As the unorthodox samana religions [Jainism of India] grew and attained large followings, their groups too came to be known by the secular terms sangha or gana. In accordance with this practice, Buddhism referred to its group of monks as the Sangha (to be precise, sangha meant a group of more than four or five and gana a group of two or three).

Primitive Buddhist beliefs insist that whether or not a person abandons secular life determines the degree to which he can become enlightened. There are four such degrees or stages—known as the four merits: entrance into the stream of sanctification (sotapanna), the state in which the person will be born once again into this world (sakadagamin), the state in which no return to this world is necessary (anagamin), and the state of perfect enlightenment (arhat). (Page 103)

The third of the four stages is that of the hermit (vanaprastha). When the householder had completed his domestic duties, when his heirs had passed through the studentship stage and were fully grown, and when he himself had reached the age of fifty or so and had gray hair, he would resign his family responsibilities and retire to live a secluded life, most often a life of disciplines conducted in forests.

Ancient Indian philosophy propounded four ideals for mankind: love of pleasure (kama), material gain (artha), morality and religion (dharma), and devotion to spiritual pursuits (moksha). The young man is devoted to kama, the man in the prime of life to artha, and the old man to moksha. Righteous duty, or dharma, is considered necessary in all the stages of life. When a man who had completed his duties as householder was about to enter the third, or hermit, stage of life, he was considered to have already given up love of pleasure and desire for material gain and to be ready to emphasize religious understanding.

In summary, then, as long as human beings are relatively content with their way of life, they feel no need for religious faith. They turn to deities and Buddhas for aid in time of illness, poverty, trouble, or other suffering. Faith of this kind is egoistic in that it is directed toward the elimination of the actual suffering of the involved individual. But as the person advances in faith and has the opportunity to observe coolly his own fate and the nature of the society around him, he grows from an understanding of the law of cause and effect alone to an understanding of the wider Law of Causation. This, in turn, gradually brings about alterations in his ideals and values. A true comprehension of basic Buddhist doctrines—the Law of Causation and the Seal of the Three Laws: that all things are impermanent, that nothing has an ego, and that nirvana is quiescence – changes a self-oriented faith into a faith taking into consideration other people and all sentient beings. Faith then leads from solving issues of common, ordinary suffering to a higher faith. This is the meaning of growth in religious faith. (Page 98)

Nanda undertook religious training for the sake of being born in heaven, where he would possess the beautiful women, because, relying on the law of cause and effect, he did not understand the wider Law of Causation. The people around him despised him because he sought only his own egoistic ends and ignored concord and the total development and perfection of others. After serious reflection, however, Nanda came to understand the Law of Causation.

Such understanding prompts awareness of the need to strive for the perfection of one’s own personality and of all society. If society as a whole improves and develops, the happiness of the individual will be guaranteed. If society is happy, the individual and all of his fellows will be happy. This is the meaning of true happiness and of the realization of the ideal Buddhist realm. Buddhist training is for the sake of realizing such a realm. When Nanda came to see this, he began training on the basis of the Law of Causation. This enabled him to attain the enlightenment of an arhat. (Page 96)

(See also How Nanda, Shakyamuni’s Half-Brother, Came To Be A Disciple)

The law of cause and effect pertains to the operations of all phenomena in the universe—not just to good and evil. It is taught in relation to what is called the Law of Causation, but there is a difference between the two. The law of cause and effect deals with the individual in terms of a temporal chain extending from past into present and then into the future. The Law of Causation, however, deals not merely with the individual but also with spatial and temporal relations among individuals and everything in their environment: family, local society, school, regional society, national society, international society, the natural environment, politics, economy, culture, spiritual fields, natural phenomena, and so on. An accurate interpretation of the world and of human life, this law is extremely extensive. It is the basis on which Buddhism teaches the impossibility of true happiness for an individual without development in the direction of happiness for all the other people in that individual’s environment. (Page 96)

