Buddhism and Hinduism Project

[Wannabe Yogi]

Yes, it has been my impression that, back in the day of Gautama, there weren't isms, but rather a "which teacher do you follow?" kind of thing. (Of course there weren't isms, that is a modern western feature, but you get what I mean).

Anyway, this is a good time to bring out, as an example, the Venerable Buddhadasa:


“ ...those who have penetrated to the highest understanding will feel that the thing called 'religion' doesn't exist after all. There is no Buddhism; there is no Christianity; there is no Islam. How can they be the same or in conflict when they don't even exist?[8] ”

I would also mention that Buddhadasa was a Theravada bhikkhu. In fact, he was am ascetic and one of the forest meditators. This means that he practiced, not just studied, and through practice of the teachings, he realized the truths of them.

I find him to be very inspirational, especially when I have had my own biases against Theravada. He seems to exemplify the attributes of Gautama.

Here, the All Powerful Wiki has something to say about him: Buddhadasa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I:bow: to the wisdom of Buddhadasa.

 

[zenzero]

Friend DreadFish,

Thank you for sharing that information.
Frubals [but the system did ot allow]
Though had never read/heard of this *buddha* earlier; now am in the know.

AM sure the stage of evolution is ripe for many like minded individuals, will walk the path of no-path like Buddhadasa. Personally too am walking the path in this life, HERE-NOW!
Translating the label *buddhadasa* would mean the state of buddha.
Yes we are all born in THAT state but lose our way as we eat the apple from the tree of knowledge or follow the mind only, instead of being mindfullness.

Found few of Budhhadasa's writings: downloads available:Category:Buddhadasa Bhikkhu - Dharmaweb

Love & rgds

 

[ratikala]

dear zenzero ,

Friend ratikala,
Thank you for your response.
Each one is a *bodhi* by birth and all it needs is awareness through any means and all those are termed yogs/paths/ways/religion.

for this reason you will find many buddhists using the term buddha seed or buddha nature , we are all born with the seed of bodhi which needs to be awakened , nurtured and brought to fruition only in its developed state is it truely bodhi (inteligence) only when it is free from all contamination and covering can it be bodhi (awakening)
so yes all paths are simply a method of nurturing or purification which allow for the blossoming of bodhi.

Sanatan dharma is not a religion it is a way of life and every way of life reaches to THAT state. Some ways may reach through evolutionary way others revolutionise their way.
Under this cultural background itself there are many many ways and Gauatama too belonged to this background.

agreed , sanatana dharma is not so much a religion and agreed allso that it is a way of life , but one must allow the simple use of the word religion as beleif in the principals of sanatana dharma are adhered to religiously by many thus it is collectively termed a religion it is only an external classification , so in truth it is both from inside it is a way of life and from the outside it is a religion .

and yes , gauatama too belongs to the sanatana dharma tradition

Firstly finding no *I* here have not said anything and if at all have shared anything are all personal understandings which is open ended and so others too can share their views and reach the middle path through sharing.

please excuse me , the one called ratikala simply addresses the one called zenzero out of politeness, as replying to points writen by he and of course all are welcome to share their veiw ,

and the idea of reaching a middle ground is most certainly an accheivement of desolving the *I* which prevents the clear veiw and attainment of bodhi

Rgds examining, firstly do not know what GAuatama said and in what context, do not mind if someone can bring the actual context and text for an understanding besides this much is sure anyone approaching with minds will be perceiving and all perceptions are wrong/illusions and what buddha said about that is known and understood.

Love & rgds

gauatama gave many instructions on this subject , so I am sure many of us have their favorites
in the kalama sutta the buddha says ..do not beleive on the strength of faith alone , or that we should not belive simply on the strength of tradition allone , not simply that it has been haded down through generations , ....but that we should beleive only after carefull examination ,after analasis and observation . ....then when finding a teaching to be valid one should then adopt it and put it into practice .....

I will look it up later and post full transcript

but out of interest I leve another quote for your contemplation

"the eight fold path is the best of all paths , the four noble truths the best of all truths . freedom from desire is the best state , and he who has eyes to see is the best of men .

this is the noble path which leads to freedom from delusion.

he who treads this path will end his suffering . I have told you of this path ever since I knew suffering and its cure .

you your self must make the efort . buddhas only point the way . those who have entered the path and who meditate will be freed from the fetters of illusion .

the Dhammapada . verses 273 ...276

please note , buddhas only point the way , therefore all suttas only point the way

we our selves must make the effort

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Tathagata;2836070]Here where? I don't see anything that confirms that, wheres the evidence?

