English
and lack of faith, and by the destruction of defilements, that very Triple Gem is a refuge, a final resort, a destination, a protection, a shelter. Thus, the thought that arises with the nature of being devoted to it. "Going for refuge" is "refuge" because one goes by it. Therefore, a being endowed with the aforementioned thought-arising goes for refuge. With the thought-arising of the kind mentioned: "These three jewels are my refuge, these are my ultimate goal," thus one approaches, resorts to, serves, attends upon, or thus one knows, understands, is the meaning. Thus, refuge, going for refuge, and he who goes for refuge, these three should be known. Regarding the types of going for refuge, there are two kinds: supramundane and mundane. Of these, the supramundane, for those who have seen the truths, at the moment of the path, by the eradication of defilements of going for refuge, being focused on Nibbāna as its object, functions in all three jewels. In essence, the realization of the Four Noble Truths is indeed the supramundane going for refuge. Therein, the Nibbāna-element, by way of direct experience, and the path-element, by way of development, being penetrated, accomplish the purpose of going for refuge. But the qualities of the Buddha, being within the scope of disciples, by way of full understanding, and likewise the qualities of the Noble Saṅgha. Therefore it is said, "it functions in all three jewels." And when it functions, it functions simultaneously, not sequentially like the mundane, because it is penetrated by penetration without delusion. But those who say, "Going for refuge does not occur with Nibbāna as its object, but because the path is attained, it is attained, like mundane knowledge for some with the three knowledges, etc.," for them, it would be only mundane going for refuge, not supramundane. And that is incorrect, because both kinds are desired. But mundane going for refuge, for ordinary people, by suppressing the defilements of going for refuge, functions by having the qualities of the Buddha, etc., as its object. In essence, this is the acquisition of faith in the Buddha, etc., in objects such as "The Blessed One is fully enlightened," etc., and right view preceded by the aforementioned faith, which is called "straightening of view" in the ten bases of meritorious action. And here, by "acquisition of faith," (it means from parents, etc.) It should be understood that going for refuge disconnected from knowledge is shown, like that of children who are encouraged, and so on. But by "Right View," going for refuge connected with knowledge is shown, seeing the Buddha's perfect enlightenment, the Dhamma's perfect well-proclaimed nature, and the Sangha's perfect practice correctly and properly, only through worldly understanding. This worldly going for refuge proceeds in four ways: by dedicating oneself, by making them one's sole resort, by becoming a disciple, and by prostration. Therein, dedicating oneself means: "Starting from today, I dedicate myself to the Buddha, to the Dhamma, to the Sangha," thus, to the Buddha and others, for the sake of escaping the suffering of samsara, the giving up of one's own self. Making them one's sole resort means: "Starting from today, I am solely devoted to the Buddha, solely devoted to the Dhamma, solely devoted to the Sangha, remember me as such," thus, being solely devoted to them. Becoming a disciple means: "Starting from today, 'I am a disciple of the Buddha, of the Dhamma, of the Sangha,' remember me as such," thus, becoming a disciple. Prostration means: "Starting from today, 'I perform salutation, rising to greet, reverential gestures, and proper conduct only for the three objects: the Buddha and others,' remember me as such," thus, utmost reverence towards the Buddha and others. Indeed, by performing any one of these four modes, going for refuge is taken. Furthermore, self-dedication should be understood thus: "I dedicate myself to the Blessed One, I dedicate myself to the Dhamma, to the Sangha, I dedicate my life, my self is indeed dedicated, my life is indeed dedicated, I go for refuge to the Buddha for as long as life lasts, the Buddha is my refuge, my shelter, my protection." "Indeed, I see the Teacher, I see the Blessed One himself, Indeed, I see the Fortunate One, I see the Blessed One himself, Indeed, I see the Perfectly Self-Enlightened One, I see the Blessed One himself," (SN 2.154) thus, like the going for refuge of Thera Mahākassapa, becoming a disciple... should be understood. “So I shall wander, from village to village, from town to town; Saluting the Fully Awakened One, and the well-taught nature of the Dhamma.” “We shall wander, from village to village, from mountain to mountain… …well-taught nature of the Dhamma.” Thus, the refuge-taking of Āḷavaka, Sātāgira, Hemavata, and others, should be understood as their devotion. But were not these Āḷavaka and others refuge-takers who came by the path? How then is their