tariki

Hi George, Well, not quite true on the Kindle. Amazon have a "Prime" service where you pay £49 a year and then can download many books for "free" and delete them when read. Not really my cup of tea but the offer is there. Anyway, moving on through various "clippings" I find with some that the "moment has gone" and I wonder why I made the clipping. However, here is one that still has bite........ Those that claim to "know" too much detail about God must rely on lies, distortion and illusion to construct their visions of Deity. The facet has turned away from the jewel and called itself, its prejudices and desires, God. To try to define God is to attempt to BE God. From "Quantum God: A Study of Reality and Theology from a 21st Century Perspective." Guy DeWhitney Which finds illumination in another drawn from "War and Peace", where Tolstoy says of Pierre that he could not see an aim, for he now had faith - not faith in any kind of rule, or words, or ideas, but faith in an ever-living, ever-manifest God.

jonnyb, hi to a fellow kindle lover! I know what you mean by the temptation to click the button and put a few more £'s on the credit card. I have developed the method of clicking the "Wish List" button instead............then later, when temptation has subsided, look through the Wish List and delete as appropriate. If the book stays on the Wish List for any length of time then it may just be worth spending the money. Not sure about recommendations as I have no idea where your interests are. Fiction or non-fiction? Classics or pot-boilers! Must admit that others non being able to see what you are reading is a plus when indulging in the latest pot-boiler - so easy to put a smug and literary look on your face as if reflecting upon the essence of Being when actually reading of the latest escapades of the latest hero. If you like the type of thing by written by those such as Wilber Smith or James Clavell (Shogun etc etc) you could look up Thomas Hoover on Amazon. His books are free and worth a look, and he has also written a few Non-Fiction which are also free. Many classics are free, and I have actually made my way through "War and Peace" (yes folks!) The secret is that instead of having to pick up a heavy weight door stop and open it to see a huge page of small type - very intimidating - there is just one screen of accommodating large type to read through at a time. Actually it was great read, and we even got the DVD of the BBC Costume Drama made in the 80's starring Anthony Hopkins as Pierre afterwards. But as I mentioned before, many "Complete Works" are available from Delphi Publications, all at under £2. They really are complete, with biographies of the authors, the letters they may have written, any non-fiction, plus photos of various associated things to do with their lives and output. The point is that at such a price you can afford to download without feeling the need to read the lot! Just browse at odd moments. Good old Oscar Wilde is a case in point - any time spent browsing through his output can be rewarding - plays, poems, the novel, short stories etc etc. Well, better go, but not without another clipping from the file. This from the works of Honen, one of the "fathers" of Pure Land Buddhism who said, appropriately enough..... The moment a scholar is born, he forgets the nembutsu. (i.e. the expression of gratitude) From "Honen The Buddhist Saint; Essential Writings and Official Biography" Which shows - looking back at Merton's words quoted before - how those from east or west can recognise that all of life is a gift and gratitude is fundamental. (By the way, thanks Joseph for your encouragement)