Well maybe I should have been clear, I believe Buddha was not an avatar, he was a realized Atman.

Here's a hint. What you claim is impossible. Buddhist doctrine directly contradicts Hindu doctrine. Just look at Brahman vs. No Brahman, eternal soul vs. no soul, etc.

yes, but Gautam Buddh was indian, but he did not like the Vedas taught by the Brahmins of that time.

Complete and utter lie. Take your disinfo somewhere else. The Buddha was born in Nepal/Lumbini. NOT India.

Ok, now i know you have no idea about Sidhrata Gautama.

The vocabulary of Buddhism is adopted from prevailing literature of the time.


eg:
The word Buddha comes in Mahabharat Shantiparva 193/6 to mean ‘intelligent’.

Bodhisatva has been used for Sri Krishna in Shishupal Vadh 15/58 and its commentary by Vallabhdeva.

Bhikshu again is a word denoting certain sage in Mahabharat Shantiparva 325/24 and Gautam Dharmasutra 3/2.

Shraman comes in Brihadaranyak Upanishad and Gautam Dharmasutra

Nirvana comes from Deval Dharmasutra

The famous Buddhist chant of Om Mani Padme Hum speaks for itself on glory of Om – that originates from Vedas and is integral part of Hinduism.

In Sutta Nipat 192, Mahatma Buddha says that:
Vidwa Cha Vedehi Samechcha Dhammam Na Uchchavacham Gachhati Bhooripanjo.
People allow sense-organs to dominate and keep shuffling between high and low positions. But the scholar who understands Vedas understands Dharma and does not waver.

 

[zenzero]

Friend ratikala,
Thank you for sharing as we walk and talk the path.

but one must allow the simple use of the word religion as belief in the principals of sanatana dharma are adhered to religiously by many thus it is collectively termed a religion it is only an external classification , so in truth it is both from inside it is a way of life and from the outside it is a religion .

Sanatan dharma means the laws of existence which is eternal and whcih humans too are part of. Those who understand it and remain within it as followers of dharma; however the mind tends to deviate one from that oneness with existence to being seperated and so in order to get back to that fold where dharma is followed many paths as many people are there i.e. [as many people so many paths - Ramakrishna]So religion is personal and one is free to follow one that suits him and so is not COLLECTIVE. Dharma is collective where the self too is included and nothing is excluded. There is no inside and outside except as mentioned the mind seperates and so one uses religion/path/way to get into following dharma. When all looking stops there is no inside or outside its oneness with that whole/existence.

..do not beleive on the strength of faith alone , or that we should not belive simply on the strength of tradition allone , not simply that it has been haded down through generations , ....but that we should beleive only after carefull examination ,after analasis and observation . ....then when finding a teaching to be valid one should then adopt it and put it into practice .....

This was due to the fact that human mind by nature tends to take control as the mind so the person and mind of the followers of the dharma too became blind and simply were not aware/conscious and this is addressed to the mind to be awake/conscious of what one does. The target is consciousness and so cautioning about the mind traps one falls into. Those who are awake for them this is not important but *kill the buddha, even if he comes in the way* is of significance where the follower's mind could fall into another trap of the mind when the individual is at the last leg and will be about to be *gate, gate* gone, gone.
Rgds the quote it is understood that all buddhas are mediums of existence and existence itself is at all times giving pointers even without buddhas except that the minds creation of illusion is so strong that even images appear to be real and the significance behind the images are forgotten.
Slowly we can see that though Gauatama never wanted any image to be used even symbolically BUT his followers has not only created his image but in record numbers.

Love & rgds

 

[zenzero]

Friend Satya,

Thank you for comprehensively bringing out the background of so many aspects of sanatan dharma which Gautama too followed.
If possible could you get the sutras where all those mentions are written?

Love & rgds

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Friend Satya,

Thank you for comprehensively bringing out the background of so many aspects of sanatan dharma which Gautama too followed.
If possible could you get the sutras where all those mentions are written?

Love & rgds

This is where my source is.

Buddhism and Vedas

Friend im not a Scholar, i would say a Buddhist can confirm these from the Sutta Nipat verses, and any Hindu Scholar from Mahabharata ect.

