Ancient Indian atheism: materialism

(Stephan's History of the World) The atheists of ancient India ("Nothing exists after death")

The Vedas are wrong? Karma has no effects?

Charvaka (Sanskrit चार्वाक, Cārvāka), also known as Lokāyata ("world only"), is an ancient Indian school of materialism [1].

It is an example of the atheistic schools in the ancient Indian philosophies [a][3][b][5][c].

Charvaka holds that only direct perception (seeing with my own eyes, experiencing with my own senses), empiricism (provable, objective scientific method), and conditional inference (logical deduction and argument) are proper sources of knowledge; it embraces philosophical skepticism and rejects all ritualism [4][6][7][8][9].

In other words, the Charvaka epistemology (the study of how we know or decide that things are true) states that whenever one infers a truth from a set of observations or truths, one must acknowledge doubt; inferred knowledge is conditional [10]. It was a well-attested belief system in ancient India [d].

Brihaspati, a [heretical] philosopher, is traditionally referred to as the founder of the Charvaka or Lokāyata philosophy, although some scholars dispute this [11, 12].

• The Buddha taught a way to be rid of (wrong) views
• Heterodox schools of Indian philosophy | PPTX

On Lokayata | Indic Civilizational Portal

.

Charvaka developed during the Hindu reformation period in the first millennium BCE [13] and is considered a philosophical predecessor to subsequent or contemporaneous heterodox philosophies such as Ajñāna, Ājīvika, Jainism, and Buddhism [14].

Its teachings have been compiled from historic secondary literature such as those found in the shastras, sutras, and Indian epic poetry [15].

Charvaka is categorized as one of the nāstika or "heterodox" schools of Indian philosophy [16, 17]. More

• Heresy in Buddhism: Six Heretical Teachers at the time of the historical Buddha
• Akriyavada: denying the efficacy of karma (deeds) to produce results in the future

Pranks for Halloween: Is it bad karma?

"KARMA: It's everywhere you're going to be." Deeds have the power to produce resultants.

.

Pranks are fun to watch because they're funny and because it's not us on the receiving end. It must be terrifying, if even for the first moments, to be the pranked on. But it sure is funny, at least for males. Females may have more sense and sensibility, preferring to daydream about Darcy coming to save them. They are so fun, funny, and fascinating that a question comes up: Are they unskillful karma?

That is, will they result in unpleasant, unwished for, unwanted, even unbearable results when they come to fruition and ripen?

It seems to be a matter of degrees if one thinks about it just a little. What's "better," to kill one person or two people?

• Nightmares can be silenced by a single piano chord, study shows (MSN)
• But isn't karma an "imponderable" and unanswerable question in Buddhism? No, what's imponderable is the working out (vipaka-phala) of karma (deeds). What we throw out by our mental, verbal, and physical actions will come back to us, but precisely HOW they will come back, that is imponderable and would drive one to madness to keep trying to figure out.

The answer is obvious only it's hard to answer because, between only those two choices, of course it's better to killer fewer people but it cannot in any way be said that it's "good" (and certainly not "better") to kill anyone.

In exactly the same way and for the same reason, a person pranked Halloween-style is going to be scared. That fear may dissolve and resolve again as catharsis, laughter, an adrenaline rush, a moment of clarity, hiccuplessness, or whatever, but for that span of time, one was frightened, experiencing horripilation, terrified, apoplectic, having a bowel movement -- and that can't be good to do to someone just for laughs.

If one imagines a motive -- such as to teach a valuable lesson or remind someone of something or to bring about sudden relief or whatever -- that may modify the karma and attenuate, but it certainly does not erase it, absolve it, make it good, or turn it into an indulgence to be paid off. It's still bad. It's like spanking someone. Whatever the motive, it is still bad (violent, insensitive, cruel, abusive) and potentially traumatizing. One may later thank you for traumatizing him or her, such as when that person grows up, joins the military, and kills many people instead of bowing out of a mission like a smarter or less traumatized person might think to do. But that thanks does not mean it was a good or neutral deed on the part of the doer, only that it had some effect for which the victim feels a necessity to have gratitude, like when you are beaten in prison on arrival, not because you did anything wrong or deserved it but only because stronger guys were looking out for your future and wanted you to toughen up, look alert, and mind your Ps and Qs. You may thank them when you avoid getting jumped by antagonistic opponents or get jumped but were ready for it because you remained hypervigilant after the first beating. But that won't make that beating "good." At best, it might make it "mixed." Mixed means at least partially bad, negative, harmful, an therefore resulting in suffering (dukkha) for the doer.

Message in the Teachings of Karma (bps.lk)

If one beats one's child with a "good" parental motive then imagines that as a karmic result, later on, perhaps in a future life, one is beaten by one's parent with a "good" motive, how is that going to be experienced, how is it going to feel, what are going to be the negative results (whether or not there are any positive ones)? Say that, indeed, one doesn't flip off the neighbor anymore but, on account of being beaten, starts seeing beating others (being physically violent and/or scolding) as a means to an end -- as demonstrated by one's own loving parent? Will one call that a win and say that beating is not bad karma? It is clearly bad karma even if it does some good or has some positive outcome in addition to all the negative outcomes. What if the child becomes nervous, fearful, introverted, shy, full of violent outbursts, closed in, untrusting...? "But, at least, does not flip off the neighbor anymore" will be a pathetic rationalization when trying to explain that spanking was "good karma."

Would that karma were so nice and limited, but each act has exponential results.

.

Reduce debt, maximize profit

What are the motives for pranks? That is another way to know whether something is skillful (wholesome, good, meritorious, proper conduct, advantageous, beneficial, harmless, in line with the dhamma): find the motives motivating it. There are six motives to choose from, and it is never really going to be just one. It will tend to be a mixed bag. At one impulsion (javana), at one mind moment (citta), it may be just one motive, but there are thousands if not millions of such impulsions and mind moments in one act (karma). The most important quality of the karma (act) is the cetana (motive, ambition, intention behind it). The six motives are easy to remember because they flipsides of one another:

• greed (attraction), nongreed
• hatred (aversion), nonhatred
• delusion (wrong view), nondelusion.

Actions motivated by any degree of greed, hatred, or delusion we can put in the unskillful, unwholesome, harmful, producing dukkha pile.

Actions motivated by any degree of nongreed (letting go, giving up, sharing, generosity, nonstinginess, charity, compassion, caring, loving-kindness, harmlessness) we can put in the skillful pile, which produces (when it finally comes to fruition, which is whenever it meets the necessary and sufficient conditions to come to frution, much more likely later rather than sooner.