Recently I've found myself virtually retired from Forums, at least from those considered "combative", where swords are crossed as each seeks to convince, cajole or even threaten others with the correctness of one's own point of view or system of belief. This has corresponded with my getting myself a Kindle EReader. When I first heard of these devices I thought they would be the very last thing I would ever buy. I have always loved books, and it is the feel - the heft - of a book that I have loved. And though there is much to be said for a brand new book, spine spotless and uncreased, I've always loved the feel of a well worn book, page edges roughed by countless others. So what price a hunk of metal where type appears at the flick of a switch, a new page at the press of a button? But needs must. Eyesight fails with age and often during the past few years I have lifted what appeared to be a good book, read the blurb, been enticed, then upon flicking though the pages, found myself looking at a font size that made my eyes water. Reluctantly I would return the book to its shelf. Anyway, when a colleague at work came in with a Kindle and gave a demonstration of its various type sizes, all available at the press of a button, I was much impressed. So now I am the proud owner of "Dookies Kindle" (Dookie being a previous name I posted under until I found that the word could mean "poo" in the USA and thus unsuited to my profound thoughts............ ) I have downloaded countless bits and pieces, various "Complete Works" of authors and poets, each so cheap that to just browse them at odd moments is sufficient ot make me feel that I am getting my money's worth! Again, many other books that have taken my fancy.........history, philosophy, and many on Buddhism - Chan, Zen and Pure Land, plus others on Christian mysticism. One of the facilities on the Kindle is the opportunity to make a "clipping" of anything read when it takes your fancy. The clipping is then placed in a file which can be browsed through at leisure. Which brings me to the point of this rambling load of waffle. I just thought, being "retired" now from "combat" I would on occasion post a "clipping" from my file, offered here to others to read and reflect upon - even make a comment if appropriate. I will not be seeking to make a case for anything, more just sharing. I suppose, this much in the spirit of one of my many mentors as I've moved along through the years........ In religious terms, this is simply a matter of accepting life, and everything in life as a gift, and clinging to none of it, as far as you are able. You give some of it to others, if you can. Yet one should be able to share things with others without bothering too much about how they like it, either, or how they accept it. Assume they will accept it, if they need it. And if they don't need it, why should they accept it? That is their business. Let me accept what is mine and give them all their share, and go my way. All life tends to grow like this, in mystery inscaped with paradox and contradiction, yet centered in its very heart, on the divine mercy.......... (Thomas Merton) So here is the very first clipping I put into my file, drawn from some commentary by Eknath Easwaran on the Hindu Upanishads. From one point of view the world is God; from another, there will always be a veil of difference between an embodied human person and the Godhead. Both are true, and neither is the whole truth. Reality is beyond all limitations, and there are paths to it to accommodate every heart.

tentex, Hi, welcome to the forum. First,.......Also, people throw the word spirituality or spiritual around a lot. How is that different from psychological to you? I try not to throw the word "spiritual" around as life is just life, reality is reality, without compartments - so again, no need to reflect upon any difference with the "psychological". The fundamental problem seems to arise from seeking all things from the basis of our self-aware thinking self, experienced as the centre of all things, from which we can only then look out at God as "object", and "believe" in God as object. The mystical dimension would seek rather to see God as the ground of being, not as a being, and therefore our experience of reality can take on a deeper dimension, one that is experienced to be prior to the subject-object division and thus embedded in the divine, in Whom we live and move and have our being. Which can seem like a load of mumbo jumbo, but the reality of this can lead us to a life that knows the world of both/and, and not either/or. Meaning is not opposed to non-meaning, nor the accidental to purpose, and certainly not "God" to atheism. Our beliefs can take a back seat, rather than driving us towards pre-conceived conclusions, Maybe our hearts can open to the reality of love, of empathy towards others...........irrespective of any belief in "purpose", or any threat of being a cosmic accident! This may seem above our capacity, yet the reality is that it calls only for a simplicity of heart and mind. Yet sadly we often seem to prefer wringing our brains dry with thoughts of "origins", of either/or. For me this all leads from the words of the Buddha, who advised us not to speculate on origins, nor even destinations, but to concentrate on "suffering and the ending of suffering". Who advised us to treat beliefs, if we must have them, more as rafts, for crossing over, not for grasping. Or, "consider the lillies of the field" if we wish to, and consider love as greater than faith or hope. All the best. Derek

For some the answer is a "yes". Recently I have had the misfortune to exchange views with a JW. In a debate concerning blood transfusions he stated that, given he would have his son for all eternity in the "New World", he would not allow a blood transfusion to save their life as doing so would mean his exclusion from such a New World, in exchange for just a few more years companionship in THIS life. Obviously, we can dismiss such as representing the "lunatic fringe", but just how rife such opinions are is anybodies guess. The JW's currently number 7,000,000 and growing. Again, my experience is that the belief in an afterlife can act as an anesthetic to our deepest emotions as human beings, just as all beliefs can. Losing a loved one and the grief that follows, working through pain and loss, opening to the full range of our emotions and our capacity for depth, we instead tell ourselves we shall "meet again", I once watched a TV programme where a young girl, a Christian, spoke of the loss of her brother. She said that she had not felt a great loss, nor any deep grief, as she knew they would meet again. While I realise that those who do share such beliefs can argue that if true, she has reacted according to "faith", I can only say that I see it as a betrayal of our humanity, a betrayal of THIS world for an imaginary other. As I live it, it comes down to the words of Anagarika Govinda, who said that the present has no extension but intensity. Eternity as the full depth of the present moment, not as endless duration. Salvation/enlightenment not as a having all things made new in a world/state of being in the future, but of seeing all things new now. For me, such does not need to mean that "when you are dead you are dead". Why should it? Belief as such - either for or against a future life - is excluded. Beliefs always get in the way.