I was born into the language of Hindi (that is my first language) and throughout my life all the poojas and mandirs i visited all prayers are in Sanskrit. and i find Hindi is similar to Sanskrit.

So i can read Hindi a little bit and somewhat understand Sanskrit words, im not 100% though.
i know that in Sanskrit words have to be split (Sandhi Vichheda) to understand its meanings.

All my life i have heard the Mahabharata, krishnacharitra, Ramcharitra and Ramayana, and there words eg; Buddha, Bodhisatva ect, have been explains to me in Hindi.

So if i see these on websites and its explained linguistically how i understand it, i use it as good reference.

Hope you understand.

 

[zenzero]

Friend Satya,
Thanks once again.

This is what confirms what had had explained earlier:

Why Mahatma Buddha rejected Vedas
9. Mahatma Buddha did not reject Vedas per se, but the malpractices happening in name of Vedas. For example, if you call someone – He is a Neta of India – today, he may get offended and feel as if you have called him corrupt and manipulative. This is not because Neta word in itself means ‘corrupt’, but because this is what we see of the so-called Netas today.
Similarly, when Mahatma Buddha questioned birth-based casteism, animal sacrifice and other nonsense practices, he was answered that Vedas sanction so. Thus, like any sane morally upright person would do, Mahatma Buddha stated that: “If Vedas sanction these evil practices, then I reject Vedas.”

Love & rgds

 

[DreadFish]

Buddhism and Vedas

It seems that the post on that site may be a bit biased (that might just be my perspective though) but nonetheless, it provides a valuable perspective on the situation; thanks for sharing.

 

[Tathagata]

Let me clarify a few things.

1. I did not write that list of differences between Buddhism and Hinduism, I copy/pasted and put the source at the bottom. I did add a footnote on the last one though.

2. Advaita Vedanta is a unique sect of Hinduism that very closely resembles Buddhism. I already know this and have known this for years. Dont think you're telling me something new by revealing that. I've followed Alan Watts and have his books and has explained Advaita Vedanta and it's similarities to Buddhism. But to me, that doesnt represent mainline Hinduism just like Paul Tilich and Christian Existentialists dont represent mainline Christianity.

3. Do not assume that I only understand the surface of Buddhism. I have delved deep into the scripture, have learned from great teachers who have years of understanding such as D.T. Suzuki, Alan Watts, the Dalai Lama, Krishnamurti, Buddhagosa, Ajahn Brahm, Stephen Bachelor, and have personally had multiple self-realizations (i dont claim to be fully enlightened however).

4. I agree that suffering is a bad representation dukka. I think the site I sourced was shallow with that regard but I used it merely to show some basic and fundamental differences.


.

 

[ratikala]

Suppose a monk were to say: "Friends, I heard and received this from the Lord's own lips: this is the Dhamma, this is the discipline, this is the Master's teaching", then, monks, you should neither approve nor disapprove his words. Then, without approving or disapproving, his words and ex*pressions should be carefully noted and compared with the Suttas and reviewed in the light of the discipline. If they, on such comparison and review, are found not to conform to the Suttas or the discipline, the conclusion must be: "Assuredly this is not the word of the Buddha, it has been wrongly un*derstood by this monk", and the matter is to be rejected. But where on such comparison and review they are found to con*form to the Suttas or the discipline, the conclusion must be: "Assuredly this is the word of the Buddha, it has been rightly understood by this monk."
- DN 16 Mahāparinibbāna Sutta - The Great Passing, The Buddha's Last Days


another way of looking at it

 

[DreadFish]

Suppose a monk were to say: "Friends, I heard and received this from the Lord's own lips: this is the Dhamma, this is the discipline, this is the Master's teaching", then, monks, you should neither approve nor disapprove his words. Then, without approving or disapproving, his words and ex*pressions should be carefully noted and compared with the Suttas and reviewed in the light of the discipline. If they, on such comparison and review, are found not to conform to the Suttas or the discipline, the conclusion must be: "Assuredly this is not the word of the Buddha, it has been wrongly un*derstood by this monk", and the matter is to be rejected. But where on such comparison and review they are found to con*form to the Suttas or the discipline, the conclusion must be: "Assuredly this is the word of the Buddha, it has been rightly understood by this monk."
- DN 16 Mahāparinibbāna Sutta - The Great Passing, The Buddha's Last Days


another way of looking at it

One thing that confuses me is that the Suttas were not written until after the Buddha's parinirvana, so how could he say "his words and ex*pressions should be carefully noted and compared with the Suttas" ?