Actions motivated by aversion (FEAR, annoyance, disliking, revulsion, hatred) we can put in the unskillful pile.

Actions motviated by nonaversion (tolerance, sympathy, mercy, compassion, loving kindness, fairness, enlightened self-interest) we can put in the skillful pile.

Actions motivated by delusion (ignorance, confusion, wrong view, misplaced or blind faith, fanaticism) we can put in the unskillful pile, which produces unwelcome, unwanted results when they (those impulsions and mind moments) come to fruition and ripen.

Actions motivated by nondelusion (wisdom, direct knowing and seeing, understanding, clarity) we can put in the skillful pile.

Spite, not your boyfriend, is karma.

One thing that should be clear although it is probably not is that there is no such thing as greed or hatred without delusion. Delusion gives rise to greed. It gives rise to hatred. There could be greed without hatred, and hatred without greed, or delusion without either, but otherwise they are usually mixed up, supporting one another, producing unskillful karma.

All that one might say in condemnation of the first three mentioned might can be turned around to praise the other three, but one must understand these terms are translated from a more sophisticated and subtle language with more nuances than English. Pali, which comes from Sanskrit, has many multivalent terms, with each word having a RANGE of meanings. That's why it sounds "negative," non-this and non-that. But according to Bhikkhu Bodhi and other scholars, this is just a convention. Nondelusion (whatever it might mean in English) really does mean "wisdom" in the original languages of the Buddha (Gandhari, Magadhi, Pali, Prakrit, Sanskrit). And nonhatred (adosa) is not merely the absence of hatred but the positive aspects of loving kindness. Our English ears have trouble hearing this and we see negativity where it is not.

Another way to have looked at this question, "Is it (pranks or anything else) bad karma?" would have been to compare life to the Disciplinary Code or Rules and Regulations the Buddha set down for monastics. Bothering others, no matter the motive, is bad because it bothers them. So thoughtlessly, unmindfully, neglectfully, carelessly, inadvertently making noise that is disruptive to others is labeled "wrong" and "not to be done" in the Vinaya. One trivial example that comes to mind is that, while eating, which in olden times was done with the hand, one is not to scrape the bottom of the bowl with one's nails such as to make noise that bothers others who are eating.

There was no intention to bother them and, nevertheless, it is wrong and should be avoided. If done with the motive to disturb others, then it is clearly bad however minor it may seem or however many rationalizations we may give. So following the example of the Monastic Sangha, who are models of good behavior for Buddhists (not that they always are), we can clearly see that pranking, joking, teasing, or even unintentionally disturbing others by our walking loudly, coughing, twitches, scratching, snoring, carelessly passing wind, and so on can be deemed violations of the Code, which applies to monastics and not us but is an example to us of what the Buddha taught for the longevity of Buddhism (the Dharma in the world), the respect of others for Buddhism and the Buddha as a teacher, for the comfort of the peaceful, and for the taming of the disturbed. The Vinaya explains why each rule or regulation was set down in the first place, with a backstory to explain its necessity. Some rules are as general as just for making it comfortable to be around or for the calming of those who are not calm. Big time pranks would never be in line with this. Little teases maybe, but even that is walking the line as we never know how someone is going to take something. We might be able to know our motives, innocent or not, but they are not likely to know those motives so may grow resentful, angry, vengeful, disturbed, or motivated to strike back. For peace's sake, keep the peace. Pranks are anti-peaceful.

Karmic results

What will be the result of any intentional action? We may imagine that it is commensurate with the act, and it is, but we all fail to understand "the act." The typical misconception, based more on a popular understanding of Hinduism than what the Buddha taught, is that if we do one thing, that one thing will happen to us in return.

This is wrong for at least two reasons. One, we don't realize what constitutes "the act" (the deed, action, intention). The Abhidhamma (the "Dharma in Ultimate Terms") as a treatise of Buddhist psychology goes into extreme detail about what "consciousness" is. We may think it's a thing, but in fact it's a process, a stream of mind-moments (cittas). These are not really "thoughts" but components or "particles" of awareness. Mental formations -- such as feelings, perceptions, volitions, and 50 others -- give us "consciousness." Among these are javanas or "impulsions." If there are countless cittas streaming, there are an exponential number of javanas for each. Each of these might lay down a track, a seed, that later manifests as a karmic result. If this understanding is correct, one "deed" (with uncountable cittas and javanas) will result in an exponential number of results. The is for the good, the bad, and the neutral resulting in welcome, unwelcome, and neither welcome-nor-unwelcome results. Results are of two kinds, resultants (vipakas) and fruit (phala). It's not clear what the distinction is, but it used to be said that one referred to mental resultants and the other to physical circumstances. Thus, one can see that mental resultants might be immediate (regret, remorse, sadness, mental pain, delight, passion, joy, elation, etc.) whereas as life circumstances might be the fruit, our situation, where we are born, how our body is, our looks, health, longevity or lack of these.

Two, since ancient times, for whatever reason, people have made the mistake of thinking that if we do something in a certain way, that deed will produce the same thing for us in the same way. This is completely wrong. When the Buddha was asked about it, he said that such a view was the negation of his teachings on karma. For example, if we slap someone in public, we may worry that our deed (our karma of slapping that person in public) will result in us being slapped in public. This is so common a view that there's no convincing even most Buddhists that this is wrong. This is what sutras and stories, the media and our own thinking tell us is "fair" and proportionate. It's incorrect. The Buddha teaches a variable result of karma. For example, if someone kills, the result will not be that one is killed. That could be the result. It may even be likely that that is the result. Oh, if only it were we might learn something. The results are actually much worse. That act, that deed, because so many things led up to it, because it was motivated by so many cittas and so many more impulsions, will yield unwelcome results over and over, again and again for a long, long time. Even if the negative results are avoided in this life (we are not caught, we are not punished, we experience no remorse, regret, sadness, misgivings, worries about retribution, coarseness, insensitivity, drunkenness to try to drown the guilt or bolster the rationalizations), they will not be avoided forever.

