Where is the Mind heading? Towards Friendship and Health?
Towards Wonder and Delight?
Towards Wonder and Delight?
The Buddhist Charter of Free Enquiry.
What Beliefs
Should We Follow?
The Kalama Sutta is also known as the Buddhist Charter of Free Enquiry. It is famous, and now appears on at least 30 websites, mostly of Buddhist groups. It challenges the usual assumptions in religion and other belief systems, and encourages free and open enquiry into the foundations and bases of such assertions. It asks a basic question about our beliefs and convictions –
“On what basis should we support something and believe in it?”
“Do these arguments stand up to investigation?”
I have been familiar with the Kalama Sutta for four decades. There was a beautiful hand written sign summarising this Charter of Free Enquiry, at the entrance of the Dhamma hall at Wat Buddha Dhamma, in the Dharug National Park north-west of Sydney, in the mid 1980’s.
I have taken Free Enquiry as a guiding principle, since 1982 when I first associated with organised religion. Others might take the literal wording of scripture and doctrine for gospel truth, but we do not have to. Let us investigate what works best for us, based on our own experience of spiritual practice.
The kālāma sutta is encoded aṅguttara nikāya 3. 65 or 3. 66. I adapted and selected from the version at –
https://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/anguttara/03/an03-066.html This has word-for-word translation of the Pali. The Sutta begins thus –
kālāma sutta, AN 3. 65 or 3. 66
The historical Buddha gave this discourse (Sutta) to the Kalama people in their town of Kesamutta. They said that other religious preachers support their own ideas and arguments (vāda) and reject those of others. What is Buddha’s position on this? They ask the Buddha - “Who (ko) speaks (āha) truth (saccaṃ), who speaks falsehood (musā)?”
Buddha replies thus -
Well, should we follow (eti) and come back to (eti) assertions (vāda) because of -
1. scriptures, authority, general agreement, or what we’ve read and heard?
2. agreement to our own belief system?
3. logic, or inference?
4. considering appearances, or what is possible?
5. the persuasive-ness of the Teacher?
Or should we investigate the consequences of thought, speech and action motivated and driven by defilements (lobha, dosa, moha), compared to other karma that is free from the defilements?
When we know (jānāti) for ourselves (attanā) : "Such thought, speech and action are unwholesome (akusala), blameworthy (sa-avajja), and condemned or censured by the wise (garahatā), and when accepted and practised lead to harm (ahitāya) and suffering (dukkhāya),” then we can abandon and let go of them (pajahati).
When we know (jānāti) for ourselves (attanā) : "Such thought, speech and action are wholesome (kusala), blameless (anavajjā), praised (pasaṃ-sati) by the wise (viññū); and when adopted and carried out they lead to well-being prosperity (hitāya) and happiness (sukhāya)," then we can accept and practise them (viharati = dwell within).
When we are being a Noble Disciple (ariya sāvaka), then we can be free (vigat) of defilements (ābhijjho byāpādo); we can be alert and resolute, we can have clear comprehension (sam-pa-jāna) and attentiveness (sati).
And we can be radiant (pharati) with good will (mettā), compassion (karuṇā), appreciation (muditā) and equanimity (upekkhā) for all aspects of our mind (sabba-dhī) and all aspects of ourselves (sabba-attatāya), and for everyone else in our world (sabba-avantaṃ loke), in all four directions, and to those above and below us, with expansive abundance.
Then we may have assurance (assāsa) of a good future, in this existence (loke) or the next. Certainly we will intend no evil (na pāpa), whether evil occurs or not.
The audience praised this Sutta.
“On what basis should we support something and believe in it?”
“Do these arguments stand up to investigation?”
I have been familiar with the Kalama Sutta for four decades. There was a beautiful hand written sign summarising this Charter of Free Enquiry, at the entrance of the Dhamma hall at Wat Buddha Dhamma, in the Dharug National Park north-west of Sydney, in the mid 1980’s.
I have taken Free Enquiry as a guiding principle, since 1982 when I first associated with organised religion. Others might take the literal wording of scripture and doctrine for gospel truth, but we do not have to. Let us investigate what works best for us, based on our own experience of spiritual practice.
The kālāma sutta is encoded aṅguttara nikāya 3. 65 or 3. 66. I adapted and selected from the version at –
https://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/anguttara/03/an03-066.html This has word-for-word translation of the Pali. The Sutta begins thus –
kālāma sutta, AN 3. 65 or 3. 66
The historical Buddha gave this discourse (Sutta) to the Kalama people in their town of Kesamutta. They said that other religious preachers support their own ideas and arguments (vāda) and reject those of others. What is Buddha’s position on this? They ask the Buddha - “Who (ko) speaks (āha) truth (saccaṃ), who speaks falsehood (musā)?”
