the teachings. That is why hearing the Dhamma is most helpful for memorizing the teachings.”

30. “But what, Master Gotama, is most helpful for hearing the Dhamma? We ask Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for hearing the Dhamma.”

“Giving ear is most helpful for hearing the Dhamma, Bhāradvāja. If one does not give ear, one will not hear the Dhamma; but because one gives ear, one hears the Dhamma. That is why giving ear is most helpful for hearing the Dhamma.”

31. “But what, Master Gotama, is most helpful for giving ear? We ask Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for giving ear.”

“Paying respect is most helpful for giving ear, Bhāradvāja. If one does not pay respect, one will not give ear; but because one pays respect, one gives ear. That is why paying respect is most helpful for giving ear.”

32. “But what, Master Gotama, is most helpful for paying respect? We ask Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for paying respect.”

“Visiting is most helpful for paying respect, Bhāradvāja. If one does not visit a teacher, one will not pay respect to him; but because one visits a teacher, one pays respect to him. That is why visiting is most helpful for paying respect.”

33. “But what, Master Gotama, is most helpful for visiting? We ask Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for visiting.”

“Faith is most helpful for visiting, Bhāradvāja. If faith in a teacher does not arise, one will not visit him; but because faith in a teacher arises, one visits him. That is why faith is most helpful for visiting.”

34. “We asked Master Gotama about the preservation of truth, and Master Gotama answered about the preservation of truth; we approve of and accept that answer, and so we are satisfied. We asked Master Gotama about the discovery of truth, and Master Gotama answered about the discovery of truth; we approve of and accept that answer, and so we are satisfied. We asked Master Gotama about the final arrival at truth, and Master Gotama answered about the final arrival at truth; we approve of and accept that answer, and so we are satisfied. We asked Master Gotama about the thing most helpful for the final arrival at truth, and Master Gotama answered about the thing most helpful for the final arrival at truth; we approve of and accept that answer, and so we are satisfied. Whatever we asked Master Gotama about, that he has answered us; we approve of and accept that answer, and so we are satisfied. Formerly, Master Gotama, we used to think: ‘Who are these bald-headed ascetics, these dark menial offspring of the Lord’s feet, that they would understand the Dhamma?’27 But Master Gotama has indeed inspired in me love for ascetics, confidence in ascetics, reverence for ascetics.

35. “Magnificent, Master Gotama! Magnificent, Master Gotama!… [as in Text III,2] … From today let Master Gotama remember me as a lay follower who has gone to him for refuge for life.”

(from MN 95: Caṅkī Sutta; II 168–77)

________________

Notes:

1.Among the criteria he proposes is the opinion of the wise, which shows that far from rejecting the opinions of others, the Buddha includes the opinions of the right sort of person among the standards for determining proper conduct. Other suttas tell us how we can judge who is truly wise; see Text III,4 and Text III,5.

2.Mp explains that this town was located at the edge of a forest. Various groups of wanderers and ascetics would stop there to spend the night before crossing the forest. During their stay they would give talks to the Kālāmas, and the Kālāmas were thus exposed to a wide range of philosophical theories. The conflicts between the different views caused them doubt and perplexity.

3.The above is a stock passage in the Nikāyas.

4.These ten inadequate criteria of truth can be grouped into three classes: (1) The first comprises the first four criteria, all positions based on reverence for tradition. Of these, (i) “oral tradition” (anussava) refers to the Vedic tradition, which, according to the brahmins, had originated with the primal deity and came down orally through successive generations. (ii) “Lineage” (paramparā) signifies an unbroken succession of teachings or teachers. (iii) “Hearsay” (or “report,” itikirā) may mean popular opinion or general consensus. And (iv) “a collection of texts” (piṭakasampadā) refers to religious texts regarded as infallible. (2) The second set, also made up of four terms, is comprised of four types of reasoning recognized by thinkers in the Buddha’s age; their differences need not detain us here. (3) The third set, made up of the last two items, refers to two types of personal authority: (i) the personal charisma of the speaker (perhaps including his external qualifications, e.g., that he is highly educated, has a large following, is respected by the king, etc.); and (ii) the speaker’s status as one’s own personal teacher (the Pāli word garu is identical with the Sanskrit guru). For a detailed analysis, see Jayatilleke, Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, pp. 175–202, 271–75.

5.Greed, hatred, and delusion are the three unwholesome roots. The aim of the Buddha’s teaching, Nibbāna, is defined as the destruction of greed (or lust), hatred, and delusion. Thus the Buddha is guiding the Kālāmas toward the heart of his teaching.

6.Here the Buddha introduces the four divine abodes (brahmavihāra): boundless loving-kindness, compassion, altruistic joy, and equanimity.

7.Mp: Because he does no evil and because no evil (i.e., suffering) will come to him.

8.This is a stock passage. “Going for refuge” is the act by which a new convert acknowledges the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Saṅgha as guiding ideals. In Buddhist tradition, it has become the procedure by which one formally declares oneself a Buddhist.

9.Gāmaṇi. The word suggests that he is a person of some prominence in the town.