• So "live by the sword, die by the sword" is not necessarily true. It is self-evidently untrue in the way we understand it and true in another way we do not understand. We think that because this killer who killed with a sword, who killed many people because he lived "by the sword" as a soldier, cop, or criminal must die by getting stabbed or beheaded, but he died of a heart attack or disease or old age surrounded by his loved ones. How could this be? Doesn't make the famous utterer of that adage wrong? That utterer will be vindicated because there are many lives, not just this one. So what if he doesn't "die by the sword" this time? He likely will in the future, many times over, but even if he doesn't, even if that is avoided, he will reap what he has sown and it will produce many unwelcome results (resultants and fruits, multiplying, maturing and ripening). In hell realms, one may be killed with a sword many times. And, still, having been killed many times over, having had many lives shortened by this act, incurring animosity and fear from others, bad looks, an angry disposition, aversion, fear, worry, and so on, that deed is not exhausted. It keeps producing unwelcome results when it gets the opportunity.

Even if the negative results are avoided in the very next life, which is unlikely since it is a heavy karma (course of action with the power to drag us down to the downfall or niraya and condition our rebirth in an unfortunate plane of existence, among animals, ghosts, demons, or hellions), going from brightness to darkness or darkness to darkness, there is still the probability of that deed bearing its result in subsequent lives when it gets the opportunity to produce results. When it finally catches up with us, the result will not be someone kills us and that's that. It is far more likely that it will result in sickliness, a shortened lifespan wherever one is born, ugliness, and other problems, to say nothing of the possibility that the person we killed will seek revenge life after life, in a cycle of retribution because we will strike back and get in more trouble. But, say, no bad result ever came about until one life far in the future, a fortunate rebirth on a good plane of existence on or above the human plane. And there the result was that it caused a shortened life and we died prematurely: That karma is in no way exhausted by that having happened. We are likely to have many lifespans shortened, have much sickliness, much pain, many lives in the downfall (a collective term for subhuman lives which have much suffering and very little hope of escape). When we add up what happened as a result of that "one" deed of killing, we will certainly understand that it was not worth it. Conversely, a skillful deed was more than worth it. If we give, share, help others, we will be helped many times over before that karma of giving that one time, even a small amount, is exhausted. (It depends to whom and how we give, but giving is good, which is not to say that it can't be made bad or soured or used as a pivot point for negativity. Imagine if we give to shame someone, outdo someone, belittle someone, or simply to gain more for ourselves. It looks like giving and sharing from the outside, but inside we can see a negative motive for a "good" deed. So it can bear its mixed results, perhaps ironically. What if as a result of giving, we get a fortune BUT we are limited to distributing it not enjoying it ourselves? We are made the head of a trust fund for others with a pittance of a stipend for serving on the board of its distribution. So the Buddha many times advised, for the nondoing of the unskillful and the doing of the skillful, this is what a buddha teaches. Why he teaches is that we and others around us might benefit. He wished for the whole world, far beyond this human plane, to benefit.

Kar Krashes and Karens (instant karma?)

This is the strange and seemingly "unfair" thing about karma. We only killed that one time, yet we are experiencing the unwanted, unwelcome, unbearable results over and over again. Similarly with skillful or good deeds, with merit. Though we only give a little, it comes back manifold. (Cast your bread upon the water).

Finally, what is the ultimate wisdom? It is enlightenment (bodhi, satori, kensho, vipassana, insight, epiphany, dawning, knowledge, sight, knowing-and-seeing, liberating-wisdom, awakening). Why? It is because ignorance (avijja, avidya, moha, miccha-ditthi, maya) is the root of all our problems in samsara (the cycle of rebirth, "again becoming," reappearance) which is inseparable from dukkha so long as we're trapped in it. Liberation (moksha) is no longer being trapped even when we still might be in it as in nirvana-with-remainder, the living arhat or buddha who still experiences pain (dukkhata) but has overcome all that can upset (dukkha) -- a response to pain rooted in aversion or frustration in wanting something to be other than the way it is.

Less is more. We should have said far less (words) and it would have been much more (useful). But for readers who read all the way through, comment. Is there any sense in what the Buddha taught? It's not so different than our Christian, Hindu, Jain, and even Jewish teachings, only the Buddha tweaked those misunderstandings and made them so clear that in his day, he was never called a "Buddhist" but frequently called a "Karmavadin," a teacher of the efficacy of deeds.

You may think I'm "hot," but I'm d*ad cold, so the joke's on you (Ariana Viera, RIP).

.

There's great hope in what he taught because in all but five situations (regarding five heinous deeds), all karma is modifiable and may even be compensated for so that it does not ruin us. Even in the case of those five deeds, and we can look at the example of Devadatta for evidence of this, karma does not rule everything. Karma is not the cause of everything. Those five have the unfortunate power to bear the result in the very next (immediate) rebirth, and it will not be good. But what else we do now will also condition the future, even if other deeds are not powerful enough to expunge or avoid this powerful result of immediate next rebirth experience. The evidence is in what the Buddha said would happen to Devadatta, the Judas figure in Buddhism. He might have much suffering ahead of him, much explaining and accounting for his horrific misdeeds, yet he would eventually become an arhat perhaps even a silent buddha.

• Dhr. Seven, Amber Larson, Ashley Wells to Ananda (Dharma Buddhist Meditation), Wisdom Quarterly

KARMA: three "Articles of (Heretical) Belief"

Ven. Nyanatiloka (Buddhist Dictionary, palikanon.com; Dhr. Seven (ed.), Wisdom Quarterly

This is not the historical Buddha Gautama but a nude Mahavira, founder of Jainism.

.

The great wandering ascetic Mahavira

These Three "Articles of (Heretical) Belief" (titthāyatana) are (in A.III.61) declared as leading to inactivity/inaction:

1. (1) the belief that all happiness and suffering are produced through previous karma (prenatal deeds, actions in past lives);
2. (2) that everything is uncaused;
3. (3) that everything is created by God.

(1) The first is the teaching of Niggantha Nāthaputta [Mahavira, the Jina, the tirthankana or "ford-finder," the founder Jainism and leader of the Jains or Nigganthas].

The fault with this doctrine (dharma, "teaching") is that it does not account for that happiness and suffering which are either the result of the present life's skillful or unskillful deeds or are associated with the corresponding action.

(2) The second is the doctrine or teaching of Makkhali Gosāla (see view at ditthi).

According to these three doctrines, humans are not responsible for their actions (deeds, karma) so as to say that all moral exertions would be useless. Source

Sexual misconduct, good/bad, karma (video)

Sue Tissue/Suburban Lawns ("Janitor"); Whitney Cummings; Ven. Nyanatiloka (Anton Gueth), Buddhist Dictionary; Ananda (Dharma Buddhist Meditation), Dhr. Seven, Ashley Wells (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly

I want to be sexy, sensual, and live it up.

