Does Deva gus know the teaching to Ven. Upāli, who desired to dwell alone?

Only for one who already developed samma samadhi, only for one who has abound home and who will not return to this material world, solitude 8s sutiable, of benefit.

Who ever turns away from kalyanamitta before this time will possible end like the rabbit who thought to follow the elephant.

As Bhante said. There are "many" who run away form their duties toward teacher, Sangha, fellows, frustrated, angry... some of the seek refuge in lay people, some become hermits (full of desire, aversion and still much ignorance).

If one still depends on ones society, nurishes from this community, has duties. If not doing them but receive the fruits, one is like someone missusing the compassion of others, like a citizen who do not pay tax.

The same counts for those how could not develop the path to a degree where ther is no more raw desire after sensuality, after becoming.

Defilements can also lead into solitude. So one should not think that Noble One are only fond far away in the forest, but possible far away from ones Upanissaya, even if next and near.

And one more thing, if faith into a tradition breaks down, if people think it makes no sense to care about something old and soon to decay, wouldn't it not like is abounding ones parents as soon as they might no more help directly but now require help?

So one should be careful to do not develope ingraditute and ignorance, because ones own sankharas or resolves are actually the same. Look at modern states who cares about old thing... nobody likes to abound one possibility for pleasure, or lets say less...

Better serve laypeople, better serve solitude... laypeople and their monks are equal, have same inclinations, are possible some of gratitude, or some who just consume their merits away and call others to join the food given through parents heritage.

It's easy to turn away from decaying, but if the duty is not done, one actually stays caught, grasp something else that is likewise or even more worse.

As the Buddha said, and the monks didn't enjoy this talk at all: nibbidā needs to be devoloped in regard of the percepition of nibbana as well.

If no desire toward this or that, where does one takes a stand, where does one dwell, go or leave?

Religion, a word borrowed from west, mean re-binding. Refuge means binding. To "ordinate" means bind.

There is nearly no possibility without strong binding, strong dependency of what pulls toward liberation.

Today there are many advertising for their livelihood with pseodo-liberalism, selling people "you can", make people depending with truth of those actually having won the path, why they are fare from it, consuming in houses, by "make your self a island". That's the trick of Mara, to bind people all the more.

For a householder it's difficult, since this religion has no formal dependency between Bhikkhus and householders. Why? Because it brings troubles if bond at house and bond to liberation at the same time. Yet there are many traditions formal householders have adopted to bind themselves, which is not an formal obligation, to the Sangha, formost by putting nurishment into this relation. Yet serial rules protect Monks and the Sangha to get not pulled into households.

Now, as many desire such bondage and that there are many monks overestimate their liberality and independency, lighten respect toward Vinaya, which protects them not to fall back in the bondage of houselive, nearly the whole heritage has already given up for mainatining households, keeping sensuality and becoming to highest.

Once having reached stream, and only then, one has become independent from all other refuges. Only once one has reached Arahataphala, one has become independent of all refuges, even of admirable friends and the Buddha.

That is something one should think with much sacca about.

The first and fundamental protection, blessing for ways upward and beyond:

The 'kalyana mitta samsevana' is not actually a necessary part, but the whole.

 If otherwise, the Buddha would have founded google, books and would not had that much burden to establish his religion by forming the Sangha.

Yes.

Thought there are those who have the quality of being hearing, totaly greatful on advices and having much trust.

This ability in it's form also requires the path winning, only then doubt falls. Something to consider. And leaving all of which limits effort behind to gain even higher paths.

Ven. Ananda, for the most, appeared merely as someone with saddha-carita. Someone how for the most needs to lose his "refuge", and no other outside to find, fist so that starting to not only honor, but put the taught into action.

Path and Fruits, require that both come together, Dhamma & Dukkha. Only when both is graspable, then one actually follows, having a reason and a way to escape.

Many people have a lot of merits and don't feel dependend, having such as google and Mara as their friends, feel fine in artificially rescure-nets, feeling fine not to know who feeds them and what intentions are behind, are grateful just for kāmaguṇa.

May Deva gus not forgets that this path is akāliko, independend of time, and that tendency away from babbamittas tiward kalyāṇamittas is a matter of nurishment, a matter of upanissayapaccayena.

To find association with good friends, reqires sacca. But if not willing to leave home, house (refuge in kama and bhava), how possible ever meet such relations, visting one house after another, fear in loosen the relations to poision, althought knowing by intellect.