Lesson - 3.3.11 By. Ashin Indaka (Kyone Pyaw)
1. Sutakkitaṃ tathā i.e. well-reasoned true
2. Sutakkitaṃ aññathā i.e. well-reasoned false
3. Duttakkitaṃ tathā i.e. ill-reasoned true
4. Duttakkitaṃ aññathā i.e. ill-reasoned false
In the first scripture, Nyāyasutra of Nyay Darshan, there are five chapters. Akshapad Gautam is the originator of Nyay Darshan. Nyaysutra is purely methodological in nature. This is the seventh material recognized in Nyay Darshan. It assists estimation. It has five kinds-
Lesson - 10.3.11 By. Ashin Indaka (Kyone Pyaw)
1. Post History,
2. Milinda’s questions,
3. Question on Talk of smiles.
4. The Delimmas,
5. A question solved by inference, and
6. Questions on distinguishing Marks.
On Knowledge of Beginnings, the Aggañña-sutta provides a detail description of the origin of the human kind and the planet earth. At the beginning known as world contraction, the human ancestry started with the living beings born from the Abhassara Brahmas.
After some long period feeding on the earth soils, the Brahma lost their body radiance and slowly changed in their body features. Then, the sun and moon started to appear in the firmament to start day and night time on earth. Then, everyone looks the same; there was no gender, only asexual. Later, after some long period, sex organs were formed on their body. And the women became excessively preoccupied with the men, and the men with the women. Owing to this excessive preoccupation with each other, passion was aroused, and their bodies burnt with lust. And later because of this burning, they indulged in sexual activity. Trees appeared and rice was available freely. This description of the beginning of mankind is so different from the modern theory of human evolution.
The Lord Buddha was staying at Sāvatthi in the mansion of Migara’s mother, in the East Park. And at that time Vasettha and Bharadvaja were living among the monks. They went up to the lord. Then the lord said to Vasettha:
“Brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīnā aññe vaṇṇā- the Brahmin caste is fair, other castes are dark,” “the Brahmins are the true children of Brahma, born from his mouth- brāhmaṇāva brahmuno puttā orasā mukhato jātā.”
Then, Vasettha, we can see Brahmin women, the wives of Brahmins, “Dissanti kho pana, vāseṭṭha, brāhmaṇānaṃ brāhmaṇiyo utuniyopi gabbhiniyopi vijāyamānāpi pāyamānāpi- who menstruate and become pregnant, have babies, and give milk.” These Brahmins misrepresent Brahma, tell lies and earn much demerit.
The Brahmins claimed that among the four classes of people recognized at that time Brahmins were the noblest; next came the Khattiya class (the nobility and royalty) followed by Vessa (the trading class) and Sudda (the lowest class). The Buddha refuted these claims of the brahmins by explaining how the world was subjected to processes of evolution and dissolution and describing how human beings first appeared on earth and how the four social classes emerged. He explained further that the nobility of a person was decided not by his birth and lineage but by his morality and knowledge of the Noble Truths.
"Whoever holds wrong views and commits misdeeds is not noble whatever his birth. Whoever restrains himself in deed, word and thought and develops the Bodhipakkhiya Dhammas until he attains complete eradication of defilements in this very life is the chief, the noblest amongst Manussa (men) and Devas (gods) irrespective of birth." Another good point was made in the same thread by son of dhamma, who said, "I don't consider that the world being talked about in the Aggañña Sutta is 'the universe'.
The Kevatta Sutta is a Buddhist scripture, one of the texts in the Digha Nikāya. The scripture takes its name from the householder Kevatta, who invites the Buddha to display various miraculous powers in order to show his spiritual superiority.