It is odd that one of the worlds greatest faiths, Buddhism, sees the sheer fact of ongoing lifetimes as something we need to escape from, while another sees an "afterlife" as a hope. Really, I have found that we need to consider deeply just what life is, what Buddhism means by life being suffering (dukkha) , just what "eternal life" - or nirvana - might mean. Leading on from this, just what is the "self", just who or what can possibly be "eternal". And would we really want the "self" we often take for ourselves, with all its baggage, to go on and on and on - no matter the loved ones we now know. Considering such deeply can take a lifetime! Or longer! And while we ask such questions, life passes us by on the other side of the road. Our loved ones perhaps go unloved, our life is not lived, and we end with perhaps a set of beliefs and pious hopes that are nothing more than dust. The "answer" seems to be to live in the moment, in a way that many faiths speak of us "selflessly". Sadly our baggage gets in the way, the future always seems more important than the "now" and our entire life a series of anticipations and epitaphs. Faith would seem to come into it. Not "belief" as a clinging to, but faith as a letting go. A letting go of "self" and its concerns for future life. How to have such faith? Ask me another. There seems to be no formulas, no set road to walk, no set prescription. I must end with a quote from Thomas Merton.........Our real journey in life is interior: it is a matter of growth, deepening, and of an ever greater surrender to the creative action of love and grace in our hearts. I would question the word "interior", which appears far too dualistic, yet such is a minor quibble. We just need to walk on.

Decent or not......... .............(and maybe questions are more important than answers) As far as I'm aware, the exact nature of the Atonement has never been determined by any Creed or Papal Bull. It does seem to me that very often its "nature" has been determined by the cultural thinking extant at the time of Christ's life on earth. But as was said by Jesus when one or two of his female followers went to the tomb........."why do you search for the living among the dead". Christ has risen, and Jesus had to go so that the spirit of all truth could come. Maybe the path that the spirit determines for us is unique for each; in just how we are "made one" with the divine. Searching through the various byways of the Christian Faith, there have been for me pointers in the "O Felix Culpa"......."O happy fault that merited such and so great a Redeemer".......and also in the words found in Phil. 2:7, where Christ is spoken of having emptied Himself. When the "fault" is seen to be a "happy one"..........rather than calling for first, outright condemnation, then blood..........then our minds seem to begin following new directions. Then again, another small verse from the NT has often made me stop and think.........."Go and learn what this means, I shall have mercy and not sacrifice". One wonders why "sacrifice" figures so largely in many theories of the atonement. Yet when the sacrifice is of self, again new thoughts can come in. Anyway, we all have to sort it out for ourselves.

