lotusinthemud

The Vitakka Santhana Sutta

The Vitakka Santhana Sutta could be seen as a way of marrying self-power and other power practice or of prioritising them such that the former is in the service of the latter rather than the other way round. The basic philosophy of other power rests upon the fact that one does not have the ability to enlighten the mind by one's own power even though the mind intrinsically has the capacity to be enlightened. The efforts of a deluded mind will always be, in varying degrees, deluded. The ego's desire to be an enlightened person is still egotistical. Therefore one entrusts oneself to the transfer of merit from the Buddha and, to this end, one adverts the mind toward that source of grace. However, inevitably, even when doing so, deluded thoughts creep in and one then may have a struggle with oneself. This is described in the sutra. Of course, the stronger one's faith the less this happens and the easier it is to overcome the difficulties that arise.

Namo Amida Bu.

~ Dharmavidya

Heart Sutra (cho ver.)(2020 mix.) × Ikkyu-ji Temple,Kyoto,Japan - Japanese Zen Music

 

 

The Meaning of Mindfulness: Reply to Tineke ~ Dharmavidya

Following the discussion coming from the essay :: here

Dharmavidya writes:

I am making this into a new discussion as it is somewhat at a tangent from the "Unmodernising Buddhism" theme.

Clearly Anapanasati and Satipatthana were teachings that were important to the Buddha.  These were key items that he wanted disciples to hang onto.  The question is, therefore, what do they actually mean and imply, and at the core of this is the word sati, translated as mindfulness.

Now the sutras on anapanasati and satipatthana contain exercises and generally the Western take on this has been to assume that these exercises are the way that one develops mindfulness and that mindfulness is some kind of present moment attention or awareness.

As far as I can see, this is a misreading.  These sutras do not say that they are teaching one to be mindful and they do not say that mindfulness is a form of attention.  In fact in both the Satipatthana Sutta and the Anapanasati Sutta it is clear that the practitioner has to have mindfulness already established before he does the exercises. The bhikkhu “establishes mindfulness before him” before he starts.  So both assume that the practitioner already has mindfulness.  Mindfulness is a precondition for the exercises that follow, not a result of them. 

The intended result of them is that the practitioner shall have an experiential understanding of the truth of the Dharma teachings, since this will keep him in good stead in the future.  He will learn things that are to be kept in mind. Thus, if he approaches awareness of the body with this mindfulness established, he understands experientially that the body is just a body, feelings are just feelings, etc. Keeping this discovery in mind will help him in many situations.  If he were to do body awareness without having the  Dharma already in mind, he might come to all sorts of other conclusions.  The worldling is also aware of his body and concludes that it is his self, or concludes that it should be pampered, or whatever. Many people are aware of their feelings and as a result are completely enslaved by them.

It is not that by doing these exercises he learns how to be more aware of what is happening in the present moment.  It is that by them he learns something that will be for his benefit for a long time.  For a bhikkhu to sustain the kind of composure Buddha is expecting, he has to keep in mind that the body is just a body, feelings are just feelings.  They pass. When he has got this then he is freed from covetousness and grief.

Also, the refrain “ardent, mindful and aware” surely designates three qualities that work in synchronisation. There is no implication here that mindfulness = awareness any more than mindfulness or awareness = ardour.

Interestingly, in the Salayatana Vibhanga Sutta (MN137) there is a threefold satipatthana.  This does not mention awareness exercises at all.  It outlines three situations, one in which the disciples do not take in what the teacher is teaching, one in which some do and some don’t and one in which they all do.  It says that the teacher is only satisfied in the third situation, however, in all three he is “unmoved, mindful and aware”.  So here mindfulness is a foundation for equanimity. I am inclined to think that satipatthana does not mean the setting up of mindfulness, but rather what mindfulness sets up.

The practice of anapanasati is not a practice of learning to follow the breath, like a yoga exercise, it is a practice of learning to experience rapture, tranquility, joy, liberation, etc, with every breath.  The emphasis of the teaching is not on the physical yoga as such but upon having the good qualities of the Dharma as close and as constant as breathing. Or, indeed, not only the good qualities, but also whatever else the bhikkhu is studying.  He is to give it attention as unwavering as breathing. In other words, having them in mind unceasingly. When this is achieved then satipatthana is also thereby achieved.

So what is mindfulness? In the Mahasihanada Sutta, mindfulness is linked with “retentiveness, memory and lucidity of wisdom”  (MN12.62)) and in the Sekha Sutta ()MN53.16 it says “He has mindfulness; he possesses the highest mindfulness and skill; he recalls and recollects what was done long ago and spoken long ago”.  In other words, mindfulness means to have a good memory, and this is supported both by the etymology of the word sati, which comes from remember, and from the fact that at the time when Rhys Davids chose “mindfulness” as the best word to translate sati, that was what mindfulness meant in the English language - to remember or keep in mind.  Rhys Davids wrote in a footnote to this translation that the Buddhist notion of mindfulness on all occasions was the Buddhist equivalent of the Christian injunction “Whatsoever you do, however mundane it may be, do it in the name of the Lord” - in other words, mindfulness is, for Buddhists, about keeping Buddha, Dharma and Sangha in mind whatever one is doing.

In Pureland Buddhism the central practice is niàn fó 念佛  which means recollection of  Buddha (J. nembutsu). Niàn is the Chinese for mindfulness. The aim is to keep Buddha in mind on all occasions.

As a result of the recent upsurge in something called mindfulness, we now have two different meanings of the word circulating and this sometimes leads to quite a bit of confusion.  The idea that mindfulness is deliberate, non-judgemental attention to whatever is arising in the present moment is a fair distance away from mindfulness as in the sentence, "I'm always mindful of what my mother told me before she died."  The latter meaning is, however, closer to what I think the Buddha meant: there are things to be remembered and treasured that will be for one's benefit for a long time, and they will be so because they will protect you from what may arise in the unpredictability of the present moment.

This is how I have come to understand it.

:: link

And a further comment from Dharmavidya:

Thank you for the question.  Often in the sutras we see the Buddha delighting in receiving a good question.  He says such things as "Oh, well done, Ananda!  This question will be for the benefit of many beings for a long time".  A good question is a Dharma door.

As I understand it, anapanasati is not so much the sati of anapana but rather sati by means of anapana.  In other words, anapanasati is not “watching the breathing” but rather it is what the Tibetans call “mounting the practice on the breath”.  This is a significant change of emphasis.

In Amida Shu the practice is to remember Buddha at all times.  The recollection of Buddha enters into everything one does.  This is called nembutsu, literally “mindfulness of Buddha” or “recollection of Buddha” and it often takes the form of saying the Buddha’s Name. To this end I encourage my people to have a mala and to use it.  This is not just because the mala is handy for counting recitations of the Buddha’s Holy Name,; it is rather that as soon as one sees the mala, or whenever one takes it in hand, the thought of Buddha is straightaway in the mind.  Telling the beads keeps the recollection going.  With each bead one says so many nembutsu.

Now anapanasati is like that.  When one mounts the practice on the breath, then the breath becomes your mala.  Every breath becomes a nembutsu.  Through anapana one’s sati (nen in Japanese) is reanimated. The breath is the soul of recollection. 

The Pureland way is also to make every aspect of Dharma into a Buddha recollection. This both simplifies and deepens the practice.  So it is not a matter of learning a scatter of practices - wisdom, compassion, rapture, impermanence, truths, powers, etc., so much as that all of these become  extensions of the one key recollection.  This being so, one does not need, necessarily, to learn many volumes of teaching in order to get the blessing.  Whether you know one teaching or many teachings, they are all recollection of Buddha. It is always valuable to listen and learn, but always, whatever the teaching, one is listening to Buddha.

Once one has selected nembutsu (selection is an important word in the teachings of Honen Shonin) then all practices become nembutsu and “only nembutsu is true and real”. 

Thus,  in the anapanasati passages in the sutras, anapanasati might be used to establish, for instance, rapture.  With each breath the rapture comes back to one.  In this way, by means of breathing, recollection of rapture occurs.  In Pureland, rapture is just another way of experiencing Buddha.  Buddha is rapture.  Rapture is the blessing of Buddha entering one's physical being.  So anapana bringing rapture is anapana bringing the experience of the presence of Buddha.

In anapanasati, the breath is ones mala.  When the breath is one’s mala the recollection occurs all the time and it does not matter which aspect of the Dharma appears, they are all recollection of Buddha.  Buddha is the mani gem: it is a jewel with innumerable facets. Buddhism is to ever be in contact with Buddha, ever receiving the blessing, taking it in with every breath.  Sati is to keep the blessing in one’s heart and anapanasati is to refresh it with every breath.  I am not breathing - Buddha is breathing in me.

I am a Religious Buddhist ~ Dharmavidya

Dharmavidya:

A little while ago I answered a knock on my door and found myself in conversation with two Jehovah’s Witnesses.  I told them I was Buddhist.  They immediately asked if I was a religious Buddhist or a philosophical Buddhist.  I replied, without hesitation, that I was a religious Buddhist.  We had a pleasant conversation and found some commonality of concern about various issues such as the current ecological crisis.  They then went on their way. 

Afterwards, I reflected that they would probably have made a more determined effort to convert me if I had answered the first question differently.  The person without religion is in a more vulnerable position and soon likely to admit to some uncertainty and anxiety. I also thought about why I had had no hesitation in answering the question as I did.  Many people who identify with Buddhism these days do not identify with religion.  What is the real point at issue here?

The fundamental definition of religion is that it is a system of thought, philosophy, culture and practice within which the core element is a distinction between the mundane and the sacred.  We could also term these poles the finite and the infinite, the conditioned and the unconditioned, the here-and-now and the eternal-beyond, the mortal and the deathless, or any other parallel set of terms. In the West they have come to take on the form of the mortal and the divine.

On this definition, secular or philosophical Buddhism is not really a religion because it lacks a sense of the beyond.  It is Buddhism minus nirvana.  If you had asked Shakyamuni about this, however, he would surely have said that Dharma without nirvana is not Dharma.  It is like a one legged man or a one wheel bicycle - it is a precarious balancing act that easily tumbles without the application of unwearying vigilance, contortion or extra props.

According to secular Buddhism, only the here and now exists, the only benefits available are mundane ones, and the only way to proceed is with the pursuit of this-worldly results.  This type of thinking is considered progressive.  However, it is fragile.  Those following such an approach, if they do so in a serious rather than dilettante manner, are liable to get burnt out, because this-worldly goals offer no permanent succour, no real solution: they are just more of the same. Many “modern” people find this very difficult to grasp. Consequently they never escape from their stress and anguish. They set up a goal of this worldly perfection and then come unstuck because there is no such perfection here to be had.

The original teaching - the Dharma - aimed at salvation from this world while within it, not mere transient happiness or pleasure.  Happiness within it might often be a spin off, but was incidental to the original purpose.  Nor is Dharma really about self-development.  Again, a good deal of character reform may well occur as a spin off - sila and samadhi develop from prajña - but the core is right view and right view is lokavid, the ability to see beyond.  We might like the idea of perfecting ourselves, but we all remain bombu.

In the Ariya Pariyesana Sutta (MN26), Buddha says:

Bhikshus, before my awakening, while I was still only an unawakened bodhisattva,

9. I, too, being myself subject to birth, sought what was also subject to birth; …
subject to decay, sought what was also subject to decay; …
subject to sickness; …
subject to death; …
subject to sorrow …
being myself subject to defilement, sought what was also subject to defilement.

Then, bhikshus, I thought thus:

‘Why should I, being myself subject to birth, seek what is also subject to birth; …
subject to decay; …
subject to sickness; …
subject to death; …
subject to sorrow; …
being myself subject to defilement, seek what is also subject to defilement?

Suppose that I, being myself subject to birth, having understood the danger in what is subject to birth, were to seek the unborn supreme security from bondage, nirvana.
Suppose that I, being myself subject to decay …
subject to sickness …
subject to death …
subject to sorrow…
subject to defilement, were to seek the undefiled supreme security from bondage, nirvana.’

If we recouch this in Pureland terms we get:

Formerly I, a bombu, sought that which is also bombu,
being a foolish being, sought that which is also foolish,
being subject to wayward passion, sought that which is also wayward.
being an impermanent mortal, sought that which is also mortal and impermanent.

Then I thought, why do I do this?

Suppose that I, a bombu, seeing the danger in it, were to seek refuge in what is not bombu;
suppose that I, a foolish being, seeing the danger in it, were to seek refuge in what is not foolish;
suppose that I, a being subject to wayward passion, seeing the danger in it, were to seek refuge in what is pure;
suppose that I, being mortal and impermanent, seeing the danger in it, were to seek refuge in what is not mortal, not impermanent.

What if I were to call out to what is beyond this mundane samsaric merry-go-round. What if I were to call out to Amida.

At a philosophical level, secular Buddhism is propped up by the wooden leg of non-duality.  A great deal is made of this notion, but it is quite clear here that the Buddha has a critically important duality in mind, namely that between the being who is limited by birth, sickness, death, sorrow and defilement on the one hand and, on the other, the unborn, the deathless, that which is not subject to sickness, sorrow and defilement. In the Dharma of Buddha, not everything is impermanent.

This is the same distinction as that between the bombu being and Amida.  Buddhism occurs when the limited being reaches out to the limitless, the finite to the infinite, the measured to the immeasurable.

One does not cross this divide, for one remains a mortal being, but one takes refuge in the other shore.  In the here and now, one calls out to the eternal. In this very life, one calls out to the beyond. In this perilous situation, one pleads for help  - “Tai Shi Chih, aid me now!”.

Such calling is nembutsu. “Namo Amida Bu”.  Then, amazingly, it comes to you. This is the meaning of Tathagata (Nyorai, in Japanese).

It is said that the difference between Jodo Shu and Jodo Shin Shu is that Jodo Shu places the emphasis upon the calling and Shin Shu places the emphasis upon it coming to you.  These, however, are two aspects of the same movement.

This is religious consciousness giving rise to a religious act with a spiritual result - the religious act that is the core of all true religion, whatever the names or terminology may be, and the result that is the reason why religious movements have had such influence and sway in human affairs.

As long as one, a mundane being, continues to call out only for an improved mundanity, one has not grasped the Dharma nor been grasped by it and so one does not get the result.

Only when, as a mundane being, one nonetheless calls out to what is ultimately sublime, beyond this tawdry sphere, does one grasp at the real Dharma and create the condition within which one can be grasped by it.  This is why it is important not to be ashamed to be religious.  Without religious consciousness one is eternally vulnerable and lost because, however much effort one makes, one is still dependent upon things that are as vulnerable, impermanent and unreliable as oneself. 

Buddha said that few would be able to get this.  He was right, but there are some with but little dust in their eyes.  Don’t let them waste for want of the Dharma.

For me personally, it makes complete sense.  Even if I were the only person left on the planet who saw this, it would still deeply satisfy.  Furthermore, it is what Shakyamuni taught.  This is original Buddhism and universal Dharma.

If Jodo Shu is “Please” and Shin Shu is “Thank You” then Amida Shu is Please and Thank You together, the complete set of cosmic good manners. Learn these good manners and use them on all occasions. Then you will be welcomed to the feast where all the Buddhas dine.

To comment, please follow this :: link

Full Text of the Amida Kyo - the Smaller Pureland Sutra

The Smaller Pureland Sutra

Thus did I hear

 

Once the Buddha at Shravasti dwelt

In the Jeta Anathapindika garden

Together with a multitude of friars

One thousand two hundred and fifty

Who were arhats every one

As was recognised by all.

 

Amongst them...

Shariputra the elder, Great Maudgalyayana, Maha-kashyapa,

Maha-katyayana, Maha-kausthila,

Revata, Shuddi-panthaka,

Nanda, Ananda, Rahula,

Gavampati, Pindola Bhara-dvaja,

Kalodayin, Maha-kapphina, Vakkula,

Aniruddha,

and many other disciples

each similarly great.

Thus Have I Heard ~ Dharmavidya

Dharmavidya writes:

FAMOUS WORDS

Buddhist sutras generally begin with these words.  Hearing is very important in Buddhism.  In fact, the essence of Buddhism is to hear the Dharma.

These words can be taken in a simplistic way and quickly passed over or they can be reflected on to some benefit.  Simplistically, one can take them as the introduction to a story that has been passed down from person to person.  At this level, what is being passed on is simply information.  The text often goes on, “once the Buddha was staying in such and such a place and there were with him the following people…”  Thus, the story teller establishes where the action takes place and the names of the participants and witnesses.  This gives evidence for the correctness of the story.  In an oral tradition, it would have meant, inter alia, “If you don’t believe me you can ask them.” 

Interestingly sutras usually do not say when the action took place.  Time was not important.  This omission has puzzled modern scholars who want to piece the story together with other stories to make a history.  This aspect evidently did not interest those who transmitted the sutras.  They were not concerned to give a historical account, they were concerned to transmit eternal truth.  So a sutra tells us about eternal truth appearing somewhere specific in the world to particular people.

TWO WAYS OF HEARING

Although we might quickly pass over the initial words, many of the scriptural commentaries linger over them and give some analysis.  This is because these words are important in their own right. “Thus have I heard” means “This is the way I heard it”.  It is worth pausing to ask “Heard what?”  In one sense the answer is obvious - heard these facts about what Buddha was asked and what he said, but sutras were not written for academic analysis nor for the obtaining of doctoral degrees.  They were for devotees.  The meaning is “This is how I heard the Dharma” or “The Dharma came to me in this way.” People who hear merely a story do not really hear the DHARMA.

There are two ways of seriously hearing the Dharma.  The first way is to hear something that you realise is of great value to yourself.  The person who hears in this way is called a shravaka.  The word shravaka is commonly translated as “disciple”, but it literally means “hearer”.  Shravakas have faith as a result of hearing the Dharma.  Perhaps we should stress REALLY HEARING IT, not just having it go in one ear and then get filed away under “other useful information”.  To really hear the Dharma is no different from what we mean by “being seized by Amida”.  People with such faith go to the Pure Land.

The second way of hearing the Dharma is to hear and be penetrated by universal truth that saves all sentient beings.  The people who sincerely hear this are called bodhisattvas.  Sattva means “being” or “spirit”.  Bodhi means the awakened Dharma.  A bodhisattva is somebody whose being or spirit is no longer their own, no longer just the expression of their personal karma, but now is bodhi.  Their being has been take over by Dharma.  They live in the spirit of awakening.

TATHAGATAGHARBA

This being penetrated by the eternal and universal Dharma is what is meant by the term tathagatagharba.  Tathagata is another word for Buddha. Gharba means embryo.  The person who has been penetrated by the Dharma in this way has within them the embryo of a future Buddha. Tathagatagharba often gets taken as a synonym for “Buddha nature”.  If you take the language this way, then the original meaning was not that everybody has Buddha nature from the beginning, but, rather, that one only has it when one has been penetrated in this way, when one has truly HEARD.

There is clearly a sexual metaphor here.  To truly hear the Dharma is to lose one's spiritual virginity.  One cannot go back.  Most people reading Buddhist texts may be engaging in some mild foreplay, but they do not risk committing themselves to the full act.

FOLLOWING THE CALL

The phrase, “Thus have I heard”, therefore, means “This is the way that I was awakened”.  The Dharma is universal, eternal and lacks for nothing, but one only participates in it when one has been penetrated by it.  Then one is no longer one’s old self.  The practical momentum of one’s old self - karma - continues, but it is not what one identifies with any more. 

There is an English usage that is valuable in this respect.  In English we talk about “having a calling”. One’s calling is what one’s life is dedicated to.  The phrase is generally associated with one’s life’s work.  Of somebody who is truly dedicated to their work or mission, we can say, “He didn’t just do it for the money, like most people. For him, it was a real calling”.  This idea of a calling is where the word vocation comes from, that being the Latin for calling.

I hope this makes it possible for us to appreciate the full significance of “Thus have I heard” and to understand why these words distinguish a sutra.  This tells us what a sutra really is.  The Dharma is infinite, but it enters and transforms us via some specific intimate encounter.  The sutras tell of these encounters.  They show the Dharma seed being planted in the world.

For the devotee, a sutra is not just another bit of historical information as it might be for the academic scholar.  Much of what we read about Buddhism has been written by such scholars, not by devotees. Such material is useful, but it requires a shift of perspective to realise the power one is dealing with. This power may have passed through the hands of the scholar, but it not penetrated her heart.

When one can truly say “Thus have I heard” then, as it says at the end of many sutras, “one has done what needs to be done”, and one will bring forth a Buddha in the future.

:: link to original post

Crumbling cigars of bark bring scholars one step closer to ancient words of Buddha

:: Crumbling cigars of bark bring scholars one step closer to ancient words of Buddha

BY ALICE MOLDOVAN

PHOTO

After more than 2,000 years, these birch bark scrolls easily fall to pieces.

SUPPLIED: MARK ALLON

The oldest Buddhist texts in the world are crumbly, prone to flaking into pieces at any time. Even conservators can't touch them with their bare hands.

Before they were found, the oldest manuscripts that scholars could study — texts from Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Thailand — were only a few hundred years old and often damaged by the tropical climate.

Mark Allon, one of 20 people in the world who can read the scrolls' ancient language, says in comparison, the crumbling birch bark artefacts take researchers "way, way back".

"It's taking us very close, closer to the Buddha," he says.

Dr Allon leads the team at the University of Sydney that is digitising some of the 2,000-year-old manuscripts, which have only recently been unfurled.

Through his work, the public will soon be able to see them online and understand their ancient teachings.

The Treasure of Religious Diversity

Dharmavidya:

There is a sutra called the Parinirvana. It is concerned with the last three months of the life of the Buddha. It begins with a conversation in which the Buddha is obliquely giving advice to a politician who is considering going to war.

The first thing that we should take from this passage, therefore, is that political and religious affairs are not two watertight separate compartments. The Buddha is here dealing with an eminently worldly matter, namely war and peace.

When we look at the world today we see that far from bringing peace, as the Buddha attempted to do, religious differences often amplify community conflicts. This is due to a misunderstanding of Dharma.

In the course of the conversation, the Buddha has the following exchange with Ananda:

   "What have you heard, Ananda: do the Vajjis show respect, honor, esteem, and veneration towards their shrines, both those within the city and those outside it, and do not deprive them of the due offerings as given and made to them formerly?"

   "I have heard, Lord, that they do venerate their shrines, and that they do not deprive them of their offerings."

   "So long, Ananda, as this is the case, the growth of the Vajjis is to be expected, not their decline.

Now we can assume that these shrines are not all Buddhist ones, especially as there is a reference to their traditional past. Perhaps none of them are, since we are still in the period of the Buddha's lifetime. It implies that the shrines are, indeed, a source of strength and cohesion to the community and give that community moral strength. This is good. The shrines of the Vajjis are probably different from those of neighbouring peoples. Each tribe has its identity expressed in its religious form.

These words of the Buddha tell us his attitude toward religious difference. He is not expecting everybody to be a Buddhist and he is acknowledging the value that diverse religious practices can bring. If we can value religious diversity as a treasure rather than a threat then it is possible to have peace in the world and growth is to be expected, not decline.

Clearly, the Buddha sees the value of social stability as well as of growth and change; of diversity as well as cohesion. The important thing is not to set these principles at war with one another but to proceed in a way that respects what is already good and adds what is better without prejudice. Harmony between religions is a key to world peace.

:: link

The Smaller Pureland Sutra

The Smaller Pureland Sutra

Thus did I hear

Once the Buddha at Shravasti dwelt

In the Jeta Anathapindika garden

Together with a multitude of friars

One thousand two hundred and fifty

Who were arhats every one

As was recognised by all.

Amongst them...
Shariputra the elder, Great Maudgalyayana, Maha-kashyapa,
 Maha-katyayana, Maha-kausthila,
Revata, Shuddi-panthaka,
Nanda, Ananda, Rahula,
Gavampati, Pindola Bhara-dvaja,

Kalodayin, Maha-kapphina, Vakkula, Aniruddha,
and many other disciples
each similarly great.

And, in addition, many bodhisattva mahasattvas...
Manjushri, prince of the Dharma, Ajita, Ganda-hastin,

Nityo-dyukta,

Together with all such as these

Even unto Shakra the king of devas

With a vast assembly of celestials

Beyond reckoning.

The Larger Pureland Sutra Sukhavativyuha: Manifesting the Land of Bliss

The Larger Pureland Sutra Sukhavativyuha: Manifesting the Land of Bliss

 

[The Scene] *
1. Thus have I heard. At one time the Blessed One was staying at the Vulture Peak at Rajagriha 2.

2. At that time the Buddha was attended by twelve thousand monks, all of them arhats.3

3. Among them were
- the Buddha’s first five disciples, the first arhats, Ajnatakaundinya, Ashvajit, Bashpa, Mahanama, and Bhadrajit;
- the first lay disciples who had all subsequently ordained: Yashas and his four friends, Vimala, Subahu, Purna son of Maitriyani, and Gavampati;
- the three Kashyapa brothers, Uruvilva Kashyapa, Gaya Kashyapa and Nadi Kashyapa, together with Kashyapa the younger and Kashyapa the great;
- the two friends, Maudgalyayana and Shariputra;
- the disciples Kapphina, Chunda, Aniruddha, Nandika, Kimpila, Subhuti, Revata, Khadiravanika, Vakkla, Svagata, Amogharaja, Parayanika, Pantha, Pantha the younger; - the Buddha’s half brother Nanda, his son Rahula, and his cousin and closest disciple Ananda;

4. The Buddha was also attended by a great many bodhisattva mahasattvas4 with Maitreya 5 at their head.6

[Ananda’s Enquiry] *
5. [23.] Then the reverend Ananda rose from his seat, uncovered his right shoulder, approached the Buddha, and knelt with his right knee touching the ground7. He joined his palms in anjali and said:
“The Blessed One’s sense powers appear serene, the colour of his skin is pure, his countenance is cleansed, radiating with a golden glow. As the jujube fruit turns bright yellow in autumn, pure, cleansed, radiating a golden colour, or as a skilfully made ornament of Jambu River gold displayed on a white cloth shows its purity, so the Blessed One appears radiant today.

6. [24] “Oh Blessed One, I do not ever recall seeing the Tathagata so serene, purified, cleansed, and radiant as I do today. This thought occurs to me ‘Today the Tathagata dwells in the sphere of most rare Dharma! the sphere of Buddhas! Today, the One who is the Eye of the World is centred upon what must be done by a guide of the world! Today, the One who is pre-eminent in the world dwells in supreme bodhi! Today, the Honoured of the Gods possesses all the virtues of a Tathagata! The Buddhas of the three times contemplate one another8. Could it be that you are now bringing to mind all the other Buddhas? Are you gazing upon the tathagatas, arhats, Samyak Sambuddhas of the past, the future and the

present? Is that why your august presence shines with such a radiance today?”

7. [25] Then the Blessed One said to Ananda,
“You are right, Ananda, you are right. But did the devas reveal this to you or did you discern this yourself, with knowledge arising from your own reflection?”