The Buddha responds by expressing his belief that Supernatural powers are not a valid measure of spiritual development, because they can be falsified through the use of charms and spells. In the First time: The Lord Buddha explains the various Psychic powers that a monk can have..., a monk becomes many, and then becomes one again, he vanishes and re-appears, goes through walls, ramparts and mountains, dives in and out of earth, walks on water, flies through the air (pathavīdhātu āpodhātu tejodhātu vāyodhdhātu), with his hand touches and strokes the sun and the moon (!), and can reach even as far as the Brahma divine worlds He goes on to deliver a discourse on virtue, expressing the belief that it is virtuous conduct, rather than supernatural developments, that display the superiority or spiritual development of a teacher. He also states that such practices will give rise to powers greater than those available to practitioners of traditional magic and austerities.
The scripture is significant to the study of Buddhism because it constitutes one of the clearest statements in the scriptures of the Buddha's opposition to the notion of Magical power and supernatural abilities as the best indicator of truth or virtue. In setting out such a belief, the Buddha placed himself in opposition to much of the popular religious traditions derived from the Vedas, which often focused on the acquisition of Supernatural powers as an ends unto itself, and as a means of measuring spiritual worthiness.
The second one is obtained through logical inference. Sandaka Sutta indicates a difference between what is “well reasoned” (Sutakkitam) and “ill reasoned” (Dutakkitam) Suttanipāta admonishes that one should desist from the debate as it lures one to make use of falsehood. In the Pāli texts, we frequently find Buddha dissociating himself from this class of rationalists and criticizing views which are said to be based on different forms of reasoning and reflection. In the Saṅgārava Sutta, the consistency is no guarantee of their factual truth. Thus with regard to rational theories there are four possibilities:
The second one is obtained through logical inference. Sandaka Sutta indicates a difference between what is “well reasoned” (Sutakkitam) and “ill reasoned” (Dutakkitam) Suttanipāta admonishes that one should desist from the debate as it lures one to make use of falsehood. In the Pāli texts, we frequently find Buddha dissociating himself from this class of rationalists and criticizing views which are said to be based on different forms of reasoning and reflection. In the Saṅgārava Sutta, the consistency is no guarantee of their factual truth. Thus with regard to rational theories there are four possibilities:
1. Sutakkitaṃ tathā i.e. well-reasoned true
2. Sutakkitaṃ aññathā i.e. well-reasoned false
3. Duttakkitaṃ tathā i.e. ill-reasoned true
4. Duttakkitaṃ aññathā i.e. ill-reasoned false
In the first scripture, Nyāyasutra of Nyay Darshan, there are five chapters. Akshapad Gautam is the originator of Nyay Darshan. Nyaysutra is purely methodological in nature. This is the seventh material recognized in Nyay Darshan. It assists estimation. It has five kinds-
(i) Pratigya (Determination), or {paratijaña}
(ii) Hetu (Middle term),
(iii) Udaharan (example),
(iv) Upanaya (comparing) and
(v) Nigaman (conclusion).
Early Buddhist scriptures introduce two kinds of knowledge i.e. Dhamme ñana which refers to knowledge of things or events and anvaye ñana or inductive knowledge. The first one is none other than experimental knowledge.
The Milindapañña unfolds as a dialogue between the Bactrian Greek ruler King Milinda and the Buddhist sage, the elder Nāgasena. Milinda first appears in the work as royal philosopher who has been demolishing with refutations, the tenets of the different schools in Indian religious thought that he encounter in his domain. In the dialogues Milinda poses the questions and Nāgasena replies.
Rather, the questions asked almost randomly- their binding principle being only the need to resolve conundrums in points of Buddhist teaching, and the answers flowing are direction, from the monk to the king, backed by the unimpeachable authority of the Buddha word, Milinda may be confidently identified with the Greek king Menander, who was descended from Greeks of Bactria. The preamble of the Milindapañha states that the work is divided into six parts: They are-
2. Milinda’s questions,
3. Question on Talk of smiles.
4. The Delimmas,
5. A question solved by inference, and
6. Questions on distinguishing Marks.
Dreams
What is this thing that people call a dream and who dreams it? King Milinda said “Venerable Nāgasena, men and women in this world see dreams pleasant and evil, things they have seen before and things they have not seen before, things they have done or have not done before, dreams peaceful and terrible, dream of matters near to them and distant from them, full of many shapes and innumerable colors.