I want to be good. Everyone, especially my mom, tells me to. But what in the world does "good" mean? It's ALL relative...isn't it?

The Buddha taught that intention (cetana, volition, underlying motive) distinguishes "good" from "bad." There are only six root-motivations for good and bad deeds. These motives color karma (our actions of thought, speech, or deed), making them skillful or unskillful, wholesome or unwholesome, bearing desirable or undesirable results, ripening in pleasure or pain, good or bad:

1. nongreed (letting go, generosity)
2. nonhatred (loving kindness, compassion)
3. nondelusion (wisdom, insight)
4. greed (liking, clinging)
5. hatred (disliking, aversion)
6. delusion (ignorance, wrong view).

When one knows and sees, one agrees with the B

Why did the Buddha call any act "good"? It's good because it ripens in happiness when it finally ripens (which can be many lifetimes from now). It's "bad" because it ripens, when it finally ripens, in disappointment/suffering.

When we do something, we feel either good, bad, or neutral as a result, but that karma has not yet born fruit. When it does, that's what the Buddha was talking about. For example, kill or steal and you may not feel bad about it now. But you sure will when that karma of killing or stealing comes to fruition with unfortunate rebirths in miserable destinations, shortened lifespans, sickliness, poverty, and so on.

It is NOT one to one, one cause to one effect. A single act produces an exponential number of results. (Why? There are many "mind moments" or cittas behind an act, each leaving a trace or seed that bears fruit, or so the Abhidharma explains. Karma is the action, and the results are called the vipaka and the phala, the karmic resultants and fruit).

Our culture says, "You reap what you sow" or "What comes around goes around." These are apt descriptions of karma because one seed leads to many fruits, and what goes around goes around many times. This revolving around making karma and reaping the results is called samsara, the Wheel of Life and Death.

Karma is not one and done. "Cast your bread upon the water" and watch it multiply. But this is actually good news if we use the knowledge skillfully: Doing good produces many more wished for results: one seed, many fruits. Plant many good seeds now when it's possible. There comes a time, reborn in certain places, that it is not possible to do any good. This is the place to plant. "Karma: It's everywhere you're going to be."

Ten deeds are very "good" because they bring about desirable results, wished for outcomes, fortunate destinations.

In one sutra in the Book of Sixes (Numerical Discourses), the Buddha lists six wished for things that are hard to come by. He teaches that they cannot be obtained by wishing, for if they could, Who would not already have them?

The Ten Courses of Action or karma-patha are ten kinds of wholesome deeds and their opposites, the ten unwholesome actions:

I. Ten wholesome courses of action (kusala-kamma-patha)

• 

  Yeah, but what is "sexual misconduct" exactly?*

  three bodily actions: refraining from killing, stealing, sexual misconduct;
• four verbal actions: refraining from lying/bearing false witness, slandering, speaking harshly, and foolish babbling (and instead engaging in true, conciliatory, mild, and wise speech);
• three mental actions: letting go (unselfish giving), friendliness, developing right views.

Both lists occur repeatedly, for example, in A.X.28, 176; MN 9; they are explained in detail in MN 114, and in the Commentary to MN 9 (R. Und., p. 14), Atthasālini Tr. I, 126ff.

NOTE: To really do the Pali language terms justice in translation, it would be necessary to include the positive English words. It is not simply a matter of refraining from doing harm, as there is also the active-good implicit in each of the six terms. "Nongreed" literally means letting go, liberality, giving, generosity, unselfishness, sharing. "Nonhatred" means more than the absence of anger and animosity; it means the presence of loving-kindness, friendliness, helpfulness, and goodwill. "Nondelusion" means wisdom, right views, insight, knowing, understanding, penetrating the truth.

II. Ten unwholesome courses of action (akusala-kamma-patha)

• three bodily actions: killing, stealing, sexual misconduct;
• four verbal actions: lying/bearing false witness, slandering, speaking harshly, foolish babbling;
• three mental actions: covetousness, ill-will, wrong views [also called the Three Poisons of greed, hatred, and delusion or passion, aversion, and confusion all rooted in ignorance].

I'm going vegan, recycling, avoiding synthetics.

Unwholesome mental courses of action comprise only extreme forms of defiled thought: The greedy wish to appropriate others' property, the hateful think of harming others, and the foolish cling to pernicious wrong views.

Milder forms of the mental defilements are also unwholesome, but they do not constitute "courses" of action, which have the power to lead to a fortunate or unfortunate rebirth.

"Sexual misconduct" DEFINED

WARNING: Profanity, graphic sexual references, loving relationships, marriage, divorce, and sex!

So then sex between consenting adults is OK?

The meaning of SEXUAL MISCONDUCT (kamesu micchacara) is "to conduct oneself unskillfully (badly, wrongly) in matters of sensuality." The Buddha got much more specific. At a minimum, it means not having sexual intercourse with any of these ten "out of bounds" persons:

1. those under the protection of a father,
2. under the protection of a mother,
3. of a father and mother,
4. of a brother,
5. of a sister,
6. of extended family,
7. of their religious community (a),
8. or those promised in [an arranged] marriage (b),
9. or those forbidden (c),
10. or those betrothed [engaged] with a garland (d).

One gives up sexual misconduct and abstains from it. One does not have sexual intercourse with any of those ten "off limits" people. In this way, there is success [in living] rather than tainted failure.

• a) Dhamma-rakkhita. Commentary: sahadhammikehi rakkhita, "protected by one's co-religionists."
• b) Promised at birth or in childhood.
• c) Sa-parida.n.da: literally, "under punishment." Commentary to MN 41: "This refers to a [person] about whom [the authorities] announce in the house, street, or village, 'One who consorts (sexually) with a person of such-and-such a name will be punished.'" — An alternative interpretation: "convicts" [who are being punished and are therefore off-limits and "forbidden" by the community or local authority].
• d) Maalagu.na-parikkhita. Commentary to MN 41: "One whom another has garlanded [engaged by some token such as a flower-garland or ring] to express the intention, 'This person will be my spouse.'"