I have been running a thread on the Dhammapada on another forum, and that thread has lead to me posting the following, given its context, but thought it might be worth posting here...... I said in the OP that in fact the Theravada path (which the Dhammapada represents) of "self power" was not my home ground. The Dhammapada is for the "sage", while my own Pure Land path is for the foolish self that sees enlightenment as totally problematic given the reality of our lives, as lived and experienced each day. Though I do love the various texts (sacred or not!) of the world of Faiths, more and more I gain inspiration from the actual lives of individuals. And individuals from all walks of life, and from their writings and their lives as actually lived, how they have lived them. So it is Shinran, a 12th century Japanese guy, who I look to in Pure Land, rather than any particular text. Shinran has left behind him a lot of words, and in his various letters I can see his heart. The Dhammapada, in this latest chapter, speaks of the fool. Its next chapter will speak of the wise. It is easy to identify ourselves with the wise, the lovers of pearls, and turn upon others when we hear of the fools, calling them swine. Yet Shinran, in his deep confessional way, identified himself well and truly with the "fool". He lamented, at a ripe old age, that he found no love in himself but self love. Lamented that, even so, he sought to teach others as though he were wise and capable of doing so. Took pride in doing so though at heart he knew he had no wisdom. And when a fellow devotee spoke to him, saying that they did not even look forward to the "pure land" because their heart so loved the fallen world and its temptations, Shinran sympathised and told him that he was the very same. So it needs to be asked, why did he not despair? It was simply because, as far as Shinran was concerned, it was the infinite compassion, the untiring light, of Amida (Reality-as-is) that revealed his true heart to him. And that being so, the pure land path is revealed. A simple dialectic, lived and breathed each and every minute of each and every day. The greater the light, the deeper the shadow, the deeper the shadow, the greater the light. And experience - not conjecture or allegiance to the dictates of a text - reveals that such a life does not lead to a state of both light and darkness, or hatred of oneself, or of condemnation of others......but to the melting of the ice of our passions into the very waters of enlightenment (to use Shinran's own words) So our side of the bargain is to see the darkness and acknowledge it, and Other Power does the rest. Yet as another Pure Land saint Saichi has said, when asked to speak of "Other Power"...... Yes, but there is neither self power not Other Power. What is, is the graceful acceptance only. Our "acceptance" of the light (by whatever means, in fact by infinite means) is the lights acceptance of us. Duality is resolved in lived experience. THIS world is the Pure Land.

Brent, just to say, such has never been an issue. When I quote..... O Saichi, what is your joy? "This world of delusion is my joy It contains the seeds of relishing the Dharma! Namu-amida-butsu is blooming everywhere!" ....I am seeking to speak of "revelation" irrespective of its "origins". As has been said, lets those with eyes to see........

Brent, just to clarify, "good grief" as in, first, amusement, second, as in, what matter just how many worlds when those in THIS world are unable to live in empathy with each other, even those who profess to love each other. All in all, just reducing things to the perspective from which I live. i.e. Great things are seen from the valleys, only small things from the peaks. (Chesterton) All the best P.S. I fail to see the "autorevelation" - as I understand it - as being included within such "epochal" revelations as I see the UP's to be, or what they attempt to be. But I'm happy to let it drop. Each to their own, and what do I know anyway?

Brent, truly, no sense of amazed chagrin at all. Sorry, we appear to be on different wavelengths. Revelation as some kind of unfolding of "truths"; and truth as some sort of accumulation of knowledge - however gained - is just not "it". For me, our real journey in life is interior, it is a matter of growth, deepening, and of an even greater surrender to the creative action of love and grace in our hearts (Merton) Knowledge - scientific or otherwise - automatically finds its place within such. The Divine, Reality-as-is, can be known by love, but by thought, never. Which opens the heart of the Cosmos - of whatever size and population - to the "child".

Brent, really, my "good grief" regarding the number of world systems was about the inability of most us to communicate effectively here and now with those we profess to love. My poor mind seems to make leaps like this, and poses enough questions without seeking "answers" in revelations from the administrative headquarters of a time-space superuniverse presided over by a triumvirate of Ancients of Days. The answers are far closer to home. All the best

Can we imagine the relative insignificance of present day distinctions between the “eastern” and “western” thought processes? Yes I can, that's the point.

Brent has said.....The authors of the UPapers have described this as “autorevelation”, which emerges from within due to the work of the indwelling spirits of our First Source and Center. They also point out the fact of a distinction in divine revelations based upon the mechanics of existential emergence, if you will. Brent, re the above, how do you understand such "distinction", particularly in relation to the five of epochal significance.? Given that these five would seem to relate only to ideas one would more often than not associate only with "western" thought processes? But anyway, glad we are not far apart in spirit.