What is this thing that people call a dream and who dreams it? King Milinda said “Venerable Nāgasena, men and women in this world see dreams pleasant and evil, things they have seen before and things they have not seen before, things they have done or have not done before, dreams peaceful and terrible, dream of matters near to them and distant from them, full of many shapes and innumerable colors.
What is this that men call a dream, and who is it who dreams it? That is called a sūpinam (dream), sire, is a suggestion that comes into the focus of the mind- There are six kinds of people who see dreams, the person who suffer from wind, the bilious and phlegmatic person possessed of a Deva, the person influenced by his own habit, and the person who sees a dream as a portent, Among these, only the last kind is true, the rest are false.”
“Bhante Nāgasena, in regard to him who sees a dream as a portent, does his mind, going along of its own accord, seek for that portent or does that portent come into the focus of the mind, does anyone else come and tell him of it?”
“It is not, that his mind going along of its own accord, seeks for that portent nor does someone else come and tell him of it, but that comes into the focus of his mind. It is like a mirror that does not go anywhere to seek for a reflection, nor does someone else bringing a reflection put it on the mirror, but the reflection comes from wherever it appears in the mirror.”
“Venerable Nāgasena, does the mind that sees a dream also know, so will be peaceful or frightening?” “No, that is not so. He speaks to others about it and they then speak to him of its meaning when the portent has arisen.” “Venerable Nāgasena, give me a smile to explain this, please.”
“It is as the moles, boils or itches that arise on a people’s body are to their gain or loss, their repute or disrepute praise or blame, happiness or sorrow- but as these boils arise, do they know we will bring about such and such an event.?” “No, Venerable, according to the place where these boils occur, so do the fortune-tellers, seeing them there, explain such indeed will be the result.” “Even so, sire, the mind that sees the dream does not know, ‘Thus will be the result, Peaceful or frightening.’ But he speaks to other about it and they then speak to him of its meaning when the portent has arisen.”
Here, Evam eva kho māharāja means “Even = so, sire” and 'tato te attham kathentīti' means “they then speak to him of its meaning.”
We! How to define? Object of mind, object of ears and object of eyes. You have given full note about that from many books.
Lesson - 17.3.11 By. Ashin Indaka (Kyone Pyaw)
* You see this paper-
* Source Studies; Pāli language.
i. Pāli alphabet and its divisions and sub-divisions.
E. g - vowels, consonants, groups etc.
ii. .…..
iii. ……
-
* You see this paper-
* Source Studies; Pāli language.
i. Pāli alphabet and its divisions and sub-divisions.
E. g - vowels, consonants, groups etc.
ii. .…..
iii. ……
-
* Logical Thinking: --
i. Five member argument Pratijñā
-
-
ii. Analysis of dreams----
-
* Pāli literature;
i. Pāli canon and its commentaries.
e.g …. Dighanikāya - Sumangalavilāsini
Majjhimanikāya - Papañcasūdanī
Samyutanikāya - Sāratthappakasini
Anguttaranikāya - Manorathapūrani
ii. -----
Bhesajjamañjusā (Medicine)
i. Five member argument Pratijñā
-
-
ii. Analysis of dreams----
-
* Pāli literature;
i. Pāli canon and its commentaries.
e.g …. Dighanikāya - Sumangalavilāsini
Majjhimanikāya - Papañcasūdanī
Samyutanikāya - Sāratthappakasini
Anguttaranikāya - Manorathapūrani
ii. -----
Bhesajjamañjusā (Medicine)
{From hand-out}
--------------------------------
1. Vātiko = the person suffers from wind.
2. Pittiko = the bilious person.
3. Semhiko = the phlegmatic person.
4. Devatūpasamhārato = the person possessed of a deva.
5. Samudācinnato = the person influenced by his own habits.
6. Pubbanimittato = the person sees a dream as a portent.
--------------------------------
Now, we will study Supinam King Milinda said, Bhante Nāgasena, this mean "Venerable Nāgasena", and Imasmim loke naranāriyo mean men and women in this world. Supinam passanti, here supinam is called a dream. You want to question. it by Pali text, Kiñcetam supinam nāma? (What does that mean?).