Before dealing with the Four Noble Truths, Buddhism teaches the everyday common-sense law that a good cause produces a good effect, a bad cause a bad effect; and both kinds of causes, suitable rewards and retributions. Even small acts of good and small acts of evil unrelated to other acts of good and evil do not disappear without a trace. Instead, each is stored up to form the intellect, personality, customary behavior, and physical makeup of the individual committing them. They become part of the personality, which they daily alter in the direction of good or bad. Acts of good and evil are intimately related to the individual’s happiness and fate. All human beings must understand that everything in this world is related according to the inflexible law of cause and effect. (Page 95)

Shakyamuni entered the [sacred-fire room of Uruvilva-Kashyapa] and sat in meditation. Surely enough, the malevolent snake came out and tried several times to attack him. But because he had a great heart of compassion for all sentient beings and felt no animosity toward the snake, Shakyamuni subdued it with benevolence and love. Entering the state of meditation known as the heart of benevolence, he calmed the fierce serpent, reduced it to a small, harmless creature, and went calmly on with his meditation throughout a peaceful night. …

Though it is a slight digression, I should like to offer a few words of explanation about the heart of benevolence, the state of concentration in meditation that Shakyamuni used to subdue the fierce serpent in the sacred-fire room of Uruvilva-Kashyapa. This state, which can be attained by anyone, refers to the benevolence that is one of the four infinite virtues–benevolence, compassion, giving happiness, and impartiality–and means constant compassion and kindness for all beings, not just for those that are dear but also for unrelated beings and even enemies against whom one might otherwise entertain bitterness.

According to Buddhist classics, eleven categories of merit attach to the practicing of the heart of benevolence. These categories are: peaceful sleep; peaceful awakening; no bad dreams; constantly clear, bright facial complexion; love from other people; love from nonhuman beings; protection of the gods; imperviousness to fire, wounds from blades, and poison; free entry into the concentration stage of meditation; at death, freedom from confusion (death comes as easily as sleep); after death, even if enlightenment has not been attained, at least the privilege of rebirth in a happy state of the Brahma heaven. (Page 64)

On his way from Benares to Uruvela in Magadha, Shakyamuni entered a quiet forest and began seated meditation. At that time, thirty young men of royal blood, all but one with their young wives, were enjoying themselves in the woods. One of the young men was unmarried, and a harlot had been procured for him. As the others were lost in their amusements, the harlot stole their gold, silver, and jewels and ran away. When they saw what had happened, the young men and women hastened in search of her. Coming upon Shakyamuni seated in a grove, they asked if he had seen the woman. He replied by asking why they were looking for her. After hearing their reason, he asked, “Which is more important, to seek that woman or to seek yourselves?” They answered that seeking themselves was more important. Whereupon Shakyamuni said, “Sit there, and I will teach you the Law whereby to seek yourselves.” They then listened to his sermon.

Following his usual custom, Shakyamuni taught first the triple doctrine of almsgiving to the poor and holy people, abiding by the moral precepts, and the assurance that good acts are rewarded by rebirth in a blessed state. From this he gradually moved to the Four Noble Truths. Upon hearing his words, the young men came to understand the true nature of human life throughout the world and attained the pure and spotless Eye of the Law. They requested to be allowed to abandon the secular world and were accepted as members of the Order.

These three types of learning are precepts, concentration, and wisdom. Precepts (or morality) are for the sake of correctly training mind and body and establishing correct physical and mental habits. Concentration, or meditation, is for the sake of spiritual unification after the mind and body have been properly trained. It produces a state in which the mind is as clear as a mirror and as still as the surface of an undisturbed body of water. Correct wisdom, reached when this kind of spiritual unification has been attained, makes possible correct judgments and suitable actions. In the light of this progression, the order for training and attainment in the three types of learning is this: precepts, concentration, and wisdom.

But, since the three types of learning correspond to three aspects of the human spirit—intellect (wisdom), emotion (concentration), and volition (precepts)—and since all three of these exist simultaneously as parts of the human spirit, the three kinds of learning, too, are not independent of each other but form a unity. From this viewpoint, there is no question of precedence among them. Nonetheless, for the sake of attainment of the states toward which the three kinds of learning are directed, the order precepts, concentration, and wisdom is reasonable.