Causes of one's DOWNFALL (sutra)

Ven. Narada Thera (1898-1983) adapted from the old-timey translations in Everyman's Ethics: Four Discourses of the Buddha edited by Dhr. Seven, Ashley Wells, Pat Macpherson, Wisdom Quarterly

CONTENTS

1. Sigalovada Sutra: The Layperson's Code of Discipline (DN 31)
2. Great Mangala Sutta: Blessings (Snp, Verses 258-269)
3. Parabhava Sutra: Downfall (Snp, Verses 91-115)
4. Vyagghapajja Sutra: Conditions of Welfare (AN 54)

These translations are adapted from the translations and notes in The Light of the Dhamma by the Venerable Narada Thera. The introductory notes to the last three texts have been supplied by the editor of this series. And all have been updated and re-edited by Wisdom Quarterly

Parabhava Sutra: The Downfall Discourse

A celestial deva or "shining one" asks the Buddha.

Whereas the "Blessings Discourse" (Mangala Sutra) deals with the way of life most conducive to progress and happiness, this "Downfall Discourse" (Parabhava Sutra) supplements it by pointing out the causes of downfall. One who allows oneself to become tarnished by these behavioral blemishes blocks one's road to worldly, moral, and spiritual progress and lowers all that is noble and human in humans. But one who is heedful of these dangers keeps open the road to all those 38 blessings of which human nature is capable.

Thus have I heard. Once the Exalted One was dwelling at Anathapindika's monastery, in Jeta's Grove, near Savatthi.

When the night was far spent, a certain deity (deva, "shining one") whose surpassing splendor illuminated the entire Jeta Grove, came into the presence of the Exalted One and, drawing near, respectfully saluted him and stood respectfully to one side. Standing there, he addressed the Exalted One in verse:

Causes of Downfall

O, what karma has caused this?! (Machell)

The Deity: Having come here with our questions to the Exalted One, we ask, O Gautama, about humanity's decline. Pray, tell us the cause of human downfall!

The Buddha: Easily known is the progressive, easily known is one who declines. One who loves Dharma progresses; one who is averse to it, declines.

The Deity: This much do we see: This is the first cause of one's downfall. Pray, tell us the second cause.

• [These lines again asking the question are repeated after each cause of downfall but have been left out for brevity.]

The Buddha: The wicked are dear to one, with the virtuous one finds no delight, one prefers the creed of the wicked — this is a cause of one's downfall.

Being fond of sleep, fond of company, indolent, lazy, and irritable — this is a cause of one's downfall.

Though being well-to-do, not to support father and mother who are old and past their youth — this is a cause of one's downfall.

To deceive by falsehood a Brahmin or wandering ascetic or any other mendicant — this is a cause of one's downfall.

To have much wealth and ample gold and food, but [out of miserly greed] to enjoy one's luxuries alone — this is a cause of one's downfall.

To be proud of one's birth, wealth, or clan, and to despise one's own kin — this is a cause of one's downfall.

To be a rake, a drunkard, a gambler, and to squander all one earns — this is a cause of one's downfall.

Not to be contented with one's own spouse, but to consort the spouses of others and prostitutes — this is a cause of one's downfall.

Though being past one's youth, to take a young spouse and to be unable to sleep for jealousy — this is a cause of one's downfall.

To place in authority a person given to drink and squandering — this is a cause of one's downfall.

To be of noble birth, with vast ambition yet slender means, but to crave for rulership — this is a cause of one's downfall.

Knowing well these causes of downfall in the world, the noble sage endowed with insight shares a happy realm.

Is life crazy, or is it karma? (video)

Dharma talk by Ajahn Suwat Suvaco, translated by Ven. Thanissaro as A Fistful of Sand: Karma edited by Dhr. Seven, Pat Macpherson, Wisdom Quarterly; Best of Wins/Fails; Dr. Zwig, "Raising People"

I wonder what they talk about inside Buddhist temples. Maybe they'll explain karma.

(Despiadado13x) VIRAL VIDEOS: Best Wins and Fails of the Year, 2015 Part 4, Aug. 16, 2016

Hey, can someone tell me what "karma" is?

In the summer of 1989, Larry Rosenberg -- one of the guiding teachers at the Insight Meditation Society (IMS) in Barre, Massachusetts -- invited Ajahn Suwat Suvaco to lead a two-week retreat the following spring. Ajahn Suwat had been living in the U.S. for several years, founding monasteries for Thai communities in Seattle and Los Angeles, and this was his first opportunity to teach large numbers of Western Buddhists. The retreat was in May, 1990, with approximately 100 attending. Ven. Thanissaro was brought from Thailand to serve as interpreter....

Karma, karma, what is karma?
Question: You've spoken of the five topics that should be contemplated every day:

1. that we're subject to aging,
2. subject to illness,
3. subject to death,
4. subject to separation from the things and people we love, and
5. that we're the owners of our karma [past actions of body, speech, mind].

This fifth topic is the most difficult of the five to understand. I was wondering if you could explain karma -- and in particular the role of mindfulness at the moment of death.

Ajahn Suwat's answer: Listen carefully. I'm going to explain karma in line with the principles of the Buddha's awakening/enlightenment.

When the Buddha explained karma, he did so in line with one of the [super-] knowledges he attained on the night of his awakening: the recollection of past lives.

In becoming a buddha [a fully awakened teacher], it was not the case that he had been born only once and had practiced only one lifetime before attaining awakening. He had been developing his goodness, his [ten] perfections, for many lifetimes.

That was how he had been able to build up his wisdom/discernment continually over the course of time to the point where he could awaken to the subtle Dharma so hard for anyone to recollect, so hard for anyone to awaken to.

He had been developing his mindfulness until it was fully powerful, his wisdom/discernment until it was fully powerful, so that he could come to know the truth.

For this reason, our understanding of karma has to depend both on our study and on our practice, training our own minds as the Buddha did so as to gain wisdom/discernment step by step. 

When the Buddha spoke about karma after his awakening to the truth, he was referring to action. There's physical karma, that is to say, the actions of the body and verbal karma, the actions of speech, and there's mental karma, the actions of the mind.

All human beings, all living beings, experience good things and bad things, pleasure and pain, as a result of their karma -- their own actions.

• 

  What was the Buddha originally saying?

  [NOTE: Most of these actions bearing fruit now and ripening were performed long in the past -- in addition to what is being done now -- when "they" were not "themselves" but someone else, in a conventional sense. Of course, in an ultimate sense, they were not anyone, and all that has been going on is an impersonal process, but it gets personalized, and an "eternal self" is imagined as going through all of this endless samsara, the playing of karma in inconceivable complexity].

Karma is something very subtle. When you ask about rebirth and how you'll experience pleasure and pain in future lives, you should first study karma in your present life, your actions in your present life.

Understand your actions in the present life clearly. Once you understand them, once you know the truth of action in the present, then when you train the mind/heart further, you'll gradually come to the end of your doubts.