We can define, Kiñ is Ko, what is defination cetam? that defination is ca + etam, so we can difine Kim ca etam supinamnāma? Definition is very important, For example, ‘Sañña’ The understanding should be explained. What are the common characteristics of “the Defunded Origination?” Saññā - Sense perception = “Byañmajāla sutta” has 62 views, there_ (Buddhism is very careful and mind fully.)
What does this dream mean? Dream is an object of mind. Sūpinam + dream that definition is object of mind. Do you remember ‘Ko cetam passati?’ = question? And then... Who person see dreams? There are six kinds of parson see dreams. They are...
2. Pittiko = the bilious person.
3. Semhiko = the phlegmatic person.
4. Devatūpasamhārato = the person possessed of a deva.
5. Samudācinnato = the person influenced by his own habits.
6. Pubbanimittato = the person sees a dream as a portent.
Summing up Vāta is air, Pitta is bile, and Semha is phlem. "Tatra maharaja etc," mean among these, sire, only the last kind is true (saccam), the rest are false (micchā) Añño vā āgantvā, that is mean "or does anyone else came and tell him of it", and 'nāpī añño koci āgatvā tassa ārocetiti' is "not does anyone else come and tall him of it". But from wherever the reflection comes it appear in the mirror" the definition is for” atha kho yato kutoci chāyā āgantvā ādāsassa apātam- upagacchati". Evam- eva that is means conscious of mind. Lokadhamma is important, that one should maintain one's integrity and remain calm and composed in the face of the ups and downs of life, known as lokadammas, which are eight in number.
2. Alābhāya - not acquiring wealth.
3. Yasāya - repute.
4. Ayasāya - disrepute.
5. Nindāya - dispraise.
6. Pasaṁsaya - praise.
7. Sukkāya - happiness.
8. Dukkāya - suffering.
These are four good and four bad circumstances in life. And then- Next paragraph is important question, there ‘middha’ mean torpor or drowsy, and ‘bhavange’ is called unconscious state. When a man is drowsy his mind is entering the unconscious state: So "we should be discussion ‘bhavanga. etc’. What does the bhavang?”, and to much explain, those are logical thinking.
Lesson - 24.3.11 By. Ashin Indaka (Kyone Pyaw)
Lesson - 24.3.11 By. Ashin Indaka (Kyone Pyaw)
Three kinds of Logical reasoning can be distinguished. These are Induction , Deduction and Abduction, according to western Philosopher.
Given a precondition, a conclusion and a rule, that the precondition implies the conclusion, they can be explained in the following way;
1. Induction means determining the rule, it is leaning the rule after numerous examples of the conclusion for following the precondition.
2. Deduction means determining the conclusion, it is using the rule and its precondition to make a conclusion.
3. Abduction means determining the precondition, it is using the conclusion and the rule to support that the precondition could explain the conclusion.
According to Buddhism, the Buddha was born in 6th century BC, his systematically developed a pragmatic, empirically based philosophy which he claimed would lead, its followers towards an enlightened existence. Buddhism is commonly called a religion, is based on logical reasoning and observation rather than spiritual faith. At the heart of Buddhist philosophy is the Buddha's enumeration of Four Noble Truths: “suffering, origin of suffering, cessation of suffering and path to cessation of suffering”. That is Theravada analysis.3. Abduction means determining the precondition, it is using the conclusion and the rule to support that the precondition could explain the conclusion.
