Real goal of Pure Land Buddhism?

[agorman]

By what I read so far, some people (Shinran) say just reaching the Pure Land means one acquired buddhahood. Others say one ends up fusing with Amitabha (in the end only Amitabha remains?!). Others say once you reach the Pure Land you need one more rebirth/reincarnation before reaching Enlightment. But they don't explain exactly what that "Enlightment" is all about. So how do I know which one of those alternatives is correct?

The last time I tried this school of Buddhism I had 3 Buddhas on my altar; Kwan Yin, Amitabha and Shakyamuni. And something odd happened. I started to get telepathic information from Amitabha; channelings which guided me to individual liberation of my true self from Maya. I heard no sound; they were what I can describe as "mental messages" or as some people say "inspiration". I actually got freightened and I thought I was becoming insane; I even tried to return the Buddha back to the store, but the seller said that was bad luck.

So Amitabha said to me the goal was no annihilation, no fusing with him, no union with the All, no eternal state of pure consciousness, but just becoming a Buddha, like him. Not becoming him, but becoming like him, one more Buddha. Was that the famous "wisdom of separation" that he's supposed to teach? That goal was OK for me.

But as the weeks passed I felt my mind was shutting down. I turned very lazy and all I wanted to do was to stay there in front of the Buddhas all day, to do nothing and think of nothing. Eventually this begun to affect my daily life and I removed them from my altar. Now I just keep trying stuff on my own, but I'm in no particular path. Anyway, what happened to me with the Buddhas still puzzles me to this day.

Thanks in advance for any answers.

 

[ratikala]

dear agorman ,

By what I read so far, some people (Shinran) say just reaching the Pure Land means one acquired buddhahood. Others say one ends up fusing with Amitabha (in the end only Amitabha remains?!). Others say once you reach the Pure Land you need one more rebirth/reincarnation before reaching Enlightment. But they don't explain exactly what that "Enlightment" is all about. So how do I know which one of those alternatives is correct?

I can only answer through knowledge of mahayana buddhism through tibetan buddhism , although I belive the understanding to be the same it is just the practices which differ .
to my knowledge one may be born in amitabha's pure land simply through prayer in this life , by generating a desire to be born in amitabha's pure land , one does not need to be enlightened but may acheive enilghtenment by being born in sukhavati , one does not fuse or merge with amitabha , one in efect becomes a bhodisattva of that realm , a bodhisattva may take rebirth through compassion , through his desire his desire to help living beings atain freedom from the cycle of birth and death .

The last time I tried this school of Buddhism I had 3 Buddhas on my altar; Kwan Yin, Amitabha and Shakyamuni. And something odd happened. I started to get telepathic information from Amitabha; channelings which guided me to individual liberation of my true self from Maya. I heard no sound; they were what I can describe as "mental messages" or as some people say "inspiration". I actually got freightened and I thought I was becoming insane; I even tried to return the Buddha back to the store, but the seller said that was bad luck.

in a way you could call these experiences glimpses of ones liberation from maya , these "mental mesages" you describe , are in a way cracks in our worldly conception through which pure light of knowledge may shine in .
I can understand you saying that you became frightened , yes , the revelation of the true nature of reality if we were to see it all at once may by comparison to our worldly understanding might send us temporarily crazy , untill we realise that the true craziness to be our deluded worldly conception !

So Amitabha said to me the goal was no annihilation, no fusing with him, no union with the All, no eternal state of pure consciousness, but just becoming a Buddha, like him. Not becoming him, but becoming like him, one more Buddha. Was that the famous "wisdom of separation" that he's supposed to teach? That goal was OK for me.

just becoming like him , :yes:

one of his attendant bodhisattvas .