“There have been many events of religious revelation but only five of epochal significance.” (underline mine) Brent, I have a more existential approach to "revelation". It seems to me that the Catholic Theologian Hans Kung spoke correctly when he suggested that there could be no world peace without peace between the religions. And one of the heart warming things - at least for me - has been the progress made in this by various human beings, who have sought to cross the boundaries, in what has been referred to as Inter-spirituality Revelation, at least to me, is found in individual hearts as they respond to words and deeds throughout the world. When a human being reads "Thou art formless, your only form is our knowledge of You" (Vedas) and grows in tolerance, and deepens their own reluctance to create idols of the mind, "revelation" is working.....(Called upaya - "skilful means" - in the Buddhist tradition, the way Reality-as-is manifests for the good/enlightenment of all) And again, "Those who in faith worship any other God, because of their love they worship me" (Bhagavad Gita) can only reveal what is good to any human heart open to a God who IS "Love". In fact, revelation to me is person to person, and if we seek to dictate exactly where it is to be found, and has been found, then we are likely to miss it when it hits us in the face. And all this corresponds to the words of Jesus Himself, who spoke of a true prophet as one who is known by their "fruits" Fruits spoken of by St Paul as love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control My own knowledge of history shows that such fruits have been manifest in countless lives, of people of all faiths and some of none. They have never been restricted to those who have "responded" to certain epoch making revelations of "significance". Frankly, such have been more the genesis of discord in our world, as each revelation vies with another. So, O Saichi, what is your joy? This world of delusion is my joy! It contains the seeds of relishing the Dharma. Namu -amida- butsu is blooming everywhere!

Sorry Brent, each to their own I suppose. Great leaps forward? Things hidden from most of us, now revealed? The "most important" series ever? Not for me mate, sorry. 7 trillion other worlds like ours? Good grief!

As I see it, until truth/righteousness is written on our hearts, rather than on tablets of stone, then all our choices as well as all our righteousness will be "as filthy rags". Love God and do what you will, or "effortlessness" and "no striving". Pertinent the words from "The Book of Hours" (Merton) which capture the paradox of all this..... In a Zen koan someone said that an enlightened person is not one who seeks Buddha or finds Buddha, but simply an ordinary person who has nothing left to do. Yet stopping is not arriving. To stop is to stay a million miles from it and to do nothing is to miss it by a whole width of the universe. As for arriving, when you arrive you are ruined. Yet how close the solution is: how simple it would be to have nothing more to do if only - one had really nothing more to do. The one who is unripe cannot get there, no matter what they do or do not do. But the ripe fruit falls out of the tree without even thinking about it. Why? The one who is ripe discovers that there was never anything to be done from the very beginning.

From the OP:- Neither God nor anyone else has condemned them to this consequence they choose it freely, because they spent their lives choosing it freely here and now. Just as those who spend eternity with God in Joy chose to embrace Him here and now with the all the consequences that arise from that choice. I have many quibbles with this statement. First we have the "quibble" expressed by the poet R.S.Thomas... and one said speak to us of love and the preacher opened his mouth and the word God fell out so they tried again speak to us of God then but the preacher was silent reaching his arms out but the little children the ones with big bellies and bow legs that were like a razor shell were too weak to come So, there are many - far too many - who are "too weak to come", or to "choose" one way of the other. To involve ourselves in "rationality" here would be wrong - in my book. Fortunately the world is not "consistent" nor "rational" at its deepest ground. As has been said, the world can only be consistent without God. Mercy, grace., forgiveness have very little to do with "consistency"! Moving on to further "quibbles", there is the argument put forward by Thomas Talbot in his book "The Inescapable Love of God" in which he deals with the "free will" defence of hell.... Given that God wills the very best for us, and given that we would wish the very best for ourselves, the idea that any human being fully informed would choose anything else is inherently flawed and incoherent. And if not fully informed, then the free will defence is void. Again, we have the words of St Augustine....."You have made us for yourself, and we remain restless until we rest in you". So the only final resting place will be "in God". Until such time, we stay "on the move". "As swans that leave the lake, we leave home after home behind" (Dhammapada) P.S. In my haste ( ) I forgot to mention the simple point that we are chosen, we do not choose. Which opens another can of worms............