Here, logical analysis is six ways- “Sambandho ca padan ceti, Padatho padaviggaho, Codanā parihāro ca, Chabbidhā suttavannanā,” that is commentaries. Sambando is relationship, context is very important. Abhidhamma is certainly very useful, the later Abhidhammiters brought the opinion of that the truth which the Buddha discovered is found only in the Abhidhamma Piṭaka, he had preached to Sāriputtra. The Buddha came out with the absolute truth (Paramatta desana).
In the Abhidhamma, we can analysis- “Kusala Citta- unwholesome consciousness-12, Ditthigata sampayuttam is mean connected with 'wrong' view. Second logical analysis 6th century B.C. Padan mean smaller, Surāsuranaroragā (that is, we can see one by one) sura+ asura+ nara+ uraga (we should be able to), Namo Buddhāya - Buddha+ta+ āya, Buddha+ āya. Nomo Po tvo ye (china) Bodhisattva.
Padatta- 'meaning of the word' 'analysis of the word' after the analysis, Codanā- complain (plaint), parihara- answer, chabbidhā- six course, vannanā- exclan mation.
“Monopubbangamā dhammā,
manosetthā manomayā,
manasā ce pasannena,
bhisati vā karoti vā,
tato nam dukkhamanveti,
cakkamva vahato padam” (Dhammapada).
Mind is the forerunner of all states, mind is chief, mind made are they. It one speaks or acts with wicked mind, because of that suffering follows one, even as the wheel follows the hoof of the draught ox.
How many words have this verse? This verse has been 20 words. One by one, here mano is pāda, pubbhangamā is pāda, that is analysis. Manopubbhangamā dammā- all mental phenomena have mind as, their forerunner in the sense that mind is the most dominant and it is the cause of the other three mental phenomena, namely feeling (vedanā), perception (saññā) and consciousness (viññāna) as their forerunner because although they arise simultaneously with mind they cannot arise, it mind dose not arise (The commentary). Manasā here means intention or volition (cetanā), volition leads one to the performance of volitional actions, both good and evil. This volition and the resultant actions constitute kamma, and kamma always follows one toproduce results.
Cakkhupāla thera blindness was the consequence of his having acted within an evil intention in a previous existence. In this context, Dukkha means suffering or physical or mental pain, misfortune, unsatisfactory mess, evil consequences, etc. In the consciousness (mana or citta), the concepts of good and evil minds have already been explained namely, Kāmāvacara citta is 54, Rūpāvacara citta is 15, Arūpāvacara citta is 12, and Lokuttara citta is 8 or 40. The Kāmāvacara citta is the cause of the other three factors, they are Akusala is 12, Ahetuka is 18, and Sahetuka citta is 24. In the Akusala citta, Lobha (attachment) is eight, Dosa (heated) is two, and Moha (delusion) is two. Since citta arises together with different mental factor or etasikas.
According to the above analysis the so-called being is composed of five groups:
1. Rūpa (matter),
2. Vedanā (feeling),
3. Sañña (perception),
4. Saṅkhāra (mental states) and
5. Viññāna (consciousness).
"Cetasika- ceta + s + ika ", that which is associated with the mind or consciousness is Cetasika (Sanscrit- Caitasika or Caitti). In the chapter on Cetasika "Ekuppāda- nirodhācaekālambanavattukā" {Ekuppāda, Ekanirodhā, Ekālambana, Ekavattuka}.
The fifty two states that are associated with consciousness, that arise and perish together with consciousness, that have the same object and basis as consciousness, are known (or learn) as Cetasika. In the Dhātu, that which carries its own characteristic mark is dhātu. They are so called since they are devoid of being or life (nissatta, nijjiva). For the sake of convenience three technical terms are used here. They are Pañcaviññadhātu, Manodhātu and Mano-viññāna-dhātu.
In all these meanings the word 'Dhamma' is to be met with in the texts, the application of this term guna = quality, virtues, desana = instruction (Nahi dhammo adhammo ca), pariyatti-text; nissatta (devoid of being) and nijjīva (soullessness). 'Dhamman vā bhikkve decitaṁ' Sodanā means question and parihāra means answer.