But as the weeks passed I felt my mind was shutting down. I turned very lazy and all I wanted to do was to stay there in front of the Buddhas all day, to do nothing and think of nothing. Eventually this begun to affect my daily life and I removed them from my altar. Now I just keep trying stuff on my own, but I'm in no particular path. Anyway, what happened to me with the Buddhas still puzzles me to this day.

this opening up to reality may take time and we should all take it as gently as we feel we need , prehaps it felt that your mind as you previously perceived it was shutting down but in truth through buddhist practice you are actualy opening up the closed , or limited worldly conception that the mind presently perceives . thus you correctly observed " individual liberation of my true self from Maya." , it is simply that this liberation was a glimpse of that reality , one has these momentary flashes of insight . the next stage is to work with such understandings .

in truth putting your buddhas away is some what like a child returning to the comforting sarroundings of the home , in this case the home is maya , but because we are accustomed to illusion we are comfortable with it , so we wish to return to that comfort , but as that child grows he becomes more curious about the outside world and ventures out again . simmilarly we have stages in our spiritual development when we become curious , so we venture out as you did , we all seek pure knowledge , but sometimes pure knowledge is just to brilliant , too astounding , we then need to digest that revelation .

Thanks in advance for any answers.

I canot truely give you any answers , as the answers you need will come from within , I can only give you reflections from my own understanding .

one thing I can say is that I am glad that the shop didnot take back the buddha because one day you may be glad that he is still with you .
in a way you have allready taken a step towards enlightenment , giving the buddha back canot undo that experience or glimpse of a greater reality .

prehaps if I may make a suggestion , .....you say you have removed amitabha from your alter , may I suggest that instead of keeping any buddha on what we might term or think of as an "alter" , that we think in terms of placing them in a shrine .
an alter has conotations of making some form of sacrifice in return for a result . where as a shrine is a place to keep any revered personality , at a shrine we may wish to make offerings purely out of love and respect , there is no request for a fixed result it is a far gentler reciprication purely by being there your buddha will rain blessings upon you .

prehaps you allready keep him somewhere nice in your home , but in case you have put him away ? I would just like to suggest that you keep him somwhere where he can bless you , the nicest thing would be to keep him on his own personal shelf in a high and suitably respectfull place , you can offer him flowers fruit or water , any thing beautiful and pure , there is no need to recite mantra or perform any procedures that you are not comfortable with . simply offer something small each day .
all that can possibly happen is that you form a conection with that buddha making it easier to understand the dharma that they reveal .that connection comes by way of their blessing, as it is by their blessings that obscurations are removed .

I often feel that without propper guidance we can rush in to a practice without fully understanding what we are doing , this is not our fault as it is natural to want to run into things , it is just a sad consequence of this age that we do not grow up with sufficiant guidance from an early age , so the unfortunate consequence is that sometimes we scare ourselves (as hapend with you) . this is why I am advocating a simple , simple one flower a day routine as steady steps are actualy much wiser than rushing in , with out the support which is so necesary .it is by no way your fault it is just a concequence of this age .

any how I hope my reflections are of some use
and if you are offering any flowers ...(or of course incence is allso a nice simple offering you could use) .... offer one from me , :namaste

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I'll try to address these points the best I can, but my answers will be tinged with ideas from my school of Zen, although there is some overlap between the two.

By what I read so far, some people (Shinran) say just reaching the Pure Land means one acquired buddhahood. Others say one ends up fusing with Amitabha (in the end only Amitabha remains?!). Others say once you reach the Pure Land you need one more rebirth/reincarnation before reaching Enlightment. But they don't explain exactly what that "Enlightment" is all about. So how do I know which one of those alternatives is correct?

I've never read in any of the Pure Land teachings where it is assumed that once one reaches Sukhavati, they have attained buddhahood or enlightenment. Nor have I heard of any teaching that one becomes one with Amitabha. What I have read is that, once one reaches the Pure Land, one's karma no longer affects them, thereby giving them easy practice. From here, one has the choice to either become a Buddha, or become a bodhisattva.

The last time I tried this school of Buddhism I had 3 Buddhas on my altar; Kwan Yin, Amitabha and Shakyamuni. And something odd happened. I started to get telepathic information from Amitabha; channelings which guided me to individual liberation of my true self from Maya. I heard no sound; they were what I can describe as "mental messages" or as some people say "inspiration". I actually got freightened and I thought I was becoming insane; I even tried to return the Buddha back to the store, but the seller said that was bad luck.

In Zen, one is taught to ignore any messages, visions, prophecies, or powers one comes across in meditation, as these are all hindrances to the path, whether they are real or illusion. So, from my viewpoint, I would say to ignore them, and keep up with your practice. Visions of Amitabha are not uncommon amongst practitioners of Pure Land, or even of his two attendant bodhisattvas, but one should not cling to these, or think of these as goals along the path.

So Amitabha said to me the goal was no annihilation, no fusing with him, no union with the All, no eternal state of pure consciousness, but just becoming a Buddha, like him. Not becoming him, but becoming like him, one more Buddha. Was that the famous "wisdom of separation" that he's supposed to teach? That goal was OK for me.

Up until the point where you said "not becoming him, but like him", I would have agreed. There is no dualities at all, therefore, we are all Shakyamuni, we are all Amitabha, we are all Vairocana. There is no difference, because the dharmakaya is one.

But as the weeks passed I felt my mind was shutting down. I turned very lazy and all I wanted to do was to stay there in front of the Buddhas all day, to do nothing and think of nothing. Eventually this begun to affect my daily life and I removed them from my altar. Now I just keep trying stuff on my own, but I'm in no particular path. Anyway, what happened to me with the Buddhas still puzzles me to this day.

Thanks in advance for any answers.

This can happen when one's practice is focused solely on mental cultivation, meditation, and the attaining of perfect wisdom, and not tempered with compassion, loving-kindness, and helping others. You should have also practiced metta bhavana, or some other such practice, to give one the quality of compassion with the goal to practice loving-kindness to all sentient beings. If one is not dedicated to the Triple Gem, and practice the precepts, our practice can actually become a hindrance. The Zen masters say that, when one sits in meditation, to expect nothing, and seek to achieve nothing, because the thought of achieving the goal of enlightenment can become a hindrance on the path. I hope this helps.

 

[agorman]

Ratikala, I already gifted all of my rupas to a friend! But rupas can be get back again (or bought) in case I need them. I'd have no problem to offer a flower for you especially after your nice and clarifying explanations.

I'm considering to put this image on my shrine, as a poster:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Amitabha_Buddha_and_Bodhisattvas.jpeg

You're right, I tend to use the word "altar", but shrine is more correct. So far I couldn't sacrifice any politician on it. The day I do that, I'll call it "altar" *sharpens ritual dagger*

I've never read in any of the Pure Land teachings where it is assumed that once one reaches Sukhavati, they have attained buddhahood or enlightenment. Nor have I heard of any teaching that one becomes one with Amitabha.

dyanaprajna2011, at:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Ddo_Shinsh%C5%AB

it says "For Shinran Shonin, who closely followed the thought of the Chinese monk Tan-luan, the Pure Land is synonymous with nirvana." So I assume this means reaching the Pure Land means reaching nirvana. I interpret this as Shinran thought just by reaching that planet one becomes a liberated being, a Buddha.

About fusing with Amitabha's mind, I think I've read that in a book, but at the time I can't find it, sorry. You will surely find something about that goal on Google.

There is no dualities at all, therefore, we are all Shakyamuni, we are all Amitabha, we are all Vairocana. There is no difference, because the dharmakaya is one.

Hmmmm dyanaprajna2011, that sounds SO much to Advaita monism to me. One thing is knowing the Ying-Yang is the Tao and another is rejecting the reality of Yin-Yang and the diversity within the Tao (which in the end results in the "10 thousand beings"). Unity is not bad because it interconnects us and separation is also good, because it allows two or more individuals to have a pleasant relationship with each other and a dynamic well-being. I see no advantage in the megalomaniac goal of becoming the All, living alone as the only being and playing to be many while I'm really just one. It would be pathetic.

But then we'd enter in the Left Hand Path vs. Right Hand Path discussion.

In Zen, one is taught to ignore any messages, visions, prophecies, or powers one comes across in meditation, as these are all hindrances to the path, whether they are real or illusion.

I think that's a big mistake. If you have a master you ignore what he's trying to teach you?

This can happen when one's practice is focused solely on mental cultivation, meditation, and the attaining of perfect wisdom, and not tempered with compassion, loving-kindness, and helping others.

Thank you, now that I read what you wrote I see. I was basically torturing myself!

So, lack of compassion is my weakness. Especially for politicians (and the Elite behind politicians). I'd like to kill them all. What a bad Buddhist I am... Although that would be so beneficial for so many sentient beings on this planet.

Anyway, thank you all again for your advice, information and patience.

 

[ratikala]

Ratikala, I already gifted all of my rupas to a friend! But rupas can be get back again (or bought) in case I need them. I'd have no problem to offer a flower for you especially after your nice and clarifying explanations.

I'm considering to put this image on my shrine, as a poster:

pictures are a very nice alternative if you do not feel comfortable with rupa's

You're right, I tend to use the word "altar", but shrine is more correct. So far I couldn't sacrifice any politician on it. The day I do that, I'll call it "altar" *sharpens ritual dagger*

of course I understand your disslike for politicians was said part tongue in cheek , but to help you a little on this rather difficult position where a hindu will csay kali yuga is the age of hypocracy and lies , that buddhists will describe it as a degenerate age , but both accknowledge that this is the fourth age in which human morality has become the most deluded and degraded , in ways this is something which we have to accept with understanding simply because it is a symptom of this age its cause has allready come about this is what buddha talkes about when he says suffering , human life is basicaly dellusion and suffering .
this does not mean that we accept this kind of society in ways it is our duty to become a bodhisattva to help aliviate this suffering . it might sound crazy but we need to recognise this the delluded state of the human mind as the normal state ! if we can look at this as a lesson we can begin to understand the nature of the human mind and how grasping causes so many problems , these corrupt politicians are desperately grasping at a reality wich does not exist , they are thinking that they can secure a position for themselves and their country by control and deception !. the wisest thing we can do is to develop commpassion for all beings as all beings are struggling and suffer under many delusions.
once we accept that life is basicaly dhukka (suffering) we are free from the delusion that we can control it , we are free to live our life in a more fruitfull way , we can devote our precious time to cultivating a loving mind we are allso better equiped to see the benifits in life and work with being a positive force in society .

dyanaprajna said from the teachings he had read , that we should not attatch to what we call visions ,
in truth we should not attatch to anything , but this does not mean that we should not observe them . we should observe them then let them go , this is the explanation of the the story of the master who told his deciple that if he saw buddha as he traversed along his path that he should kill buddha ! this sounds diss respectfull , but he is simply meaning that we should not attatch to vissions that occur through meditation .
this is relative to one type of practice and one has to understand the relevance of each practice .

dyanaprajna2011, at:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Ddo_Shinsh%C5%AB

it says "For Shinran Shonin, who closely followed the thought of the Chinese monk Tan-luan, the Pure Land is synonymous with nirvana." So I assume this means reaching the Pure Land means reaching nirvana. I interpret this as Shinran thought just by reaching that planet one becomes a liberated being, a Buddha.

it is said that simply by calling amitabhas name one may reach sukhavati , even those who still have some duobt may accheive sukhavati buy developing a mind which takes refuge in amitabha , being then born in that pure land a state of liberation is accheived where by one becomes a bodhisatva , it is said that not all bodhisatvas are fully enlightened beings , these bodhisatvas out of love and compassion return again to help sentient beings and through this pure intention they accive final and full liberation thereby acheeiving buddhahood .

About fusing with Amitabha's mind, I think I've read that in a book, but at the time I can't find it, sorry. You will surely find something about that goal on Google.

it is less a case of fusing with that pure mind but acheiving the same pure mind , if you understand the subtlty .

Hmmmm dyanaprajna2011, that sounds SO much to Advaita monism to me.

agreed ,to my mind this dosent entirely fit with mahayana veiw

One thing is knowing the Ying-Yang is the Tao and another is rejecting the reality of Yin-Yang and the diversity within the Tao (which in the end results in the "10 thousand beings"). Unity is not bad because it interconnects us and separation is also good, because it allows two or more individuals to have a pleasant relationship with each other and a dynamic well-being. I see no advantage in the megalomaniac goal of becoming the All, living alone as the only being and playing to be many while I'm really just one. It would be pathetic.

pesonaly I veiw it as one true reality ! by acheiving buddha hood we acheive perfect enlightenment , which is knowing and working within that reality , a bodhisattva atains that reality and has the choice to continue to work for the benifit of sentient beings thus there are subtle elements of his personal seperation but his mind knoes the onenrss of perfect enlightenment , this does not mean he merges with it , but becomes of that quality .

however there are many veiws concocted by un enlightened beings due to their limited understanding ,

this is why it is best not to attatch too much to insisting that it is this ! it is that ! ....Ha Ha ... hopefully one day we will find out

.in the meanwhile it is best not to attatch to strongly to any fixed mind , just continue on the path observing as you go .

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

it says "For Shinran Shonin, who closely followed the thought of the Chinese monk Tan-luan, the Pure Land is synonymous with nirvana." So I assume this means reaching the Pure Land means reaching nirvana. I interpret this as Shinran thought just by reaching that planet one becomes a liberated being, a Buddha.

Shinran's school of Jodo Shinshu was a bit more, extreme (for lack of a better word), than Honen's Jodo Shu school. For Honen, reaching Sukhavati was simply a place where one could reach enlightenment easy, because one's karma had no effect on them there. But for Shinran, this was the end result of the path. Another difference between the two was that Shinran believed that only faith in Amitabha could allow one entrance into Sukhavati, while Honen believed that some effort on the part of the believer was necessary. As a Zen Buddhist who sometimes chants the nembutsu, I'm more inclined toward Honen's approach.

Hmmmm dyanaprajna2011, that sounds SO much to Advaita monism to me.

That's probably because I'm Zen, and the two are almost identical.

One thing is knowing the Ying-Yang is the Tao and another is rejecting the reality of Yin-Yang and the diversity within the Tao (which in the end results in the "10 thousand beings"). Unity is not bad because it interconnects us and separation is also good, because it allows two or more individuals to have a pleasant relationship with each other and a dynamic well-being. I see no advantage in the megalomaniac goal of becoming the All, living alone as the only being and playing to be many while I'm really just one. It would be pathetic.

Actually, relationships are much more compassionate and cordial when one understands that all things are united into a single essence. When we learn to view other sentient beings as our own selves, we cease to do the things that cause harm. Another issue with seeing ourselves as an individual entity is that it is caused by the assumption that we have an individual ego-soul, which goes against what the Buddha taught. We are all dharmakaya, the Buddha-nature. As far as "the megalomaniac goal of becoming the All", this is not the goal, because we are already part of the "All" (which I understand to be the Buddha-nature), so there's no real point in trying to become one with it. This is counterproductive. We don't "live alone as the only being", we understand that there are other beings, with the understanding that they are not separate from ourselves. This is what the Buddha taught in the idea of dependent origination.

I think that's a big mistake. If you have a master you ignore what he's trying to teach you?

No, you understand that he/she is only a guide. This is the meaning of the famous Zen saying "a finger pointing at the moon". We cannot take our teachers, the teachings, the sutras, or anything else as other than just the finger, being sure not to confuse them with the moon. They can only point the way, ultimately, it's we ourselves who have to travel the path.

Thank you, now that I read what you wrote I see. I was basically torturing myself!

So, lack of compassion is my weakness. Especially for politicians (and the Elite behind politicians). I'd like to kill them all. What a bad Buddhist I am... Although that would be so beneficial for so many sentient beings on this planet.

Don't worry, you're not alone. I still have a huge reserve of cynicism left in me that has to be dealt with, and slowly but surely, it will be dealt with. Just take it one step at a time. You have to travel the path before you can arrive at the destination.

Anyway, thank you all again for your advice, information and patience.

No problem, and you're welcome. Anymore questions, just feel free to ask.

 

[ratikala]

dear dyanaprajna ,

Shinran's school of Jodo Shinshu was a bit more, extreme (for lack of a better word), than Honen's Jodo Shu school. For Honen, reaching Sukhavati was simply a place where one could reach enlightenment easy, because one's karma had no effect on them there. But for Shinran, this was the end result of the path. Another difference between the two was that Shinran believed that only faith in Amitabha could allow one entrance into Sukhavati, while Honen believed that some effort on the part of the believer was necessary. As a Zen Buddhist who sometimes chants the nembutsu, I'm more inclined toward Honen's approach.

for me it is good to hear an explanation of the differences in veiw from within .

That's probably because I'm Zen, and the two are almost identical.

interesting you should say this , for me coming from tibetan mahayana , I find it hard to feel a similarity with advaita ?

Actually, relationships are much more compassionate and cordial when one understands that all things are united into a single essence. When we learn to view other sentient beings as our own selves, we cease to do the things that cause harm.

I am not wishing to correct you , just that I would like to offer a veiw point for your concideration .
"relationships are much more compassionate and cordial when one understands that all things are united into a single essence."

I am agreeing with you here , but what if I were to say that your "single essence" were the true nature of phenomena realised , that we were not so much united in to a single essence , but that we are united by the realisation of that ultimate truth ?

Another issue with seeing ourselves as an individual entity is that it is caused by the assumption that we have an individual ego-soul, which goes against what the Buddha taught. We are all dharmakaya, the Buddha-nature. As far as "the megalomaniac goal of becoming the All", this is not the goal, because we are already part of the "All"

I am understanding you perfectly but wanting to replace the word all with truth ! , reality !

(which I understand to be the Buddha-nature),

I am undestanding buddha nature to be the inate propencity to realise the true nature of phenomena

so there's no real point in trying to become one with it.

exactly , no need to try to become one with it , only to realise it !

This is counterproductive. We don't "live alone as the only being", we understand that there are other beings, with the understanding that they are not separate from ourselves. This is what the Buddha taught in the idea of dependent origination.

"understand that they are not sepperate from our selves" , but also to understand that they are just like our selves , simmilarly all posess that potential , that buddha seed , but similarly all are equaly confused as to our true being , thus comes true compassion .

Don't worry, you're not alone. I still have a huge reserve of cynicism left in me that has to be dealt with, and slowly but surely, it will be dealt with. Just take it one step at a time. You have to travel the path before you can arrive at the destination.

and it is through understanding our ultimate and conventional natures that we develop the compassion which washes away that cynicism which is only natural of the enbodied being , first we might develop compassion towards our own nature , towards our own tendancy for cynicism , such acceptance understands and forgives these tendancies within , if we may understand and forgive our own nature then we will easily understand and forgive others allso , we may then begin to love others , failings and all , this is compassion .

yes , surely "one step at a time "

but steps taken with refuge in buddha , with trust in buddha , might just turn out to be leaps and bounds :namaste

hope you dont mind my throwing some thoughts in .

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

interesting you should say this , for me coming from tibetan mahayana , I find it hard to feel a similarity with advaita ?

In my studies, I've found that Zen, Advaita Vedanta, and Nyingma Dzogchen are all almost identical to each other. So if you're looking for a Tibetan version of Advaita, look to Nyingma Dzogchen.

I am agreeing with you here , but what if I were to say that your "single essence" were the true nature of phenomena realised , that we were not so much united in to a single essence , but that we are united by the realisation of that ultimate truth ?

That's actually what I was getting at, you just said it better than I did.

I am understanding you perfectly but wanting to replace the word all with truth ! , reality !

I would have too, but I was just using the terminology in the OP.

"understand that they are not sepperate from our selves" , but also to understand that they are just like our selves , simmilarly all posess that potential , that buddha seed , but similarly all are equaly confused as to our true being , thus comes true compassion .

Exactly.

hope you dont mind my throwing some thoughts in .

Not at all. I'm always interested to hear your viewpoints.

 

[SageTree]

Not really up to speed on the talk as of the moment, but this....

In my studies, I've found that Zen, Advaita Vedanta, and Nyingma Dzogchen are all almost identical to each other. So if you're looking for a Tibetan version of Advaita, look to Nyingma Dzogchen.

..... is bang on.


Although finding Dzogchen resources aren't exactly plentiful and abounding.

:namaste

Looking forward having a catch up moment with this thread.

SageTree

 

[Jainarayan]

In my studies, I've found that Zen, Advaita Vedanta, and Nyingma Dzogchen are all almost identical to each other. So if you're looking for a Tibetan version of Advaita, look to Nyingma Dzogchen.

I know I'm a month late with this, but what I'm learning so far is there's an element of Advaita in Vajrayana and Taoism also.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I know I'm a month late with this, but what I'm learning so far is there's an element of Advaita in Vajrayana and Taoism also.

That's one thing I like about eastern religions, particularly dharmic, but oftentimes Taoism can be thrown in there as well, is that they all share so much in common.

 

[Jainarayan]

I wonder how much of Taoism was influenced "under the covers" by the dharmic religions.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I wonder how much of Taoism was influenced "under the covers" by the dharmic religions.

I know that Zen and Taoism influenced each other. It's generally listed as a Taoic religion, but it does seem to share alot in common with dharmic religions.