10.Note that the headman here ascribes to the Buddha, as a direct quotation, a general statement of the causal relationship between desire and suffering not found in the Buddha’s words above. The statement is, however, clearly needed as the referent of “this principle” (iminā dhammena). It is thus possible that the statement was in the original text but had dropped out in the course of its oral transmission. Just below the Buddha does make the generalization himself.

11.Read, with Be and Ce, ajānantena, as against Ee’s ājānantena. The negative is clearly required here, since the monk who cannot directly know the Buddha’s mind must infer from his bodily and verbal behavior that he is fully purified.

12.“States cognizable through the eye” are bodily actions; “states cognizable through the ear” are words.

13.“Mixed states” would mean the conduct of one who is trying to purify his behavior but is unable to do so consistently. Sometimes his conduct is pure, sometimes impure.

14.Ps: The dangers are conceit, arrogance, etc. For some monks are calm and humble as long as they have not become well known and popular; but when they become famous and popular, they go about acting improperly, attacking other monks like a leopard pouncing on a herd of deer.

15.Ps: This statement shows the Buddha’s impartiality. He does not extol some and disparage others.

16.So tasmiṃ dhamme abhiññāya idh’ekaccaṃ dhammaṃ dhammesu niṭṭhaṃ gacchati. In order to convey the intended meaning I have rendered the second occurrence of dhamma here as “teaching,” i.e., the particular doctrine taught to him, the plural dhammesu as “teachings,” and tasmiṃ dhamme as “that Dhamma,” in the sense of the total teaching. Ps and Ps-pṭ together explain the meaning thus: “When the Dhamma has been taught by the Master, the monk, by directly knowing the Dhamma through penetration of the path, fruit, and Nibbāna, comes to a conclusion regarding the preliminary teaching of the Dhamma about the aids to enlightenment (bodhipakkhiyā dhammā).”

17.This refers to the faith of a noble person (ariyapuggala), who has seen the Dhamma and thus can never acknowledge any teacher other than the Buddha.

18.He was a prominent brahmin who ruled over Opasāda, a crown property in the state of Kosala that had been granted to him by King Pasenadi.

19.Apparently this is Kāpaṭhika’s clan name.

20.These are the ancient rishis whom the brahmins regarded as the divinely inspired authors of the Vedic hymns.

21.In Pāli: saddhā, ruci, anussava, ākāraparivitakka, diṭṭhinijjhānakkhanti. Of these five grounds for arriving at a conviction, the first two seem to be based primarily on emotion, the third to be an unquestioning acceptance of tradition, and the last two primarily rational or cognitive. The last three are included among the ten unacceptable grounds for a belief in Text III,2. The “two different ways” that each may turn out are true or false.

22.It is not proper for him to come to this conclusion because he has not personally ascertained the truth of his conviction but only accepts it on a ground that is not capable of yielding certainty.

23.Saccānurakkhana: or, the safeguarding of truth, the protection of truth.

24.Saccānubodha: or, the awakening to truth.

25.In this series, “he scrutinizes” (tūleti), according to Ps, means that he investigates phenomena as impermanent, suffering, and nonself. This is the stage of insight contemplation. “Applies the will” (ussahati) and “strives” (padahati) appear similar. We might understand the former as the effort leading to insight, the latter as the effort that leads from insight to world-transcending realization. This last step is signified by the expression, “he realizes with the body the supreme truth.” The supreme truth (paramasacca) is Nibbāna.

26.While the “discovery of truth” (saccānubodha) in this context seems to mean the attainment of stream-entry, the final arrival at truth (saccānuppatti) must mean the attainment of arahantship. Note that the final arrival at truth does not come about through any new measures, but simply through the repeated development of those same factors that led to the discovery of truth.

27.Ps: The brahmins believed that they themselves were the offspring of Brahmā’s mouth, the khattiyas of his breast, the mercantile class (vessa) of his belly, the workers (sudda) of his legs, and samaṇas of the soles of his feet.

    « Xem chương trước «      « Sách này có 14 chương »       » Xem chương tiếp theo »

_______________

MUA THỈNH KINH SÁCH PHẬT HỌC

DO NXB LIÊN PHẬT HỘI PHÁT HÀNH

Donate

Thành viên đang online:
Viên Hiếu Thành Huệ Lộc 1959 Bữu Phước Chúc Huy Minh Pháp Tự minh hung thich Diệu Âm Phúc Thành Phan Huy Triều Phạm Thiên Trương Quang Quý Johny Dinhvinh1964 Pascal Bui Vạn Phúc Giác Quý Trần Thị Huyền Chanhniem Forever NGUYỄN TRỌNG TÀI KỲ Dương Ngọc Cường Mr. Device Tri Huynh Thích Nguyên Mạnh Thích Quảng Ba T TH Tam Thien Tam Nguyễn Sĩ Long caokiem hoangquycong Lãn Tử Ton That Nguyen ngtieudao Lê Quốc Việt Du Miên Quang-Tu Vu phamthanh210 An Khang 63 zeus7777 Trương Ngọc Trân Diệu Tiến ... ...

Việt Nam (161 lượt xem) - Senegal (13 lượt xem) - Hoa Kỳ (12 lượt xem) - ... ...