Kusala is wholesome in the sense of being free from physical (body), and mental sickness though passions. Killing, stealing and sexual misconduct are bodily actions. Lying, slandering, harsh speech and vain talking verbal actions, and ill will, covetousness and false belief are mental actions. Citta and cetacika arises together with, not different, but citta (mind) is the leader of thought, mind is the porāna.
- Pubbanga is means going first.
- manosetthā is means intention or volition (cetanā).
- pasannena is means mental devotion (manopasāda).
- karoti- physical.
- bhāsati- versati.
Lesson - 7.4.11 By. Ashin Indaka (Kyone Pyaw)
Information on Buddhist law as laid down in the Vinaya-pitak,on the other hand, can be gathered from random references in the Samantapāsādikā or the Kankhāvitarani, a commentary on the Pātimokkha, or even in commentaries on other parts of the Tipitaka, As the vast commentarial literature has not been made easily accessible by adequate indices, the following examples are by no means the result of a systematic search. Although better and clearer evidence still hidden somewhere in the Atthakathā.
- Pubbanga is means going first.
- manosetthā is means intention or volition (cetanā).
- pasannena is means mental devotion (manopasāda).
- karoti- physical.
- bhāsati- versati.
Lesson - 7.4.11 By. Ashin Indaka (Kyone Pyaw)
Information on Buddhist law as laid down in the Vinaya-pitak,on the other hand, can be gathered from random references in the Samantapāsādikā or the Kankhāvitarani, a commentary on the Pātimokkha, or even in commentaries on other parts of the Tipitaka, As the vast commentarial literature has not been made easily accessible by adequate indices, the following examples are by no means the result of a systematic search. Although better and clearer evidence still hidden somewhere in the Atthakathā.
The Samantapāsādikā was describes in some detail how a legal expert has to act with respect to persons who bring a case before him and with respect to the Vinaya-rules he is going to use. Once a case (vatthu) is brought before the assembly of monks, plaintiff (Codaka) and accused (Cuditaka) have to be asked, whether they are going to accept the final verdict. In the case of incompetence, legal experts have to be invited, who are to be agreed by both parties.
These have to decide according to Dhamma-vinaya-satthusāsana “teaching- discipline- prescription of the teacher”, the Samantapāsādikā according to the “true cause”, to reproof and remonstration and finally a group of monks capable and competent to decide the case has been established, the hearing proper can begin with the plaintiff stating his case which then has to be examined with all necessary care.
The Legal expert has to take the following six points into consideration: the facts (Vatthu), the Pātimokkha (Mātikā), the commentary on the Pātimokkha (Padabhājaniya), ‘the three sections’ (Tikepariccheda), the ‘intermediate offense’ (Antarāpatti) and the conditions, under which there is no offense (Anāpatti).
For the Buddha has decided many disputes himself and has given hints how legal experts should decide in future, although all this advice may be of some help for a monk who has to decide a case in agreement with the Vinaya, in the Samantapāsādikā (Pārājika- Bāhiranidāna) gives at least an impression how this could have been done: A certain monk in Antarasamuda (inter of ocean) took a well formed coconut, turned it, and made it into a drinking cup polished like mother-of-pearl. Then he left it behind and went to Cetiyagiri in the Anurādapura of Sri lanka.
“Antarasamudde kira eko bhikkhu susanthānam nālikeram labhitvā bhamam āropetvā sankhathālakasadisam manoramam pānīyathālakam katvā tattheva thapetvā cetiyagirim agamāsi.”
Antara is means inter, samuda is ocean, kira is indeclinable, eko bhikkhu is a certain(one) monk, susanthānam is well form (good shape), nālikeram is coconut fruit, labhitvā is took, bhamam is turned machine, āropetvā is polish, sankha is couch, sankhathālaka is mother-ofpearl, sadisam is similar,and pānīyathālakam is drinking cup.(tattheva = tattha + eva).