There's no one who has ever resolved doubts about rebirth simply through reading or hearing the spoken word.

Even among those who've practiced a long time, if their insight/discernment isn't up to the task, they'll still have their same old doubts.

The texts tell us that doubt is ended only with the attainment of the first of the noble paths, the first stage of enlightenment called stream-entry.

Stream-enterers have cut away three defilements: self-identity views [the strong belief that all of this is personal], doubt [about the path to full enlightenment], and attachment to precepts and practices [as a means of attaining enlightenment and final liberation].

When the insight/discernment of the noble [enlightenment] path arises, knowledge of birth and death, rebirth and redeath, arises together with it.

As for our current level of insight/discernment, if we want to know about these things, we need to do the preliminary work [actually practicing the path, not just talking about it, learning it, studying it, or reflecting on it].

We need to study the nature of action [our karma] in the present. So today I won't speak of future lifetimes. I'll teach about the three kinds of action -- physical action, verbal action, and mental action -- in the present.

What's "good"?

“Raising People“ official music video by Dr. Zwig. From his album, Live at the Wiltern Theatre, recorded and produced by Grammy winner David Bianco. Directed by Laban.

These three kinds of action are divided into two sorts, good and bad [skillful and unskillful, pleasant and unpleasant, wished for and unwished for].

Bad actions give rise to suffering [disappointment, unsatisfactoriness, discontent, unfulfillment]. Good actions give rise to good results: happiness, prosperity, mindfulness, and insight/discernment, both in the present and on into future days, future months, future years.

Bad actions are called unskillful karma. The Buddha taught that it is wise to abandon this kind of karma [as it leads to unwelcome, unwished for, unpleasant results when it finally matures].

In the area of physical action, this includes tormenting and killing living beings, whether large or small. This kind of action is unskillful because it lacks goodwill and compassion.

All living beings love their lives. If we kill them it's unskillful because we without compassion, without pity, without regard for their lives.

This is why the Buddha said it is wise not to do it. If we kill other human beings, we get punished now by civil law and [impersonally in the future] by the [mysterious workings of] Dharma [universal or cosmic order, Nature, the lawfulness/impersonal orderliness of things like actions bringing about appropriate results, as like attracts like]. More

• VIDEO: A human-cow hybrid born in Argentina

The Buddha defines "good and bad" karma

Ven. Nanamoli, Buddha's Words on Karma; WY; Dhr. Seven (ed.), Aloka, Wisdom Quarterly

Karma is a [female camel], so be careful what is willed, said, done (journaliststate.com).

INTRODUCTION

The Brahmins in this sutra are intelligent people, who are asked a question about the cause of rebirth -- why some are reborn in the states of deprivation (in the realm of animals, ghosts, hellions) while others become devas (shining ones, light beings) reborn in various heavenly realms.

• [Brahmins are high caste wealthy people in and around ancient India, the "priestly class" (who in Hinduism can only come from this caste). Their claim to fame is that they uphold the Vedas (Knowledge Books), the Brahmanas in particular. Brahma (the "Supreme") is their God. But the Buddha redefined the term "Brahmin" (a brahmana as distinct from a sramana or wandering ascetic) to refer to those who do acts of merit in this life. Previously it referred to the caste one entered at birth, regardless of one's karma/conduct in this life. The Buddha taught that one's deeds (karma) in this life are more important. He rejected the Vedas as the supreme authority. The Buddha was a Scythian, a "noble warrior" (kshatriya), the top caste above Brahmins.]

The Buddha then defines and analyzes what kind of karma (actions, deeds, conduct) will take one to a low rebirth. Seeing our own behavior, we learn what can be done about it. If one makes any of these Ten Courses of Bad Karma strong in oneself, an unwished for result can be expected in this very life or "on the dissolution of the body after death."

Mirror, Mirror, on the wall

But the Ten Courses of Good Karma are also stated and the reasons they should be strengthened in ourselves. By repeating them frequently, they can become habit and serve a very welcome purpose of becoming the basis of high rebirths and much good fortune in this very life, though guarding against the conceit, "I am good."

The final part of this discourse deals with the aspirations one may have for rebirth at the time of death. One's previous deeds (karma) must, of course, be such as will support such aspirations. A miser might aspire to riches, but stingy, miserly, hoarding karma will lead to poverty.

If a person has kept the lunar observance days (the Eight Precepts of the uposatha or "fasting" days), and the Five Precepts in general, and been generous and honest, this is a passport to various heavenly rebirths (from the lowly devas in the Realm of the Four Great Overseers or Regents of the four cardinal directions up to the Devas that Wield Power over Others' Creations).

Beyond this it is necessary to also be proficient in the meditative absorptions (jhanas) to access realms of rebirth among the brahmas (the divinities, from Great Brahma's Retinue to the Very Fruitful Devas) in accordance with one's level of proficiency with these four meditative states (called form attainments) -- weak, middling, or strong.

For rebirth in the next five brahma-planes, the enlightened state of non-returning is required, while for the last four one must have gained the four formless attainments.

Finally, one may aspire to THE END OF REBIRTH: to full enlightenment and therefore full liberation from all suffering. But, of course, aspiration alone is insufficient. Practice and the resultant insight-wisdom are needed.

The Sutra: The Brahmins of Sala

1. Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One (the Buddha) was wandering in the country of Kosala with a large community (sangha) of wandering ascetics. He eventually arrived at a Kosalan Brahmin village called Sala.

2. The Brahmin householders of Sala heard: "A wandering ascetic named Gotama (Sanskrit Gautama), it seems, a son of the Scythians who went forth from a Scythian clan, has been wandering in the Kosalan country with a large community of ascetics and has come to Sala.

"Now a good report of Master Gotama has spread to this effect:

"'That Blessed One is such since he is an arhat, fully enlightened, perfect in true knowledge and conduct, sublime, knower of worlds, incomparable teacher of persons to be tamed, teacher of devas and humans, liberated (enlightened), and blessed.

"'He describes this world with its shining ones, inimicals, and divinities (devas, maras, and brahmas), this generation with its wandering ascetics and Brahmins, with its rulers and its people, which he has himself realized through direct knowledge.

"'He teaches a Dharma (Doctrine) that is good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end, full of [deep] meaning and [cogent] phrasing; he affirms a spiritual life that is utterly perfect and pure.' Now it is good to see such arhats."