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Let me clarify a few things.


Advaita Vedanta is a unique sect of Hinduism that very closely resembles Buddhism. I already know this and have known this for years. Dont think you're telling me something new by revealing that. I've followed Alan Watts and have his books and has explained Advaita Vedanta and it's similarities to Buddhism. But to me, that doesnt represent mainline Hinduism just like Paul Tilich and Christian Existentialists dont represent mainline Christianity.

I could not disagree with this more. Here are some facts on this subject:

-Adi Sankara is the main spokesman of this sect. He is the one who systematized modern Hinduism. If you have a Vedantic View its him you argue with or agree with. At minimum he is one of the big dogs in the yard of Hinduism.

-Advaita Vedanta is the school of Hindu thought study most in western universities.

-Polls by Indian news papers show that in India Swami Vivekananda is popularly seen as the most important Hindu Teacher of the 20th century.(this is shocking because he died in 1902) His birthday is a national Holiday in India (National Youth Day) His teaching was Advaita.

-Advaita Vedanta (IAST Advaita Vedānta; Sanskrit: अद्वैत वेदान्त [əd̪ʋait̪ə ʋeːd̪ɑːnt̪ə]) is considered to be the most influential[1] and most dominant[2][3] sub-school of the Vedānta (literally, end or the goal of the Vedas, Sanskrit) school of Hindu philosophy.Advaita Vedanta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[DreadFish]

1. I did not write that list of differences between Buddhism and Hinduism, I copy/pasted and put the source at the bottom. I did add a footnote on the last one though.

Yes, but your posting them as a response shows endorsement of the views presented, thus it was not wrong of us to believe you believed these things. If we keep misunderstanding you, maybe you are not being very clear in your responses. That is your responsibility to present your thoughts clearly, lest our misunderstanding arise and conflict ensue.

2. Advaita Vedanta is a unique sect of Hinduism that very closely resembles Buddhism. I already know this and have known this for years. Dont think you're telling me something new by revealing that. I've followed Alan Watts and have his books and has explained Advaita Vedanta and it's similarities to Buddhism. But to me, that doesnt represent mainline Hinduism just like Paul Tilich and Christian Existentialists dont represent mainline Christianity.

Good for you you. Why the need to clarify how long you have known something?

3. Do not assume that I only understand the surface of Buddhism. I have delved deep into the scripture, have learned from great teachers who have years of understanding such as D.T. Suzuki, Alan Watts, the Dalai Lama, Krishnamurti, Buddhagosa, Ajahn Brahm, Stephen Bachelor, and have personally had multiple self-realizations (i dont claim to be fully enlightened however).

Have you met these persons directly and experienced their teachings? Or are you reading brochures about tropical paradises and how to visit them written by professional travelers? It also doesn't matter one **** how many multiple realizations anyone has had. Maybe once someone's ego was dropped and everything they thought about everything completely dissolved into something inexplicable and they experienced complete connection and love in a way incredibly inexplicable, but hell, they're still right here subject to cause and effect, sadness, depression, jealousy, irritation, and mundane enjoyment right at this moment.

4. I agree that suffering is a bad representation dukka. I think the site I sourced was shallow with that regard but I used it merely to show some basic and fundamental differences.

Make sure to clarify what you're saying, it has obviously been misunderstood by a few people.



It doesn't matter who you read. If one's understanding is intellectual, it is like playing with plastic Buddha toys and one's Buddhism is not genuine, only still in the starting gate.


Again, your responses exhibit pride and maybe a bit of anger, I could certainly be wrong though.


Im sure you have done a good bit of reading, and it has likely been a good, balanced, nutritious diet, but dont forget to digest and let the nutrients be absorbed so you can really benefit. Gautama and all his students did not realize through reading, they sat and observed the truths that Gautama taught to them through direct seeing.

 

[zenzero]

Friends,
The posts above leads this to be shared and sorry if it brings about any emotions as one needs to be conscious of such states and meditate on it.

"I know one thing, that I know nothing" (Ancient Greek: ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα hèn oîda hóti oudèn oîda; Latin: scio me nihil scire or scio me nescire) is a well-known saying that is derived from Plato's account of the Greek philosopher Socrates. This saying is also connected and/or conflated with a contemporary Pythian oracular answer "Socrates" to the question "who is the wisest man in Greece?".