Buddha replies thus -
Well, should we follow (eti) and come back to (eti) assertions (vāda) because of -
1. scriptures, authority, general agreement, or what we’ve read and heard?
2. agreement to our own belief system?
3. logic, or inference?
4. considering appearances, or what is possible?
5. the persuasive-ness of the Teacher?
Or should we investigate the consequences of thought, speech and action motivated and driven by defilements (lobha, dosa, moha), compared to other karma that is free from the defilements?
When we know (jānāti) for ourselves (attanā) : "Such thought, speech and action are unwholesome (akusala), blameworthy (sa-avajja), and condemned or censured by the wise (garahatā), and when accepted and practised lead to harm (ahitāya) and suffering (dukkhāya),” then we can abandon and let go of them (pajahati).
When we know (jānāti) for ourselves (attanā) : "Such thought, speech and action are wholesome (kusala), blameless (anavajjā), praised (pasaṃ-sati) by the wise (viññū); and when adopted and carried out they lead to well-being prosperity (hitāya) and happiness (sukhāya)," then we can accept and practise them (viharati = dwell within).
When we are being a Noble Disciple (ariya sāvaka), then we can be free (vigat) of defilements (ābhijjho byāpādo); we can be alert and resolute, we can have clear comprehension (sam-pa-jāna) and attentiveness (sati).
And we can be radiant (pharati) with good will (mettā), compassion (karuṇā), appreciation (muditā) and equanimity (upekkhā) for all aspects of our mind (sabba-dhī) and all aspects of ourselves (sabba-attatāya), and for everyone else in our world (sabba-avantaṃ loke), in all four directions, and to those above and below us, with expansive abundance.
Then we may have assurance (assāsa) of a good future, in this existence (loke) or the next. Certainly we will intend no evil (na pāpa), whether evil occurs or not.
The audience praised this Sutta.
Translational Notes.
The original Pali is very long, having 1200 words and many repetitions. This verbosity makes the sutta cumbersome and unwieldly, and seems to focus too much attention on narrow a range of issues to be of much use in solving the broad range of life’s problems. It also lends itself to indoctrination. This could put off some readers. So I have condensed and adapted the material, and included all useful parts, in my presentation of this famous sutta.
In addition, the traditional form of this sutta does have the flavour of didactic doctrine. It says – “Do not go by the following ten reasons for belief.” One hundred generations have passed since the Buddha’s period; plenty of time for indoctrination to creep into the scriptures.
To restore the original theme of this sutta, which is enquiry and investigation, we can present the ten reasons for belief differently, as questions – “Should we go along with the following ten reasons?” This suggests private reflection to gain insight.
Discussion.
Ten Reasons for Belief.
The Buddha actually lists ten possible reasons for believing in an assertion or argument, and I condensed them into five groups. These ten reasons for belief are repeated four times in this Sutta. Buddha Vacana devotes 1700 words to discuss their meanings, which you can read if you wish. He quotes Thanissaro, a prominent monk translator late 20th century. Other prominent monk scholars of the Pali canon include Bodhi and Nyanamoli of the late 20th century, and Sujato of the 21st century.
I looked up the meaning of these ten reasons for belief in the Pali Text Society’s dictionary of 1925. It has over a million words, and PTS produced it after forty years of transliterating then translating thousands of pages of Pali Buddhist scriptures. So it is the most detailed Pali dictionary we have.
1. anu·savana. ‘anu’ means ‘according to, in conformity with.’ savana = heard or learned. But can we be certain that our learning is complete or without fault ?
2. param·parā = para + para means ‘further further’. Something that follows on from something else. For an independent thinker, it can mean something that follows on from our existing beliefs, and therefore fits into our belief system. For the traditionalist, it could mean following on from tradition or lineage. Or it could mean something that furthers and expands our knowledge.
3. iti·kira means ‘so we would guess, here we would guess’. Yet kira can also mean ‘true’, not guesswork. Thus itikira could mean ‘we know this to be true.’
4. piṭaka·sampadāna. piṭaka = ‘basket of traditional knowledge.’ sampadāna = ‘handed over, handed down.’ padāna = ‘bestow or give’, but also can mean ‘attainment.’ So piṭaka sam·padāna could mean ‘basket of traditional knowledge that goes with (saṃ) attainment.’ saṃ means ‘accompanies.’
5. takka·hetu. takka means ‘doubt, doubtful’ and literally means ‘twist, turn’. hetu means ‘cause, reason.’ Yet other translators translate takka as ‘logic, reason’, which has opposite meaning.
6. naya·hetu. naya means ‘leading, guiding, conducting.’ Thus naya·hetu can mean a guiding reason or cause. Or it could mean that which leads to the cause. Yet other scholars translate this as “by inference.”
7. ākāra·parivitakka. parivitakka means ‘complete and thorough reflection and consideration’. ākāra means ‘conditions, properties’. Yet ākāra can also mean ‘appearances.’
8. diṭṭhi·nijjhāna khamati. nijjhāna means ‘understanding, insight, perception.’ khamati means patient. It can also mean ‘suitable’. diṭṭhi means ‘view, viewpoint.’ Yet other scholars translate diṭṭhi·nijjhāna khamati as ‘agreement after pondering views.’
9. bhabba·rūpatā. bhabba means ‘likely or possible’. rūpa means ‘appearance.’ Thus bhabba·rūpatā can mean ‘what appears to be likely.’ Yet bhabba also means ‘power, ability,’ and rūpa also means ‘quality, form’. Therefore, bhabba·rūpatā can also mean ‘what has the nature and form of being effective and powerful.’
10. samaṇo no garu. samaṇo means ‘wandering or reclusive religious person.’ garu = guru. As a noun, it means “revered teacher’, yet as an adjective it means ‘heavy.’ no has opposite meanings; it can be either affirmative of denying. Thus samaṇo no garu can mean either a religious teacher who is revered, or a religious teacher who is not revered. It could also mean a religious person who is persuasive.
We can see that each of these ten reasons for belief have different meanings in pāỊi, perhaps opposite meanings. Most of these reasons for belief might appear to be worthwhile reasons to ‘follow (eti) an assertion or argument (vāda) and return to it (eti).’ But on closer examination, are they good reasons for belief? Starting from the last reasons –
A teacher or teaching might have impressive conduct and expression when we see them, and therefore worthy of respect. But elsewhere they might not be respected at all, because something they keep hidden now has been exposed elsewhere.
A teacher or teaching might seem to come from patient and proper insight that penetrates into the real qualities of experience. Yet we might discover later they come only from a brief look at the superficial appearances. And so on, going up the list of supposed reasons for religious belief.
Not Just Religious Belief.
Furthermore, Buddha’s advice applies also to other belief systems, beyond religious beliefs and doctrine. The actual word used is vāda which primarily means ‘speech’. vāda is best known from the second precept; to refrain from false speech (musa vāda), where the speech is excessive. For vāda has the specified meaning of an emphatic or formulated speech, such as assertions or doctrines. Thus vāda can mean argument, conflicting assertions and unhelpful beliefs. In fact, two words are used vāda and pavāda, where the prefix pa- means ‘carried on in a marked degree or even beyond its mark.’
So we can apply Buddha’s advice more broadly. We can also apply this advice to stinking thinking, where we find ourselves identifying with and believing the inflamed and hurtful thinking. Such unhelpful thinking often proliferates in our mind, when the people and pursuits in our life greatly fail us. We find ourselves assailed by excessively critical, derisive, despairing, fearful and other self sabotaging thoughts. Buddha advises us; should we really believe such rubbish? Should we follow (eti) it and return to (eti) it?
Therefore, Buddha advises us to investigate : are our thought, speech and action wholesome and leading to happiness and prosperity, or leading the other way? Let us be free of defilements, be alert and resolute, have clear comprehension, and be attentive.
In fact, Buddha’s first advice is to view such self sabotage as definitely (alaṃ) arising from (uppannā) uncertainty and doubt (kaṅkhati), and being confusing and distracting (vici-kicchi). Instead of believing it, instead of following (eti) it and returning to (eti) it. This is stated before Buddha enumerates the ten reasons for believing (eti) in an assertion or argument (vāda pavāda).
Conventional Translations.
Perhaps for simplicity sake, Buddha Vacana and Thanissaro provide the following interpretations of these ten reasons for belief –
- what you have heard said,
- what has been transmitted [by a tradition],
- general consensus,
- what has been handed down in a collection of texts,
- logical reasoning,
- inference,
- reflection on appearances,
- agreement after pondering views,
- what is probable
- respect for the teacher.