3. The Brahmin householders of Sala went to the Blessed One. Some bowed to the Blessed One and sat down respectfully to one side. Some exchanged greetings with him, and when the courteous and amiable talk was done, sat down to one side. Some raised their hands with palms together in salutation to the Blessed One and sat down to one side. Some announced their names and clans in the Blessed One's presence and sat down to one side. Some kept silent and sat down to one side.

4. When they were seated, they said to the Blessed One: "Master Gotama, what is the reason, what is the condition, why some beings here, on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in states of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, even in a hell?

"And what is the reason, what is the condition, why some beings here, on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in a happy destination, even in a heavenly world?"

5. "Householders, it is by reason of karma (deeds) not in accordance with the Dharma, by reason of unskillful conduct, that beings here on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in states of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, even in a hell.

"In contrast, it is by reason of karma in accordance with the Dharma, by reason of skillful conduct, that some beings here on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in a happy destination, even in a heavenly world."

Explanation

6. "We do not understand the meaning of this utterance of Master Gotama's spoken in brief without yet expounding the detailed meaning. It would be good if Master Gotama taught us the Dharma so that we might understand the detailed meaning of his utterance spoken in brief."

"Then, householders, listen and heed well what I shall say."

"Yes, venerable sir," they replied, and the Blessed One said:

THE TEN COURSES OF UNSKILLFUL (BAD) KARMA

I didn't think/say/do nuthin

7. "Householders, there are:

• three (3) kinds of bodily karma, unskillful conduct, not in accordance with the Dharma.

"There are:

• four (4) kinds of verbal karma, unskillful conduct, not in accordance with the Dharma.

"There are:

• three (3) kinds of mental karma, unskillful conduct, not in accordance with the Dharma.

8. "How? Here someone is a killer of living beings: one is murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, and is merciless to all kinds of living beings.

"One is a taker of what is not given: one takes as a thief another's possessions and property in village or forest.

Sexual misconduct defined

C'mon, let's just have sex. Who cares?

One is given to sexual misconduct, misconduct with regard to sexual desires: one has sex (intercourse) with persons protected by:

1. mother
2. father
3. parents (mother and father)
4. brother
5. sister
6. relatives
7. as have a spouse
8. as entail a penalty
9. with those who are [promised in marriage] and/or
10. engaged with a token (e.g., garland) of betrothal.

"That is how there are three kinds of bodily conduct not in accordance with the Dhamma, unskillful conduct.
 
Verbal karma

Mouth correcter: Was it something I said? That's not what I meant, but it was when I said it.

.

9. "How are there four kinds of verbal karma, unskillful conduct, not in accordance with the Dharma?

"Here someone speaks falsehood (bears false witness): when summoned to a court, or to a meeting, or to one's relatives' presence, or to a guild, or to the royal family's presence, and is questioned as a witness, 'So, good person, tell what you know,' then, not knowing, one says 'I know,' or knowing, one says 'I do not know,' not seeing, one says 'I see,' or seeing, one says 'I do not see.' In full awareness one speaks falsehood for one's own ends or for another's ends or for some trifling worldly end.

"One speaks maliciously (divisively): one is a repeater elsewhere of what is heard here for the purpose of causing division from these, or one is a repeater to these of what is heard elsewhere for the purpose of causing division from those, and one is thus a divider of the united, a creator of divisions, who enjoys discord, rejoices in discord, delights in discord, one is a speaker of words that create discord.

"One speaks harshly: one utters such words as are rough, hard, hurtful to others, censuring others, bordering on anger and unconducive to concentration.

"One gossips (idle chatter): as one who tells that which is unseasonable (spoken at an inappropriate or inopportune time), that which is not fact (true), that which is not good, that which is not the Dharma, that which is not the Discipline, and one speaks out of season speech not worth hearing, which is unreasoned, impertinent, and unconnected with good.

"That is how there are four kinds of verbal karma, unskillful conduct, not in accordance with the Dharma.

Mental karma

"Mind" is not in the head but in the heart.

10. "How are there three kinds of mental karma, unskillful conduct, not in accordance with the Dharma?

"Here someone is covetous: one is a coveter of another's possessions and property: 'Oh, that what is another's were mine!' Or one has a mind of ill-will, with the intention of a mind affected by hate: 'May these beings be slain and slaughtered, may they be cut off, perish, be annihilated!'

"Or one has wrong view, distorted understanding: 'There is nothing [to come of what is] given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed, no fruit and ripening of good and bad karma (deeds), no this world, no other world, no [special significance in what is given to] mother, no father, no spontaneously (reborn) beings,*

• [*Note 1: beings who appear due only to the force of past deeds (karma) -- without intervention of parents -- in some states of rebirth: all devas (light beings) and brahmas (divinities), ghosts (pretas), inhabitants of the hells (narakas). See Maha Sihanada Sutra (MN 12).]

"no good and virtuous wandering ascetics and Brahmins who, having themselves realized by direct knowledge, declare this world and the other world.'**

• [**2: For an explanation of these views held by other wandering ascetic teachers in the Buddha's time, which were a rejection of all moral values, see Ledi Sayadaw's The Eightfold Path and Its Factors Explained (Wheel #245/247, bps.lk).]

"That is how there are three kinds of mental karma, unskillful conduct, not in accordance with the Dharma.

"So, householders, it is by reason of karma, not in accordance with the Dharma, by reason of unskillful conduct, that some beings here, on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in states of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, even in hells.

Ten Courses of Skillful (Good) Karma

If I were ever mindful, I would do good.

11. "Householders, there are three kinds of bodily karma, skillful conduct, in accordance with the Dharma.

"There are four kinds of verbal karma, skillful conduct, in accordance with the Dharma.

"There are three kinds of mental karma, skillful conduct, in accordance with the Dharma.

12. "How are there three kinds of bodily karma, skillful conduct, in accordance with the Dharma?

"Here someone, abandoning the killing of living beings, becomes one who abstains from taking life; with rod and weapon laid aside, gentle and kindly, one abides compassionate toward all living beings.

"Abandoning the taking of what is not given, one becomes one who abstains from taking what is not given; one does not take as a thief another's possessions and property in village or forest.

"Abandoning misconduct with regard to sexual desires, one becomes one who abstains from sexual misconduct: one abstains from sex (intercourse) with persons protected by mother, father, parents (father and mother), brother, sister, relatives, as have a spouse, as entail a penalty, those who [promised in marriage], and/or are engaged with a token (e.g., a garland) of betrothal.

"That is how there are three kinds of bodily karma, skillful conduct, in accordance with the Dharma.