Love & rgds

 

[SageTree]

nice to see some hard action in the Dharma DIR, folks.

 

[ratikala]

dear dread fish

One thing that confuses me is that the Suttas were not written until after the Buddha's parinirvana, so how could he say "his words and ex*pressions should be carefully noted and compared with the Suttas" ?

Ha Ha , little bit of artistic licence here on the part of the composser of the sutta

supposedly when the suttas were composed all present agreed that the written suttas reflected the true words or instructions of the buddha .

and to apply discriminating wisdom in this case ....

I refer back to the kalama sutta ,

The Instruction to the Kalamas

Anguttara Nikaya, Tika Nipata, Mahavagga, Sutta No. 65

The Kalamas of Kesaputta go to see the Buddha

1. I heard thus. Once the Blessed One, while wandering in the Kosala country with a large community of bhikkhus, entered a town of the Kalama people called Kesaputta. The Kalamas who were inhabitants of Kesaputta: "Reverend Gotama, the monk, the son of the Sakyans, has, while wandering in the Kosala country, entered Kesaputta. The good repute of the Reverend Gotama has been spread in this way: Indeed, the Blessed One is thus consummate, fully enlightened, endowed with knowledge and practice, sublime, knower of the worlds, peerless, guide of tamable men, teacher of divine and human beings, which he by himself has through direct knowledge understood clearly. He set forth the Dhamma, good in the beginning, good in the middle, good in the end, possessed of meaning and the letter, and complete in everything; and he proclaims the holy life that is perfectly pure. Seeing such consummate ones is good indeed."
2. Then the Kalamas who were inhabitants of Kesaputta went to where the Blessed One was. On arriving there some paid homage to him and sat down on one side; some exchanged greetings with him and after the ending of cordial memorable talk, sat down on one side; some saluted him raising their joined palms and sat down on one side; some announced their name and family and sat down on one side; some without speaking, sat down on one side.
The Kalamas of Kesaputta ask for guidance from the Buddha

3. The Kalamas who were inhabitants of Kesaputta sitting on one side said to the Blessed One: "There are some monks and brahmans, venerable sir, who visit Kesaputta. They expound and explain only their own doctrines; the doctrines of others they despise, revile, and pull to pieces. Some other monks and brahmans too, venerable sir, come to Kesaputta. They also expound and explain only their own doctrines; the doctrines of others they despise, revile, and pull to pieces. Venerable sir, there is doubt, there is uncertainty in us concerning them. Which of these reverend monks and brahmans spoke the truth and which falsehood?"
The criterion for rejection

4. "It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them.
Greed, hate, and delusion

5. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does greed appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his harm, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being given to greed, and being overwhelmed and vanquished mentally by greed, this man takes life, steals, commits adultery, and tells lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his harm and ill?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
6. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does hate appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his harm, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being given to hate, and being overwhelmed and vanquished mentally by hate, this man takes life, steals, commits adultery, and tells lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his harm and ill?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
7. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does delusion appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his harm, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being given to delusion, and being overwhelmed and vanquished mentally by delusion, this man takes life, steals, commits adultery, and tells lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his harm and ill?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
8. "What do you think, Kalamas? Are these things good or bad?" — "Bad, venerable sir" — "Blamable or not blamable?" — "Blamable, venerable sir." — "Censured or praised by the wise?" — "Censured, venerable sir." — "Undertaken and observed, do these things lead to harm and ill, or not? Or how does it strike you?" — "Undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill. Thus it strikes us here."
9. "Therefore, did we say, Kalamas, what was said thus, 'Come Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, "The monk is our teacher." Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill," abandon them.'
The criterion for acceptance

10. "Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them.
Absence of greed, hate, and delusion

11. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does absence of greed appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his benefit, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being not given to greed, and being not overwhelmed and not vanquished mentally by greed, this man does not take life, does not steal, does not commit adultery, and does not tell lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his benefit and happiness?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
12. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does absence of hate appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his benefit, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being not given to hate, and being not overwhelmed and not vanquished mentally by hate, this man does not take life, does not steal, does not commit adultery, and does not tell lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his benefit and happiness?" _ "Yes, venerable sir."
13. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does absence of delusion appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his benefit, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being not given to delusion, and being not overwhelmed and not vanquished mentally by delusion, this man does not take life, does not steal, does not commit adultery, and does not tell lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his benefit and happiness?" _ "Yes, venerable sir."
14. "What do you think, Kalamas? Are these things good or bad?" — "Good, venerable sir." — "Blamable or not blamable?" — "Not blamable, venerable sir." — "Censured or praised by the wise?" — "Praised, venerable sir." — "Undertaken and observed, do these things lead to benefit and happiness, or not? Or how does it strike you?" — "Undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness. Thus it strikes us here."
15. "Therefore, did we say, Kalamas, what was said thus, 'Come Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, "The monk is our teacher." Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness," enter on and abide in them.'

 

[ratikala]

The Four Exalted Dwellings

16. "The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who in this way is devoid of coveting, devoid of ill will, undeluded, clearly comprehending and mindful, dwells, having pervaded, with the thought of amity, one quarter; likewise the second; likewise the third; likewise the fourth; so above, below, and across; he dwells, having pervaded because of the existence in it of all living beings, everywhere, the entire world, with the great, exalted, boundless thought of amity that is free of hate or malice.
"He lives, having pervaded, with the thought of compassion, one quarter; likewise the second; likewise the third; likewise the fourth; so above, below, and across; he dwells, having pervaded because of the existence in it of all living beings, everywhere, the entire world, with the great, exalted, boundless thought of compassion that is free of hate or malice.
"He lives, having pervaded, with the thought of gladness, one quarter; likewise the second; likewise the third; likewise the fourth; so above, below, and across; he dwells, having pervaded because of the existence in it of all living beings, everywhere, the entire world, with the great, exalted, boundless thought of gladness that is free of hate or malice.
"He lives, having pervaded, with the thought of equanimity, one quarter; likewise the second; likewise the third; likewise the fourth; so above, below, and across; he dwells, having pervaded because of the existence in it of all living beings, everywhere, the entire world, with the great, exalted, boundless thought of equanimity that is free of hate or malice.

 

[ratikala]

The Four Solaces

17. "The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom four solaces are found here and now.
"'Suppose there is a hereafter and there is a fruit, result, of deeds done well or ill. Then it is possible that at the dissolution of the body after death, I shall arise in the heavenly world, which is possessed of the state of bliss.' This is the first solace found by him.
"'Suppose there is no hereafter and there is no fruit, no result, of deeds done well or ill. Yet in this world, here and now, free from hatred, free from malice, safe and sound, and happy, I keep myself.' This is the second solace found by him.
"'Suppose evil (results) befall an evil-doer. I, however, think of doing evil to no one. Then, how can ill (results) affect me who do no evil deed?' This is the third solace found by him.
"'Suppose evil (results) do not befall an evil-doer. Then I see myself purified in any case.' This is the fourth solace found by him.
"The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, these four solaces are found."
"So it is, Blessed One. So it is, Sublime one. The disciple of the Noble Ones, venerable sir, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, four solaces are found.
"'Suppose there is a hereafter and there is a fruit, result, of deeds done well or ill. Then it is possible that at the dissolution of the body after death, I shall arise in the heavenly world, which is possessed of the state of bliss.' This is the first solace found by him.
"'Suppose there is no hereafter and there is no fruit, no result, of deeds done well or ill. Yet in this world, here and now, free from hatred, free from malice, safe and sound, and happy, I keep myself.' This is the second solace found by him.
"'Suppose evil (results) befall an evil-doer. I, however, think of doing evil to no one. Then, how can ill (results) affect me who do no evil deed?' This is the third solace found by him.
"'Suppose evil (results) do not befall an evil-doer. Then I see myself purified in any case.' This is the fourth solace found by him.
"The disciple of the Noble Ones, venerable sir, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, these four solaces are found.
"Marvelous, venerable sir! Marvelous, venerable sir! As if, venerable sir, a person were to turn face upwards what is upside down, or to uncover the concealed, or to point the way to one who is lost or to carry a lamp in the darkness, thinking, 'Those who have eyes will see visible objects,' so has the Dhamma been set forth in many ways by the Blessed One. We, venerable sir, go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma for refuge, and to the Community of Bhikkhus for refuge. Venerable sir, may the Blessed One regard us as lay followers who have gone for refuge for life, from today."




sorry a lot to read but rather post it whole :bow: