Nomon Tim continues his reflections on holding opposites in our lives, shining a light on two suttas from the Pali canon: the Sallatha Sutta and Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta.

Stream audio:

Tim's talk notes:

Some of the teachings of Buddhism feel very far out - encouraging us to take a bigger, vaster view of who and what we and this universe are. To nudge us out of narrow views, projections, and assumptions. To encourage us not to be limited by our concepts and familiar ideas. We've got a little study of the Lotus Sutra going on Monday evenings right now and it's very much that way. And the wonderful ongoing Reading Dogen group are about a third of the way through Dogen's massive, playful and far out explorations of the nature of everything. These teachings that do a kind of tricky yoga on our minds are important. They aren't easy but I think they're essential. I've been talking a lot lately I feel about the idea of holding opposites. Not falling for our often knee-jerk beliefs that it's either this way or it's that way. It can be in all kinds of ways both, and neither, and one side fully contains the other side. This stuff can really loosen us up and help us be more flexible and open. And sometimes just a bit confused if truth be told, but it's a process. And it's a long one. 

And other teachings of Buddhism are just quite practical. You take them in and you think, yeah of course - that's how it is. And if you're paying attention you realize but…wait…that makes sense but how come I ask like it's not the truth half the time. Like the teachings on impermanence. We are so shocked when things change and break and when beings die as if that was the exception in an otherwise stable universe where everything is going to stay just like it is. Of course not and yet. 

So here are a few of those kinds of teachings. I want to share a bit from a pair of early Buddhist teachings that are quite practical and encourage us to explore how these show up in our daily lives.  And to I have done a little condensing of these three into a handout that I have some copies of and will also post a link to with the Dharma talk.  

The first of these three is the Sallatha Sutta. I think Sallatha means "arrow" or "dart" and that's the central metaphor of the teachings. It's often called the teaching of the second dart. 

The Buddha in this teaching makes a distinction between people who've understood the teachings and those who haven't in regards to how these two groups deal with painful or challenging things. The experienced practitioners are the "well-taught noble disciples" and the people who don't practice are the "untaught worldlings." I guess we're probably somewhere in between. 

The Buddha first points out that these two groups have something in common. We all experience pleasant feelings, unpleasant feelings, and neutral feelings. That this is universal human experience. 

But there's a big difference in how they relate to pleasant and unpleasant experiences. The language in translation is kind of cute: 

When an untaught worldling is touched by a painful feeling, he worries and grieves, he laments, beats his breast, weeps and is distraught. 

So first we untaught worldlings are just super reactive and upset. And then we make it worse: 

Having been touched by that painful feeling, he resists (and resents) it. Then in him who so resists (and resents) that painful feeling, an underlying tendency of resistance against that painful feeling comes to underlie (his mind). 

And he uses a wonderful metaphor to describe this one-two punch that I've found really helpful: 

It is as if a man were pierced by a dart and, following the first piercing, he is hit by a second dart. So that person will experience feelings caused by two darts. It is similar with an untaught worldling: when touched by a painful (bodily) feeling, he worries and grieves, he laments, beats his breast, weeps and is distraught. So he experiences two kinds of feeling: a bodily and a mental feeling. 

As a modern interpreter of this I don't think it's that the first painful experience is neccessiarly in the body - it too could be a mental experience. Someone is derogatory towards you over the email say. That hurts. That's being hit by a dart. Ouch. 

And then in our upset about it all we take up a second dart and throw that at ourselves too. Maybe it's a dart of blame: either blaming the other person for being a smuck or blaming ourselves for whatever we did that triggered the negative exchange. Or maybe it's pure resistance: you shouldn't be talking to me like that! This shouldn't be happening! They should enforce the etiquette rules around here for goodness sakes, why was she allowed to be here and say that? Or straight up denial: I'm just not going to take this in, period. 

And in contrast to this poor untrained wordly one the well-taught noble disciple is able to accept the first dart. I mean ouch, but not adding all of this stress and upset. It just hurts, that's all. This suggesting that's Buddha's teaching for us: feel the pain and accept it. Maybe you learn something from it but there's no need to add all of that extra suffering. No need to throw second darts at yourself or someone else. Shit happens pretty much, move on. 

There's also some interesting teaching in here about using pleasurable stuff as distraction and avoidance techniques. No surprise that the well-trained noble disciple is totally not side tracked by pleasure seeking, she knows that won't really help and even better she knows that practicing deeply leads to much better freedom. 

This last bit is implied in the sutta like this: 

Then in him who does not proceed to enjoy sensual happiness, no underlying tendency to lust for pleasant feelings comes to underlie the mind. He knows, according to facts, the arising and ending of those feelings, and the gratification, the danger and the escape connected with these feelings … When he experiences a pleasant feeling, a painful feeling or a neutral feeling, he feels it as one who is not fettered by it. 

So how we do we relate to pleasure and pain. Can we just experience it straight up? Practice not being to pulled this way or that in each moment of experience. And if something difficult happens just feel it and not add extra suffering by tossing second darts around? 

The second of the teachings I want to share is just named after the monk the Buddha was talking to in this little teaching story. It's called the Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta: The Shorter Instructions to Malunkyaputta. And it also revolves around a metaphor of being hit by an arrow. 

It's on a similar topic: how do we relate to difficulty and how easily we can spin into a truly unhelpful response. This one doesn't need a lot of interpretation it's pretty clear: 

"It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a brahman, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short... until I know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored... until I know his home village, town, or city... until I know whether the bow with which I was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until I know whether the bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the feathers of the shaft with which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, or another bird... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.' The man would die and those things would still remain unknown to him. 

The context in the sutta is a little philosophical: there's an argument going on about such hot topics as whether the cosmos is eternal or not or whether the Buddha still exists after his body dies (Lotus Sutra fans will have a little insight there!). In the story of the sutta this monk named Malunkyaputta is obsessed by these questions and has just been sitting up all night worrying about it - he can't believe Buddha hasn't clarified these subtle points of metaphysics and he's losing his mind over it all. And the Buddha gave him this teaching: your obsession with these questions isn't doing you any good, your conditioning has hit you with an arrow of obsessive need to know. How about just pulling it out and letting go of the whole thing? 

But in a way that's actually not so weird. We all get obsessed by ideas. We all want to understand how it and we work. Obsession and identification with different ideas leads to all kinds of conflicts and even wars - quite a few are going on right now. 

But all that as it may be when something hurts do you get obsessed with trying to figure out why? What kind of injury is this? Where'd it come from? What's it about? To the point where you just can't let it go and won't accept help? Righteousness is here too isn't it? I'd rather be wounded and a martyr than accept help or move on. 

There's an interesting third early teaching on how do we know what to believe anyway but I'll leave that for another day to leave time to discuss. 

Do you throw second darts? Do you obsess over your woundedness to the point of not inviting or allowing healing or help? Do you get wound up in righteousness? What does it look and feel like when you resist what's actually happening? Maybe also a little exploring here of the use of distraction, do you distract in pleasurable things (Netflix) to avoid feeling the pain from the first dart or the arrow? Have any examples from your life? [that you feel comfortable sharing?] 

Let's discuss and I want to practice a timed turns speaking and listening practice that's really quite deep. We've dabbled with this a bit but I'm thinking I'd like to have this be a common way we unpack things together. It helps to make a lot of space and also is wonderfully fair: each person gets exactly the same amount of time and space. 

Link to abbreviated handout

https://docs.google.com/document/d/13KQMykwhcidIu8eJ3p7YBiBpTR1-48It/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=110771854794023859611&rtpof=true&sd=true

Full text below

See also:

• "A Look at the Kalama Sutta," by Bhikkhu Bodhi.

• "Lost in Quotation," by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

"The Right to Ask Questions," by Larry Rosenberg.

Three Original Teachings from Buddhism’s Pali Canon Translations from accesstoinsight.org 

Introduction from Tim: Buddhism is the most important source tradition informing the mindfulness movement. Here we sample three teachings from Early Buddhism’s Pali Canon. Two provide direct and useful teachings that we can share in class as teaching stories and the third is the essential teaching on how to approach teachings in general. While we don’t expect to have time to study all of the original source materials informing the mindfulness movement, to dip into a few is valuable. This material is a little repetitive as it’s based on the oral tradition, feel free to skim a bit! 

Teaching #1:  Sallatha Sutta:

The Dart Notes from Tim: the short teaching is the origin of the wonderful parable of the two darts. I use this all the time in mindfulness classes and it's the one overt bit of Buddhism that's always in my class manuals. Many people have found it helpful as an image and teaching as it includes both acceptance (of the first dart) and empowerment (reducing our second dart throwing). Although it's not always possible to know original sources of old stories and teachings and it's fine, within reason, to restate the summaries of others, this is one is short and accessible and we can feel god about having studied the original teaching. 

"An untaught worldling, O monks, experiences pleasant feelings, he experiences painful feelings and he experiences neutral feelings. A well-taught noble disciple likewise experiences pleasant, painful and neutral feelings. Now what is the distinction, the diversity, the difference that exists herein between a well-taught noble disciple and an untaught worldling? "When an untaught worldling is touched by a painful (bodily) feeling, he worries and grieves, he laments, beats his breast, weeps and is distraught. He thus experiences two kinds of feelings, a bodily and a mental feeling. It is as if a man were pierced by a dart and, following the first piercing, he is hit by a second dart. So that person will experience feelings caused by two darts. It is similar with an untaught worldling: when touched by a painful (bodily) feeling, he worries and grieves, he laments, beats his breast, weeps and is distraught. So he experiences two kinds of feeling: a bodily and a mental feeling. "Having been touched by that painful feeling, he resists (and resents) it. Then in him who so resists (and resents) that painful feeling, an underlying tendency of resistance against that painful feeling comes to underlie (his mind). Under the impact of that painful feeling he then proceeds to enjoy sensual happiness. And why does he do so? An untaught worldling, O monks, does not know of any other escape from painful feelings except the enjoyment of sensual happiness. Then in him who enjoys sensual happiness, an underlying tendency to lust for pleasant feelings comes to underlie (his mind). He does not know, according to facts, the arising and ending of these feelings, nor the gratification, the danger and the escape, connected with these feelings. In him who lacks that knowledge, an underlying tendency to ignorance as to neutral feelings comes to underlie (his mind). When he experiences a pleasant feeling, a painful feeling or a neutral feeling, he feels it as one fettered by it. Such a one, O monks, is called an untaught worldling who is fettered by birth, by old age, by death, by sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair. He is fettered by suffering, this I declare. "But in the case of a well-taught noble disciple, O monks, when he is touched by a painful feeling, he will not worry nor grieve and lament, he will not beat his breast and weep, nor will he be distraught. It is one kind of feeling he experiences, a bodily one, but not a mental feeling. It is as if a man were pierced by a dart, but was not hit by a second dart following the first one. So this person experiences feelings caused by a single dart only. It is similar with a well-taught noble disciple: when touched by a painful feeling, he will no worry nor grieve and lament, he will not beat his breast and weep, nor will he be distraught. He experiences one single feeling, a bodily one. "Having been touched by that painful feeling, he does not resist (and resent) it. Hence, in him no underlying tendency of resistance against that painful feeling comes to underlie (his mind). Under the impact of that painful feeling he does not proceed to enjoy sensual happiness. And why not? As a well-taught noble disciple he knows of an escape from painful feelings other than by enjoying sensual happiness. Then in him who does not proceed to enjoy sensual happiness, no underlying tendency to lust for pleasant feelings comes to underlie (his mind). He knows, according to facts, the arising and ending of those feelings, and the gratification, the danger and the escape connected with these feelings. In him who knows thus, no underlying tendency to ignorance as to neutral feelings comes to underlie (his mind). When he experiences a pleasant feeling, a painful feeling or a neutral feeling, he feels it as one who is not fettered by it. Such a one, O monks, is called a well-taught noble disciple who is not fettered by birth, by old age, by death, by sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair. He is not fettered to suffering, this I declare. "This, O monks, is the distinction, the diversity, the difference that exists between a well-taught noble disciple and an untaught worldling." 

Teaching #2: Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta: The Shorter Instructions to Malunkya 

Notes from Tim: This is a classic teaching on being wise in what we attend to. The opening section (which is less important to us as mindfulness teachers) is a dialog between Buddha and one of his students about whether contemplating cosmology is helpful to our project of reducing suffering (conclusion: nope). The middle section is I think most valuable to us as mindfulness teachers - I have flagged this with a note "key passage" - here a fantastic parable about how involved we get in worrying about the why of our suffering instead of just getting on with healing and growth. 

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Then, as Ven. Malunkyaputta was alone in seclusion, this train of thought arose in his awareness: "These positions that are undeclared, set aside, discarded by the Blessed One — 'The cosmos is eternal,' 'The cosmos is not eternal,' 'The cosmos is finite,' 'The cosmos is infinite,' 'The soul & the body are the same,' 'The soul is one thing and the body another,' 'After death a Tathagata exists,' 'After death a Tathagata does not exist,' 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist,' 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist' — I don't approve, I don't accept that the Blessed One has not declared them to me. I'll go ask the Blessed One about this matter. If he declares to me that 'The cosmos is eternal,' that 'The cosmos is not eternal,' that 'The cosmos is finite,' that 'The cosmos is infinite,' that 'The soul & the body are the same,' that 'The soul is one thing and the body another,' that 'After death a Tathagata exists,' that 'After death a Tathagata does not exist,' that 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist,' or that 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,' then I will live the holy life under him. If he does not declare to me that 'The cosmos is eternal,'... or that 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,' then I will renounce the training and return to the lower life." Then, when it was evening, Ven. Malunkyaputta arose from seclusion and went to the Blessed One. On arrival, having bowed down, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, "Lord, just now, as I was alone in seclusion, this train of thought arose in my awareness: 'These positions that are undeclared, set aside, discarded by the Blessed One... I don't approve, I don't accept that the Blessed One has not declared them to me. I'll go ask the Blessed One about this matter. If he declares to me that "The cosmos is eternal,"... or that "After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist," then I will live the holy life under him. If he does not declare to me that "The cosmos is eternal,"... or that "After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist," then I will renounce the training and return to the lower life.' "Lord, if the Blessed One knows that 'The cosmos is eternal,' then may he declare to me that 'The cosmos is eternal.' If he knows that 'The cosmos is not eternal,' then may he declare to me that 'The cosmos is not eternal.' But if he doesn't know or see whether the cosmos is eternal or not eternal, then, in one who is unknowing & unseeing, the straightforward thing is to admit, 'I don't know. I don't see.'... If he doesn't know or see whether after death a Tathagata exists... does not exist... both exists & does not exist... neither exists nor does not exist,' then, in one who is unknowing & unseeing, the straightforward thing is to admit, 'I don't know. I don't see.'" "Malunkyaputta, did I ever say to you, 'Come, Malunkyaputta, live the holy life under me, and I will declare to you that 'The cosmos is eternal,' or 'The cosmos is not eternal,' or 'The cosmos is finite,' or 'The cosmos is infinite,' or 'The soul & the body are the same,' or 'The soul is one thing and the body another,' or 'After death a Tathagata exists,' or 'After death a Tathagata does not exist,' or 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist,' or 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist'?" "No, lord." "And did you ever say to me, 'Lord, I will live the holy life under the Blessed One and [in return] he will declare to me that 'The cosmos is eternal,' or 'The cosmos is not eternal,' or 'The cosmos is finite,' or 'The cosmos is infinite,' or 'The soul & the body are the same,' or 'The soul is one thing and the body another,' or 'After death a Tathagata exists,' or 'After death a Tathagata does not exist,' or 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist,' or 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist'?" "No, lord." "Then that being the case, foolish man, who are you to be claiming grievances/making demands of anyone? "Malunkyaputta, if anyone were to say, 'I won't live the holy life under the Blessed One as long as he does not declare to me that "The cosmos is eternal,"... or that "After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,"' the man would die and those things would still remain undeclared by the Tathagata. [Key passage -Tim] "It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a brahman, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short... until I know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored... until I know his home village, town, or city... until I know whether the bow with which I was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until I know whether the bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the feathers of the shaft with which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, or another bird... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.' The man would die and those things would still remain unknown to him. "In the same way, if anyone were to say, 'I won't live the holy life under the Blessed One as long as he does not declare to me that 'The cosmos is eternal,'... or that 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,' the man would die and those things would still remain undeclared by the Tathagata. "Malunkyaputta, it's not the case that when there is the view, 'The cosmos is eternal,' there is the living of the holy life. And it's not the case that when there is the view, 'The cosmos is not eternal,' there is the living of the holy life. When there is the view, 'The cosmos is eternal,' and when there is the view, 'The cosmos is not eternal,' there is still the birth, there is the aging, there is the death, there is the sorrow, lamentation, pain, despair, & distress whose destruction I make known right in the here & now. "It's not the case that when there is the view, 'The cosmos is finite,' there is the living of the holy life. And it's not the case that when there is the view, 'The cosmos is infinite,' there is the living of the holy life. When there is the view, 'The cosmos is finite,' and when there is the view, 'The cosmos is infinite,' there is still the birth, there is the aging, there is the death, there is the sorrow, lamentation, pain, despair, & distress whose destruction I make known right in the here & now. "It's not the case that when there is the view, 'The soul & the body are the same,' there is the living of the holy life. And it's not the case that when there is the view, 'The soul is one thing and the body another,' there is the living of the holy life. When there is the view, 'The soul & the body are the same,' and when there is the view, 'The soul is one thing and the body another,' there is still the birth, there is the aging, there is the death, there is the sorrow, lamentation, pain, despair, & distress whose destruction I make known right in the here & now. "It's not the case that when there is the view, 'After death a Tathagata exists,' there is the living of the holy life. And it's not the case that when there is the view, 'After death a Tathagata does not exist,' there is the living of the holy life. And it's not the case that when there is the view, 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist,' there is the living of the holy life. And it's not the case that when there is the view, 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist' there is the living of the holy life. When there is the view, 'After death a Tathagata exists'... 'After death a Tathagata does not exist'... 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist'... 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,' there is still the birth, there is the aging, there is the death, there is the sorrow, lamentation, pain, despair, & distress whose destruction I make known right in the here & now. "So, Malunkyaputta, remember what is undeclared by me as undeclared, and what is declared by me as declared. And what is undeclared by me? 'The cosmos is eternal,' is undeclared by me. 'The cosmos is not eternal,' is undeclared by me. 'The cosmos is finite'... 'The cosmos is infinite'... 'The soul & the body are the same'... 'The soul is one thing and the body another'... 'After death a Tathagata exists'... 'After death a Tathagata does not exist'... 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist'... 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,' is undeclared by me. "And why are they undeclared by me? Because they are not connected with the goal, are not fundamental to the holy life. They do not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are undeclared by me. "And what is declared by me? 'This is stress,' is declared by me. 'This is the origination of stress,' is declared by me. 'This is the cessation of stress,' is declared by me. 'This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress,' is declared by me. And why are they declared by me? Because they are connected with the goal, are fundamental to the holy life. They lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are declared by me. "So, Malunkyaputta, remember what is undeclared by me as undeclared, and what is declared by me as declared." That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, Ven. Malunkyaputta delighted in the Blessed One's words. 

Teaching #3: Kalama Sutta: A Teaching For the Kalamas Translator's note (by Thanissaro Bhikkhu): Although this discourse is often cited as the Buddha's carte blanche for following one's own sense of right and wrong, it actually says something much more rigorous than that. Traditions are not to be followed simply because they are traditions. Reports (such as historical accounts or news) are not to be followed simply because the source seems reliable. One's own preferences are not to be followed simply because they seem logical or resonate with one's feelings. Instead, any view or belief must be tested by the results it yields when put into practice; and — to guard against the possibility of any bias or limitations in one's understanding of those results — they must further be checked against the experience of people who are wise. The ability to question and test one's beliefs in an appropriate way is called appropriate attention. The ability to recognize and choose wise people as mentors is called having admirable friends. 

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One, on a wandering tour among the Kosalans with a large community of monks, arrived at Kesaputta, a town of the Kalamas. The Kalamas of Kesaputta heard it said, "Gotama the contemplative — the son of the Sakyans, having gone forth from the Sakyan clan — has arrived at Kesaputta. And of that Master Gotama this fine reputation has spread: 'He is indeed a Blessed One, worthy, & rightly self-awakened, consummate in knowledge & conduct, well-gone, a knower of the cosmos, an unexcelled trainer of those persons ready to be tamed, teacher of human & divine beings, awakened, blessed. He has made known — having realized it through direct knowledge — this world with its devas, maras, & brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & brahmans, their rulers & common people; has explained the Dhamma admirable in the beginning, admirable in the middle, admirable in the end; has expounded the holy life both in its particulars & in its essence, entirely perfect, surpassingly pure. It is good to see such a worthy one.'" So the Kalamas of Kesaputta went to the Blessed One. On arrival, some of them bowed down to him and sat to one side. Some of them exchanged courteous greetings with him and, after an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, sat to one side. Some of them sat to one side having saluted him with their hands palm-to-palm over their hearts. Some of them sat to one side having announced their name & clan. Some of them sat to one side in silence. As they sat there, the Kalamas of Kesaputta said to the Blessed One, "Lord, there are some brahmans & contemplatives who come to Kesaputta. They expound & glorify their own doctrines, but as for the doctrines of others, they deprecate them, revile them, show contempt for them, & disparage them. And then other brahmans & contemplatives come to Kesaputta. They expound & glorify their own doctrines, but as for the doctrines of others, they deprecate them, revile them, show contempt for them, & disparage them. They leave us absolutely uncertain & in doubt: Which of these venerable brahmans & contemplatives are speaking the truth, and which ones are lying?" "Of course you are uncertain, Kalamas. Of course you are in doubt. When there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born. So in this case, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering' — then you should abandon them. "What do you think, Kalamas? When greed arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?" "For harm, lord." "And this greedy person, overcome by greed, his mind possessed by greed, kills living beings, takes what is not given, goes after another person's wife, tells lies, and induces others to do likewise, all of which is for long-term harm & suffering." "Yes, lord." "Now, what do you think, Kalamas? When aversion arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?" "For harm, lord." "And this aversive person, overcome by aversion, his mind possessed by aversion, kills living beings, takes what is not given, goes after another person's wife, tells lies, and induces others to do likewise, all of which is for long-term harm & suffering." "Yes, lord." "Now, what do you think, Kalamas? When delusion arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?" "For harm, lord." "And this deluded person, overcome by delusion, his mind possessed by delusion, kills living beings, takes what is not given, goes after another person's wife, tells lies, and induces others to do likewise, all of which is for long-term harm & suffering." "Yes, lord." "So what do you think, Kalamas: Are these qualities skillful or unskillful?" "Unskillful, lord." "Blameworthy or blameless?" "Blameworthy, lord." "Criticized by the wise or praised by the wise?" "Criticized by the wise, lord." "When adopted & carried out, do they lead to harm & to suffering, or not?" "When adopted & carried out, they lead to harm & to suffering. That is how it appears to us." "So, as I said, Kalamas: 'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering" — then you should abandon them.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said. "Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them. "What do you think, Kalamas? When lack of greed arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?" "For welfare, lord." "And this ungreedy person, not overcome by greed, his mind not possessed by greed, doesn't kill living beings, take what is not given, go after another person's wife, tell lies, or induce others to do likewise, all of which is for long-term welfare & happiness." "Yes, lord." "What do you think, Kalamas? When lack of aversion arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?" "For welfare, lord." "And this unaversive person, not overcome by aversion, his mind not possessed by aversion, doesn't kill living beings, take what is not given, go after another person's wife, tell lies, or induce others to do likewise, all of which is for long-term welfare & happiness." "Yes, lord." "What do you think, Kalamas? When lack of delusion arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?" "For welfare, lord." "And this undeluded person, not overcome by delusion, his mind not possessed by delusion, doesn't kill living beings, take what is not given, go after another person's wife, tell lies, or induce others to do likewise, all of which is for long-term welfare & happiness." "Yes, lord." "So what do you think, Kalamas: Are these qualities skillful or unskillful?" "Skillful, lord." "Blameworthy or blameless?" "Blameless, lord." "Criticized by the wise or praised by the wise?" "Praised by the wise, lord." "When adopted & carried out, do they lead to welfare & to happiness, or not?" "When adopted & carried out, they lead to welfare & to happiness. That is how it appears to us." "So, as I said, Kalamas: 'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness" — then you should enter & remain in them.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said. "Now, Kalamas, one who is a disciple of the noble ones — thus devoid of greed, devoid of ill will, undeluded, alert, & resolute — keeps pervading the first direction [the east] — as well as the second direction, the third, & the fourth — with an awareness imbued with good will. Thus he keeps pervading above, below, & all around, everywhere & in every respect the all-encompassing cosmos with an awareness imbued with good will: abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will. "He keeps pervading the first direction — as well as the second direction, the third, & the fourth — with an awareness imbued with compassion. Thus he keeps pervading above, below, & all around, everywhere & in every respect the all-encompassing cosmos with an awareness imbued with compassion: abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will. "He keeps pervading the first direction — as well as the second direction, the third, & the fourth — with an awareness imbued with appreciation. Thus he keeps pervading above, below, & all around, everywhere & in every respect the all-encompassing cosmos with an awareness imbued with appreciation: abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will. "He keeps pervading the first direction — as well as the second direction, the third, & the fourth — with an awareness imbued with equanimity. Thus he keeps pervading above, below, & all around, everywhere & in every respect the all-encompassing cosmos with an awareness imbued with equanimity: abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will. "Now, Kalamas, one who is a disciple of the noble ones — his mind thus free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, & pure — acquires four assurances in the here-&-now: "'If there is a world after death, if there is the fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then this is the basis by which, with the break-up of the body, after death, I will reappear in a good destination, the heavenly world.' This is the first assurance he acquires. "'But if there is no world after death, if there is no fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then here in the present life I look after myself with ease — free from hostility, free from ill will, free from trouble.' This is the second assurance he acquires. "'If evil is done through acting, still I have willed no evil for anyone. Having done no evil action, from where will suffering touch me?' This is the third assurance he acquires. "'But if no evil is done through acting, then I can assume myself pure in both respects.' This is the fourth assurance he acquires. "One who is a disciple of the noble ones — his mind thus free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, & pure — acquires these four assurances in the here-&-now." "So it is, Blessed One. So it is, O One Well-gone. One who is a disciple of the noble ones — his mind thus free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, & pure — acquires four assurances in the here-&-now: "'If there is a world after death, if there is the fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then this is the basis by which, with the break-up of the body, after death, I will reappear in a good destination, the heavenly world.' This is the first assurance he acquires. "'But if there is no world after death, if there is no fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then here in the present life I look after myself with ease — free from hostility, free from ill will, free from trouble.' This is the second assurance he acquires. "'If evil is done through acting, still I have willed no evil for anyone. Having done no evil action, from where will suffering touch me?' This is the third assurance he acquires. "'But if no evil is done through acting, then I can assume myself pure in both ways.' This is the fourth assurance he acquires. "One who is a disciple of the noble ones — his mind thus free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, & pure — acquires these four assurances in the here-&-now. "Magnificent, lord! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has the Blessed One — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. We go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of monks. May the Blessed One remember us as lay followers who have gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life." 

See also: ·

"A Look at the Kalama Sutta," by Bhikkhu Bodhi

"Lost in Quotation," by Thanissaro Bhikkhu

"The Right to Ask Questions," by Larry Rosenberg