13. "How are there four of verbal karma, skillful conduct, in accordance with the Dharma?

"Here someone, abandoning false speech, becomes one who abstains from false speech: when summoned to a court or to a meeting or to one's relatives' presence or to a guild or to the royal family's presence, and questioned as a witness, 'So, good person, tell what you know,' not knowing, one says 'I do not know,' or knowing, one says 'I know,' not seeing one says 'I do not see,' or seeing, one says 'I see.' One does not in full awareness speak falsehood for one's own ends or for another's ends or for some trifling worldly end.

"Abandoning malicious (divisive) speech, one becomes one who abstains from malicious speech: as one who is neither a repeater elsewhere of what is heard here for the purpose of causing division from these, nor a repeater to these of what is heard elsewhere for the purpose of causing division from those, who is thus a reuniter of the divided, a promoter of friendships, enjoying concord, rejoicing in concord, delighting in concord, one becomes a speaker of words that promote concord.

"Abandoning harsh speech, one becomes one who abstains from harsh speech: one becomes a speaker of such words as are innocent, pleasing to the ear and lovable, as go straight to the heart, are civil, desired by many and dear to many.

"Abandoning gossip (idle chatter), one becomes one who abstains from gossip: as one who tells that which is seasonable (appropriate and opportune), that which is factual (true), that which is good, that which is the Dharma, that which is the Discipline, one speaks in season speech worth hearing, which is reasoned, definite and connected with good. That is how there are four kinds of verbal karma, skillful conduct, in accordance with the Dharma.

14. "How are there three kinds of mental karma, skillful conduct, in accordance with the Dharma?

"Here someone is not covetous: one is not a coveter of another's possessions and property: 'Oh, that what is another's were mine!' One has no mind of ill-will [but rather one of metta, goodwill], with the intention of a mind unaffected by hate: 'May these beings be free from enmity, affliction, and anxiety, may they live happily!'

"One has right view, undistorted understanding: 'There is [a result of] what is given and what is offered and what is sacrificed, and there is fruit and ripening of good and bad deeds, and there is this world and the other world and [special significance to what is done to] mother and father, and [there really are] spontaneously (reborn) beings, and good and virtuous wandering ascetics and Brahmins who, having themselves realized by direct knowledge, declare this world and the other world.'

"That is how there are three kinds of mental karma, skillful conduct, in accordance with the Dharma.

"So, householders, it is by reason of karma in accordance with the Dharma, by reason of skillful conduct, that some beings here, on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in a happy destination, even in the heavenly world.

The fruits of good karma

The countless worlds of the 31 Planes of Rebirth

15. "If a householder who observes karma (deeds), skillful conduct, in accordance with the Dharma should wish: 'Oh, that on the dissolution of the body, after death, I might reappear in the company of the warrior-nobles of great property!' it is possible that on the dissolution of the body, after death, one may do so. Why is that? It is because one observes karma that is in accordance with the Dharma, skillful conduct.

16. "If a householder who observes karma is accordance with the Dharma, skillful conduct, should wish: 'Oh, that on the dissolution of the body, after death, I might reappear in the company of the Brahmins of great property!' it is possible...

17. "If a householder who observes karma in accordance with the Dharma...' I might reappear in the company of householders of great property!' it is possible...

18. "If a householder who observes karma in accordance with the Dharma, skillful conduct, should wish: 'Oh, that on the dissolution of the body, after death, I might reappear in the company of the shining ones (devas) of the Four Great Sky Kings!' it is possible that on the dissolution of the body, after death, one may do so. Why is that? It is because one observes karma in accordance with the Dharma, skillful conduct.

19. "...of the shining ones of the Realm of the Thirty-Three...***

• [***3: The rendering of the various devas' names on the various "heavenly" planes of existence are based on the Commentary to the Hadaya-vibhanga (in the Vibhanga, second book of the Abhidhamma: See The Book of Analysis, P.T.S. Translation Series).]

20. "...of the shining ones who have Gone to Bliss...

21. "...of the Contented shining ones...

22. "...of the shining ones who Delight in Creating...

23. "...of the shining ones who Wield Power over others' Creations...

24. "...of shining ones of Brahma's Retinue...

25. "...of the Radiant shining ones...

26. "...of the shining ones of Limited Radiance...

27. "...of the shining ones of Measureless Radiance...

28. "...of the shining ones of Streaming Radiance...

29. "...of the Glorious shining ones...

30. "...of the shining ones of Limited Glory...

31. "...of the shining ones of Measureless Glory...

32. "...of the shining ones of Refulgent Glory...

33. "...of the Very Fruitful shining ones...

34. "...of the shining ones Bathed in their own Prosperity...

35. "...of the Untormenting shining ones...

36. "...of the Fair-to-see shining ones...

37. "...of the Fair-seeing shining ones...

38. "...of the shining ones who are Junior to None...

• [The following four planes comrpise the Formless Sphere, arupa loka.]

39. "...of the shining ones of the base consisting of boundless space...

40. "...of the shining ones of the base consisting of boundless consciousness...

41. "...of the shining ones of the base consisting of nothingness...

42. "If a householder who behaves in accordance with the Dharma, in skillful conduct, should wish: 'Oh, that on the dissolution of the body, after death, I might reappear in the company of the devas of the base consisting of neither-perception-nor-non-perception!' it is possible that, on the dissolution of the body, after death, one may do so. Why is that? It is because one behaves in accordance with the Dharma, in skillful conduct.

43. "If a householder who behaves in accordance with the Dharma, in skillful conduct, should wish: 'Oh, that by realization myself with direct knowledge, I may here and now enter upon and abide in the deliverance of the heart and the deliverance by wisdom that are taint-free with the exhaustion of taints!' it is possible that, by realization oneself with direct knowledge, one may here and now enter upon and abide in the deliverance of the heart and the deliverance by wisdom that are taint-free with the exhaustion of taints. Why is that? It is because one bheaves in accordance with the Dharma, in skillful conduct."

44. When this was said, the Brahmin householders of Sala said to the Blessed One:

"Magnificent, Master Gotama, magnificent! The Dharma has been made clear in many ways by Master Gotama -- as though he were turning upright what had been overthrown, revealing the hidden, showing the way to one who were lost, holding up a lamp in the darkness for those with eyes to see things [as they really are].

45. "We go to Master Gotama for guidance, and to the Dharma, and to the Community [of enlightened followers of the Dharma]. From today let Master Gotama accept us as followers who have gone to him for guidance for life."