Paul, Wayne Teasdale says very early in his book that we are all mystics at heart, which for me explains just why, as Thomas Merton says, the problem of sanctity and salvation is in fact the problem of finding out who we are and of discovering our true selves.......... We can be whatever we like. We can be ourselves or not, as we please. We are at liberty to be real, or to be unreal. We may be true or false....(From "New Seeds of Contemplation") And it all seems to involve the paradox that though what we must be is what we are, again "how far have I to go to find You in Whom I haver already arrived!" Which all involves paradox and mystery, but also the very simple necessity of seeking to be totally honest with ourselves. As Shinran (one of the "founding fathers" of Shin - Pure Land - Buddhism) seems to have been, who saw and acknowledged, when close to death at the end of a long life, that he still did not know right from wrong, nor false from true, that he lacked even small love and small compassion, yet still enjoyed seeking to teach others out of pride......Yet, within such honesty, rather than getting out the sackcloth and ashes and whipping himself because of his "sin", simply recognised that just because such was so he was the supreme candidate for the boundless compassion of Reality-as-is, Amida. Such honesty, such a trust, turns rubble to gold!

I have been looking at a book by the Catholic Wayne Teasdale, called the "Mystic Heart". In it he speaks of various "guidelines" offered for consideration by those who would seek communion and co-operation ( as opposed to confrontation and assertion ) Guideline 1 :- The world religions bear witness of the Ultimate Reality to which they give various names: Brahman, Allah, (the) Absolute, God, Great Spirit." This guideline emphasises experience, not mere conception, for the basis of each Faith lies in the actual experience of these tradition's founders over the course of many centuries. Guideline 2 :- Ultimate Reality cannot be limited by any name or concept. Therefore our words, no matter how technical or precise, or specialized, are incapable of holding or conveying the Ultimate it its actual nature, yet our life and being are coordinated with it. Guideline 3:- Ultimate Reality is the ground of infinite potentiality and actualization. It is only by opening up to and integrating with the source that we awaken to who we actually are, which is hidden in the mystery of the source itself. Guideline 4:- Faith is opening, accepting, and responding to Ultimate Reality. Faith in this sense precedes every belief system. Therefore faith is a basic attitude of trust in the ultimate mystery behind existence; it is a gesture and stand of pure openess. Guideline 5:- The potential for human wholeness - or in other frames of reference, enlightenment, salvation, transformation, blessedness, nirvana - is present in every human person. We have - indeed we are - this potential for unlimited being because this mystical dimension is part of what makes us human. Guideline 6:- Ultimate Reality may be experienced not only through religious practices but also through nature, art, human relationships, and service to others. Therefore the Ultimate can be experienced in virtually anything. There is no place, no activity that restricts the divine. It is everywhere. Guideline 7:- As long as the human condition is experienced as separate from Ultimate Reality, it is subject to ignorance, illusion, weakness and suffering. When we live in separation and division, from ourselves and from others, we are out of touch with the way things really are. Guideline 8:- Disciplined practice is essential to the spiritual life; yet spiritual attainment is not the result of one's own efforts, but the result of the experience of oneness (unity) with Ultimate Reality. In other words, what transforms us is not what we do but our integration with what is. Prayer is communion with Reality. Just thought I would share.

When a holy man has reached the summit of two paths (meditative concentration and insight), he knows the truth and all his fetters fall away. Thomas Cleary comments that as well as "meditative concentration and insight", the two paths can also be understood as "knowledge and action", referring to the integration of perceptive and active facets of enlightenment. He who in this world has transcended the ties of both merit and demerit. Cleary:- to transcend merit and demerit does not mean to be inactive, but to pass beyond the state of expecting and demanding to be rewarded for virtue. As has been said......"They have their reward"!! And Cleary's final words, for the very last verse......."this is not the end of the Dhammapada. The Dhammapada is a wheel, not a line, Now go back to the "beginning".

So, the final chapter. Good to emphasise once again that here the definitions given for exactly what constitutes "holiness" was revolutionary at the time, a time when "holiness" was often identified purely with hereditary caste, virtually a state one was born into.