“Suvannata sussaratā, Susantāna surῡpatā. Ᾱbhipacca parivārā, Sabbo me ṫena lobbhoti.” Another monk went to Antarasamudda, stayed in the very monastery, saw the cup, took it away with the intention to steal it, and went to Cetiyagiri,too.
“Athañño bhikkhu antarasamuddam gantvā tasmin vihāre pativasanto tam thālakam disvā theyyacittena gahetvā cetiyagirimeva āgato.” Athañāo bhikkhu (atha+añño) is another monk, gantvā is went, tasmin vihāre is in the very monastery, pativasanto is stayed, disvā is saw, theyyacittena is with the intention to steal mind, gahetvā is took it away and meva is means too.
“Athañño bhikkhu antarasamuddam gantvā tasmin vihāre pativasanto tam thālakam disvā theyyacittena gahetvā cetiyagirimeva āgato.” Athañāo bhikkhu (atha+añño) is another monk, gantvā is went, tasmin vihāre is in the very monastery, pativasanto is stayed, disvā is saw, theyyacittena is with the intention to steal mind, gahetvā is took it away and meva is means too.
The monk who originally owned the cup saw the other monk drinking rice-gruel and asked: .” “Where did you get that?”- “I bought it from antarasamudda.”
“Tassa tattha yāgum pivantassa tam thālakam disvā thālakasāmiko bhikkhu āha. “‘kuto te idam laddhan’ti” . Antarasamuddato me ānītanti.”
“Tassa tattha yāgum pivantassa tam thālakam disvā thālakasāmiko bhikkhu āha. “‘kuto te idam laddhan’ti” . Antarasamuddato me ānītanti.”
Tassa is means there, yāgum is drinking rice-gruel, sāmiko is originally own, āha is, here asked”, kuto is where and ānītanti is bought. He said “This is not your property. It has been stolen,” and dragged him before the assembly of monks.
“So tam ‘netam tava santakam, theyyāya te gahitan’ti. samghamajjham ākaddhi.” Netam (na-etam) is this is not your property, theyyāya is stolen,samghamajjham is assembly of monks, majjha is middle and ākaddhi is dragged.
“So tam ‘netam tava santakam, theyyāya te gahitan’ti. samghamajjham ākaddhi.” Netam (na-etam) is this is not your property, theyyāya is stolen,samghamajjham is assembly of monks, majjha is middle and ākaddhi is dragged.
There they did not get a decision and went the Mahāvihara. There the drums were beaten. An assembly was held and the hearing (Vinicchaya) began. The Elders, who were experts in the Vinaya, decided that it was theft. A member of this assembly was the Elder Godha, the Abhidhamma expert, who was at the same time an expert in the Vinaya.
“Tattha ca vinicchayamalabhitvā Mahāvihāram agamimsu. Tattha bherim paharāpetvā mahācetiyasamāpe sannipātam katvā vinicchayam ārabhimsu. vinayadharattherā avahāram sannīpesum. Tasmim ca sannipāte Ᾱbhidhammika Godattatthero vinayakusalo nāma hoti” Ᾱbhidhammiko is the Abhidhamma expert (scholar), bherim is drums, paharāpetvā is were beaten and vinayakusalo is an expert in the Vinaya.
He spoke thus: “Where has he stolen this cup?”-“It was stolen in Antarasamudda.”- “How much is its value there?”-“It is worth nothing, because coconuts are split there, their contents is eaten, and the shell is thrown away, being considered as something like wood.”-“What is the value of the manual labour of the monk there?”-“A penny (māsaka) or even less than a penny.”
“Indeed the SammāsamBuddha has prescribed somewhere a Pārājika with regard to a penny or even less than a penny.”
