English
uneven in mind, in three ways? Here, householders, someone is covetous... "May that be mine!" And he is malevolent in mind, with a corrupted thought-intention: "May these beings be slain... or may they not exist!" And he holds wrong view, with a perverted outlook: "There is no giving, there is no sacrifice... having realized, they declare." Thus, householders, in three ways he is unrighteous in mind, uneven in mind. Because of such unrighteous conduct, such uneven conduct, householders, some beings here, with the breaking up of the body, after death, are reborn in a state of woe, a bad destination, a downfall, hell. In three ways, householders, one is righteous in bodily conduct, even in bodily conduct. In four ways, one is righteous in speech, even in speech. In three ways, one is righteous in mind, even in mind. And how, householders, is one righteous in bodily conduct, even in bodily conduct, in three ways? Here, householders, someone (abstains from) taking life... Abandoning the destruction of life, he abstains from the destruction of life. He lays aside stick and weapon, modest, compassionate, dwelling with sympathy for the welfare of all living beings. Abandoning taking what is not given, he abstains from taking what is not given. Whatever belongs to another, he does not take what is not given, considered as theft. Abandoning sexual misconduct, he does not engage in such conduct. Thus, householders, in three ways by body, he is a practitioner of Dhamma, a practitioner of equality. And how, householders, in four ways by speech, is one a practitioner of Dhamma, a practitioner of equality? Here, householders, someone abandoning false speech, abstains from false speech. He does not knowingly speak falsehood. Abandoning divisive speech, he speaks words that unite. Abandoning harsh speech, he speaks gentle, pleasing words. Abandoning idle chatter, he speaks at the right time, with reason, limited, connected with benefit. Thus, householders, in four ways by speech, he is a practitioner of Dhamma, a practitioner of equality. And how, householders, in three ways by mind, is one a practitioner of Dhamma, a practitioner of equality? Here, householders, someone is not covetous. Whatever belongs to another, another's possessions and belongings, he does not covet, thinking: 'Oh, if only what belongs to another were mine!' And he is without ill-will, with an undefiled intention of mind – 'May these beings be free from enmity, free from affliction, free from trouble, and may they maintain themselves in happiness!' And he has right view, an unperverted vision – 'There is what is given, there is what is offered... having realized it for themselves through direct knowledge, they declare it.' Thus, householders, in three ways by mind, he is a practitioner of Dhamma, a practitioner of equality. Indeed, householders, because of such practice of Dhamma, practice of equality, some beings here, with the breaking up of the body, after death, are reborn in a good destination, a heavenly world. If, householders, a practitioner of Dhamma, a practitioner of equality, should wish – 'Oh, if only, with the breaking up of the body, after death, I might be reborn in the company of wealthy Khattiyas!' This is indeed possible, that He, after the body's breaking, after death, would be reborn among great khattiya families. For what reason? Because he lives by Dhamma, he lives righteously. If, householders, one who lives by Dhamma, who lives righteously, should wish: ‘Oh, may I, after the body's breaking, after death, be reborn among great brahmin families, great householder families!’ This is indeed possible, that he, after the body's breaking, after death, would be reborn among great householder families. For what reason? Because he lives by Dhamma, he lives righteously. If, householders, one who lives by Dhamma, who lives righteously, should wish: ‘Oh, may I, after the body's breaking, after death, be reborn among the Devas of the Four Great Kings!’ This is indeed possible, that he, after the body's breaking, after death, would be reborn among the Devas of the Four Great Kings. For what reason? Because he lives by Dhamma, he lives righteously. If, householders, one who lives by Dhamma, who lives righteously, should wish: ‘Oh, may I, after the body's breaking, after death, be reborn among the Tāvatiṃsa Devas… the Yāma Devas… the Tusita Devas… the Nimmānaratī Devas… the Paranimmitavasavattī Devas… the Brahmakāyika Devas!’ This is indeed possible, that he, after the body's breaking, after death, would be reborn among the Brahmakāyika Devas. For what reason? Because he lives by Dhamma, he lives righteously. If, householders, one who lives by Dhamma, who lives righteously, should wish: ‘Oh, may I, after the body's breaking, after death, be reborn among the Ābha Devas!’ This is indeed possible, that he, after the body's breaking, after death, would be reborn among the Ābha Devas. For what reason? Because he lives by Dhamma, he lives righteously. If, householders, one who lives by Dhamma, who lives righteously, should wish: ‘Oh, may I, after the body's breaking, after death, be reborn among the Parittābha Devas… the Appamāṇābha Devas… the Ābhassara...’ …with the devas of limited glory, …with the devas of immeasurable glory, …with the devas of radiant glory, …with the Vehapphala devas, …with the Aviha devas, …with the Atappa devas, …with the Sudassa devas, …with the Sudassī devas, …with the Akaniṭṭha devas, …with the devas who have attained the sphere of infinite space, …with the devas who have attained the sphere of infinite consciousness, …with the devas who have attained the sphere of nothingness, …with the devas who have attained the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception. This is indeed a possibility, that after the breaking up of the body, after death, he would arise in companionship with the devas who have attained the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception. For what reason? Because he is one who lives by the Dhamma, who lives righteously. If, householders, one who lives by the Dhamma, who lives righteously, should wish: ‘Oh, may I, through the destruction of the taints, by my own direct knowledge, here and now, realize and abide in the taintless liberation of mind, liberation by wisdom!’ This is indeed a possibility, that he, through the destruction of the taints, by his own direct knowledge, here and now, would realize and abide in the taintless liberation of mind, liberation by wisdom. For what reason? Because he is one who lives by the Dhamma, who lives righteously.” 448. When this was said, the Veranja brahmin householders said to the Blessed One: “Excellent, good Gotama! Excellent, good Gotama! Just as, good Gotama, one might set upright what was overturned, or reveal what was hidden, or point out the way to one who was lost, or hold up a lamp in the darkness so that those with eyes might see forms; even so has the Dhamma been made clear by the good Gotama in many ways. We go for refuge to the good Gotama, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of bhikkhus. May the good Gotama remember us as lay followers who have gone for refuge from this day forth as long as life lasts.” The Veranjaka Sutta is finished, the second. 3. The Great Vedalla Sutta 449. Thus have I heard – At one time the Blessed One was staying at Savatthi, in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Then Venerable Mahākoṭṭhika, having risen from seclusion in the evening time, approached Venerable Sāriputta. Having approached, he exchanged greetings with Venerable Sāriputta. Having concluded courteous and memorable talk, he sat down to one side. Seated to one side, Venerable Mahākoṭṭhika said this to Venerable Sāriputta: "'Unwise, unwise,' friend, it is said. To what extent, friend, is one called unwise?" "'He does not understand, he does not understand,' friend, therefore he is called unwise." "And what does he not understand? 'This is suffering,' he does not understand. 'This is the origin of suffering,' he does not understand. 'This is the cessation of suffering,' he does not understand. 'This is the path leading to the cessation of suffering,' he does not understand. "'He does not understand, he does not understand,' friend, therefore he is called unwise." "'Good, friend,' Venerable Mahākoṭṭhika, having approved and rejoiced in Venerable Sāriputta's words, asked Venerable Sāriputta a further question: "'Wise, wise,' friend, it is said. To what extent, friend, is one called wise?" "'He understands, he understands,' friend, therefore he is called wise." "And what does he understand? 'This is suffering,' he understands. 'This is the origin of suffering,' he understands. 'This is the cessation of suffering,' he understands. 'This is the path leading to the cessation of suffering,' he understands. "'He understands, he understands,' friend, therefore he is called wise." "'Consciousness, consciousness,' friend, it is said. To what extent, friend, is it called consciousness?" "'It cognizes, it cognizes,' friend, therefore it is called consciousness." "And what does it cognize? It cognizes pleasure, it cognizes pain, it cognizes neither-pain-nor-pleasure. "'It cognizes, it cognizes,' friend, therefore it is called consciousness." "And friend, this wisdom and this consciousness— are these phenomena conjoined or disjoined? Is it possible to... to separate these phenomena and declare their distinction?” “Friend, the wisdom and the consciousness— these phenomena are conjoined, not disjoined. And it is not possible to separate these phenomena and declare their distinction. For, friend, what one understands, that one cognizes; what one cognizes, that one understands. Therefore, these phenomena are conjoined, not disjoined. And it is not possible to separate these phenomena and declare their distinction.” “Friend, of this wisdom and consciousness— these phenomena being conjoined, not disjoined— what is their distinction?”