The Holy Man Exert yourself, O holy man! Cut off the stream (of craving), and discard sense desires. Knowing the destruction of all the conditioned things, become, O holy man, the knower of the Uncreated (Nibbana)! When a holy man has reached the summit of two paths (meditative concentration and insight), he knows the truth and all his fetters fall away. He for whom there is neither this shore nor the other shore, nor yet both, he who is free of cares and is unfettered — him do I call a holy man. He who is meditative, stainless and settled, whose work is done and who is free from cankers, having reached the highest goal — him do I call a holy man. The sun shines by day, the moon shines by night. The warrior shines in armor, the holy man shines in meditation. But the Buddha shines resplendent all day and all night. Because he has discarded evil, he is called a holy man. Because he is serene in conduct, he is called a recluse. And because he has renounced his impurities, he is called a renunciate. One should not strike a holy man, nor should a holy man, when struck, give way to anger. Shame on him who strikes a holy man, and more shame on him who gives way to anger. Nothing is better for a holy man than when he holds his mind back from what is endearing. To the extent the intent to harm wears away, to that extent does suffering subside. He who does no evil in deed, word and thought, who is restrained in these three ways — him do I call a holy man. Just as a brahman priest reveres his sacrificial fire, even so should one devoutly revere the person from whom one has learned the Dhamma taught by the Buddha. Not by matted hair, nor by lineage, nor by birth does one become a holy man. But he in whom truth and righteousness exist — he is pure, he is a holy man. What is the use of your matted hair, O witless man? What of your garment of antelope's hide? Within you is the tangle (of passion); only outwardly do you cleanse yourself. The person who wears a robe made of rags, who is lean, with veins showing all over the body, and who meditates alone in the forest — him do I call a holy man. I do not call him a holy man because of his lineage or high-born mother. If he is full of impeding attachments, he is just a supercilious man. But who is free from impediments and clinging — him do I call a holy man. He who, having cut off all fetters, trembles no more, who has overcome all attachments and is emancipated — him do I call a holy man. He who has cut off the thong (of hatred), the band (of craving), and the rope (of false views), together with the appurtenances (latent evil tendencies), he who has removed the crossbar (of ignorance) and is enlightened — him do I call a holy man. He who without resentment endures abuse, beating and punishment; whose power, real might, is patience — him do I call a holy man. He who is free from anger, is devout, virtuous, without craving, self-subdued and bears his final body — him do I call a holy man. Like water on a lotus leaf, or a mustard seed on the point of a needle, he who does not cling to sensual pleasures — him do I call a holy man. He who in this very life realizes for himself the end of suffering, who has laid aside the burden and become emancipated — him do I call a holy man. He who has profound knowledge, who is wise, skilled in discerning the right or wrong path, and has reached the highest goal — him do I call a holy man. He who holds aloof from householders and ascetics alike, and wanders about with no fixed abode and but few wants — him do I call a holy man. He who has renounced violence towards all living beings, weak or strong, who neither kills nor causes others to kill — him do I call a holy man. He who is friendly amidst the hostile, peaceful amidst the violent, and unattached amidst the attached — him do I call a holy man. He whose lust and hatred, pride and hypocrisy have fallen off like a mustard seed from the point of a needle — him do I call a holy man. He who utters gentle, instructive and truthful words, who imprecates none — him do I call a holy man. He who in this world takes nothing that is not given to him, be it long or short, small or big, good or bad — him do I call a holy man. He who wants nothing of either this world or the next, who is desire-free and emancipated — him do I call a holy man. He who has no attachment, who through perfect knowledge is free from doubts and has plunged into the Deathless — him do I call a holy man. He who in this world has transcended the ties of both merit and demerit, who is sorrowless, stainless and pure — him do I call a holy man. He, who, like the moon, is spotless and pure, serene and clear, who has destroyed the delight in existence — him do I call a holy man. He who, having traversed this miry, perilous and delusive round of existence, has crossed over and reached the other shore; who is meditative, calm, free from doubt, and, clinging to nothing, has attained to Nibbana — him do I call a holy man. He who, having abandoned sensual pleasures, has renounced the household life and become a homeless one; has destroyed both sensual desire and continued existence — him do I call a holy man. He who, having abandoned craving, has renounced the household life and become a homeless one, has destroyed both craving and continued existence — him do I call a holy man. He who, casting off human bonds and transcending heavenly ties, is wholly delivered of all bondages — him do I call a holy man. He who, having cast off likes and dislikes, has become tranquil, is rid of the substrata of existence and like a hero has conquered all the worlds — him do I call a holy man. He who in every way knows the death and rebirth of all beings, and is totally detached, blessed and enlightened — him do I call a holy man. He whose track no gods, no angels, no humans trace, the arahant who has destroyed all cankers — him do I call a holy man. He who clings to nothing of the past, present and future, who has no attachment and holds on to nothing — him do I call a holy man. He, the Noble, the Excellent, the Heroic, the Great Sage, the Conqueror, the Passionless, the Pure, the Enlightened one — him do I call a holy man. He who knows his former births, who sees heaven and hell, who has reached the end of births and attained to the perfection of insight, the sage who has reached the summit of spiritual excellence — him do I call a holy man.