devotion-refuge-taking spoken of? Even for those who came by the path of refuge-taking, because they declared the nature of devotion with "So I shall wander from village to village," and so on, it is spoken of in that way. Then, the brahmin Brahmāyu, rising from his seat, arranging his upper robe over one shoulder, prostrated his head at the Bhagavā’s feet, kissed the Bhagavā’s feet with his mouth, massaged them with his hands, and announced his name: "I am Brahmāyu, good Gotama, a brahmin; I am Brahmāyu, good Gotama, a brahmin." In this way, prostration should also be understood. This prostration is of four kinds, according to kinship, fear, teacher, and worthiness of offerings. Among these, refuge-taking occurs with prostration due to worthiness of offerings, not with the other three prostrations arising from kinship, fear, and so on. For refuge is taken in the best way, and broken in the best way. Therefore, if a Sakyan or Koliyan bows, thinking "The Buddha is our kinsman," the refuge is not taken. Or if one bows out of fear, thinking "The recluse Gotama is honored by kings, of great power; if not bowed to, he might cause harm," the refuge is not taken. And if, remembering something learned from the Bhagavā during the Bodhisatta period, or during the Buddha period— “One should enjoy one portion of wealth, employ two for business; And set aside a fourth, it will be for times of adversity.” —having learned such a teaching for this present life, one bows, thinking "He is my teacher," the refuge is not taken. It is not a refuge. But expecting guidance for the next world or for liberation, one only makes a respectful salutation to a worthy recipient. But whoever bows, thinking "This is the foremost worthy recipient in the world," by that very act, refuge is taken. And for a lay follower, male or female, who has thus taken refuge, even if they bow to a relative gone forth among other sects, thinking "This is my relative," the taking of refuge is not broken, much less for one not gone forth. Similarly, bowing to a king out of fear. For if he, honored by the state, is not bowed to, he might cause harm. Similarly, even if one bows to any teacher of a craft, even if he belongs to another sect, thinking "This is my teacher," it is not broken. Thus, the distinctions of taking refuge should be understood. The discourse on taking refuge is concluded. Discourse on the fruits of taking refuge. Here, the four fruits of recluseship are the result of the supramundane taking of refuge, because the supramundane taking of refuge is understood to be the Noble Path itself. But the non-arising and cessation of all suffering of cyclic existence is the fruit of benefit. For this has been said: "And whoever has gone for refuge to the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Saṅgha; sees the Four Noble Truths with right wisdom. Suffering, the origin of suffering, and the overcoming of suffering; and the Noble Eightfold Path that leads to the cessation of suffering. This indeed is the safe refuge, this is the supreme refuge; having come to this refuge, one is released from all suffering." Moreover, the fruit of benefit for one who has passed away, in terms of not approaching things as permanent, and so on, should be understood. For this has been said: "It is impossible, monks, it cannot happen, that a person endowed with right view would regard any formation as permanent, would regard it as pleasant, would regard any phenomenon as self, would deprive his mother of life, would deprive his father of life, would deprive an Arahant of life, would, with a malicious mind, shed the blood of a Tathāgata, would cause a schism in the Saṅgha, or would declare another teacher. Such a thing does not exist." But for worldly taking of refuge, prosperity in existence and prosperity in wealth are indeed the results. This has been said: "Whoever has gone to the Buddha for refuge, They will not go to the realms of woe; Having abandoned the human body, They will fill up the host of devas." And further it has been said: "Then Sakka, lord of devas, together with eighty thousand devas, approached the Venerable Mahāmoggallāna... ...And Sakka, lord of devas, standing to one side, the Venerable Mahāmoggallāna said this to him: 'Good it is, lord of devas, to go for refuge to the Buddha. Because of going for refuge to the Buddha, lord of devas, some beings here, with the breaking up of the body, after death, are reborn in a good destination, a heavenly world. They surpass other devas in ten respects: in divine lifespan, in divine beauty, in divine happiness, in divine fame, in divine sovereignty, in divine sights, in divine sounds, in divine smells, in divine tastes, and in divine touches.'" This is the same principle for the Dhamma and the Saṅgha. Moreover, the special fruit of going for refuge should be understood in terms of the Velāma Sutta and so on. Thus, in the Velāma Sutta, it is said: "A great offering made by Velāma, continuously for