“So evamāha “iminā idaṁ thālakaṁ kuhiṁ avahaṭan”ti. Antarasamudde avahaṭanti. Tatridaṁ kiṁ agghatīti. Na kiñci agghati, tatra hi nāḷikeraṁ bhinditvā miñjam khāditvā kapālaṁ chaḍḍenti, dāru-atthaṁ pana pharatīti. Imassa bhikkhuno ettha hatthakammaṁ kiṁ agghatīti. Māsakaṁ vā ῡnamāsakaṁ vāti. Atthi pana katthaci Sammāsambuddena māsakena vā ῡnamāsakena vā pārājikaṁ paññattanti. Tatridaṁ=tatra(there) + idaṁ(its or this).
“So evamāha “iminā idaṁ thālakaṁ kuhiṁ avahaṭan”ti. Antarasamudde avahaṭanti. Tatridaṁ kiṁ agghatīti. Na kiñci agghati, tatra hi nāḷikeraṁ bhinditvā miñjam khāditvā kapālaṁ chaḍḍenti, dāru-atthaṁ pana pharatīti. Imassa bhikkhuno ettha hatthakammaṁ kiṁ agghatīti. Māsakaṁ vā ῡnamāsakaṁ vāti. Atthi pana katthaci Sammāsambuddena māsakena vā ῡnamāsakena vā pārājikaṁ paññattanti. Tatridaṁ=tatra(there) + idaṁ(its or this).
This being said there was a unanimous approval: “Excellent, well spoken, well decided!”- “Evaṁ vutte “sādhu sādhu sukathitaṁ suvinicchitan”ti ekasādhukāro ahosi.”
Antarasamuda (Inter of Ocean)
Information on Buddhist law as laid down in the Vinaya-pitak, on the other hand, can be gathered from random references in the Samantapāsādikā, a commentary on the Pātimokkha.
The Samantapāsādikā describes in some detail how a legal expert has to act with respect to persons who bring a case before him and with respect to the Vinaya-rules he is going to use. Once a case (vatthu) is brought before the assembly of monks, plaintiff (codaka) and accused (cuditaka) have to be asked, whether they are going to accept the final verdict. In the case of incompetence, legal experts have to be invited, who are to be agreed by both parties.
The Samantapāsādikā according to the “true cause”, to reproof and remonstration and finally a group of monks capable and competent to decide the case has been established.
The legal expert has to take the following six points: the facts (vatthu), the Pātimokkha (mātikā), the commentary (padabhājaniya), ‘the three sections’ (tikepariccheda), the ‘intermediate offense’ (antarāpatti) and the conditions, under which there is no offense (anāpatti). For the Buddha has decided many disputes himself and has given hints how legal experts should decide in future, although all this advice may be of some help for a monk who has to decide a case in agreement with the Vinaya, in the Pārājika- Bāhiranidāna gives at least an impression how this could have been done:
A certain monk in Antarasamuda took a well formed coconut, turned it, and made it into a drinking cup polished like mother-of-pearl. Then he left it behind and went to Cetiyagiri in the Anurādapura. Another monk went to Antarasamudda, stayed in the very monastery, saw the cup, took it away with the intention to steal it, and went to Cetiyagiri, too.
The monk who originally owned the cup saw the other monk drinking rice-gruel and asked: “Where did you get that?”- “I bought it from antarasamudda.” He said “This is not your property. It has been stolen,” and dragged him before the assembly of monks. There they did not get a decision and went the Mahāvihara. There the drums were beaten. An assembly was held and the hearing (vinicchaya) began. The Elders, who were experts in the Vinaya, decided that it was theft. A member of this assembly was the Elder Godha, the Abhidhamma expert, who was at the same time an expert in the Vinaya.
He spoke thus: “Where has he stolen this cup?”-“It was stolen in Antarasamudda.”- “How much is its value there?”-“It is worth nothing, because coconuts are split there, their contents are eaten, and the shell is thrown away, being considered as something like wood.”-“What is the value of the manual labour of the monk there?” “Indeed the Sammā SamBuddha has prescribed somewhere a Pārājika with regard to a penny or even less than a penny.”
This being said there was a unanimous approval: “Excellent, well spoken, well decided!”
14.9.11
14.9.11
No comments:
Post a Comment