Apparently, by the lifetime of the Buddha, the "monk" (Bhikkhu) and the life lived by such had become more of a career choice, and a "worldly" career at that. So here, the Buddha seeks to redefine the life lived in terms of character and spiritual qualities rather than ritual usage and social status. He who has no attachment whatsoever for the mind and body, who does not grieve for what he has not — he is truly called a monk. Cleary comments that attachment to mind and body - or as other translations say, "possessiveness towards names and forms" - means greed for status, title, reputation, power over others, etc. Empty this boat, O monk! Emptied, it will sail lightly The image of the "empty boat" has a long history.................in many Faiths and teachings.

The Monk Good is restraint over the eye; good is restraint over the ear; good is restraint over the nose; good is restraint over the tongue. Good is restraint in the body; good is restraint in speech; good is restraint in thought. Restraint everywhere is good. The monk restrained in every way is freed from all suffering. He who has control over his hands, feet and tongue; who is fully controlled, delights in inward development, is absorbed in meditation, keeps to himself and is contented — him do people call a monk. That monk who has control over his tongue, is moderate in speech, unassuming and who explains the Teaching in both letter and spirit — whatever he says is pleasing. The monk who abides in the Dhamma, delights in the Dhamma, meditates on the Dhamma, and bears the Dhamma well in mind — he does not fall away from the sublime Dhamma. One should not despise what one has received, nor envy the gains of others. The monk who envies the gains of others does not attain to meditative absorption. A monk who does not despise what he has received, even though it be little, who is pure in livelihood and unremitting in effort — him even the gods praise. He who has no attachment whatsoever for the mind and body, who does not grieve for what he has not — he is truly called a monk. The monk who abides in universal love and is deeply devoted to the Teaching of the Buddha attains the peace of Nibbana, the bliss of the cessation of all conditioned things. Empty this boat, O monk! Emptied, it will sail lightly. Rid of lust and hatred, you shall reach Nibbana. Cut off the five, abandon the five, and cultivate the five. The monk who has overcome the five bonds is called one who has crossed the flood. Meditate, O monk! Do not be heedless. Let not your mind whirl on sensual pleasures. Heedless, do not swallow a red-hot iron ball, lest you cry when burning, "O this is painful!" There is no meditative concentration for him who lacks insight, and no insight for him who lacks meditative concentration. He in whom are found both meditative concentration and insight, indeed, is close to Nibbana. The monk who has retired to a solitary abode and calmed his mind, who comprehends the Dhamma with insight, in him there arises a delight that transcends all human delights. Whenever he sees with insight the rise and fall of the aggregates, he is full of joy and happiness. To the discerning one this reflects the Deathless. Control of the senses, contentment, restraint according to the code of monastic discipline — these form the basis of holy life here for the wise monk. Let him associate with friends who are noble, energetic, and pure in life, let him be cordial and refined in conduct. Thus, full of joy, he will make an end of suffering. Just as the jasmine creeper sheds its withered flowers, even so, O monks, should you totally shed lust and hatred! The monk who is calm in body, calm in speech, calm in thought, well-composed and who has spewn out worldliness — he, truly, is called serene. By oneself one must censure oneself and scrutinize oneself. The self-guarded and mindful monk will always live in happiness. One is one's own protector, one is one's own refuge. Therefore, one should control oneself, even as a trader controls a noble steed. Full of joy, full of faith in the Teaching of the Buddha, the monk attains the Peaceful State, the bliss of cessation of conditioned things. That monk who while young devotes himself to the Teaching of the Buddha illumines this world like the moon freed from clouds.