Post reply

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Tags:

Seperate each tag by a comma
Message icon:

Attach:
(Clear Attachment)
(more attachments)
Allowed file types: apk, doc, docx, gif, jpg, mpg, pdf, png, txt, zip, xls, 3gpp, mp2, mp3, wav, odt, ods, html, mp4, amr, apk, m4a, jpeg
Restrictions: 50 per post, maximum total size 150000KB, maximum individual size 150000KB
Note that any files attached will not be displayed until approved by a moderator.
Anti-spam: complete the task

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: Johann
« on: November 24, 2019, 10:13:04 AM »

It's by the means of perceiving the Gems as Sublime by good householders, that they are capable to use reflecting on them for cleansing the mind and reach borderlands, but there are also those who use them to cover their dirt up and to gain some beauty for better dealling with their weak stands while staying in outer lands. Using them as makeup for low trades and to try to make their confused views shine.

There is no security if abounding right view and virtue, thinking already dwell amoung highered path. Even Arahat do not abound what is the safe bet for those not knowing not seeing yet.

Adding since possible useful for clear understanding on the matter "not given"

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa

...[224] Bhikkhus, endowed with forty things as though led and lain is in hell. What forty?

Here, bhikkhus, a certain one destroys living things, rouses others to destroy living things gives permission to destroy living things and praises the destruction of living things. Takes the not given rouses others to take the not given, gives permission to take the not given and praises taking the not given....
Posted by: Johann
« on: November 24, 2019, 09:30:52 AM »

May Wanderer Vivek have a successful journey and arrives there what seeking for. May he also keep in mind that taking refuge is always possible as long this domain remains in it's original purpose.
Posted by: Vivek
« on: November 24, 2019, 08:49:38 AM »

Metta to Everyone.
thanks for discussion.
Now I am taking leave from sangham.net.

Be Happy, Take care,
Posted by: Johann
« on: November 24, 2019, 06:34:55 AM »

It's not possible to receive things of which are strong reasons that the giver hasn't obtained the gift in proper ways, given by the real owner, but origins popossible out of the sphere of concealment of stolen goods. Perceiving so, receiving would be a transgression. And also the aspect of told relation between disciple and teacher, in regard of use from outside the relation is something to consider, if wishing to maintain a relation build on trust and loyalty.

Relation is voluntary, yet love without marriage doesn't work for a good.

Good householder from Ghana, Nyom Ebo, calling himself saddhamma without having been given possible by what ever parents, says correct that my person often uses strong language of which can possible hurt if of less trust and faith, strong annoying for fools, caught in much conceit, and often hard to digest. Yet he also does not encourage to follow, since if in dependency could limit ones relations, wealth an honor.

May Nyom be sure, that modern views and communism arent in the frame of right and grasping the snake on the tail will hurt.

And even my person often engages in burdensome talks on generosity with people without, virtue with people without... it also has it's limits when no slight qualities are seen, basic right view is missed. May Nyom follow the modern ideas and productivity and consume over the path and Noble Domain.

And just to get known, should a Monk rest and dwell in anothers domain without given, without having asked the owner, he conducts a fault. Also when he would leave it, without saying anything. It's not possible to pull the Noble Domain, real liberal, into Villages and their binding conducts for consume and ideas of purify by means of food.

The are significat differents between "beggar" and "social benefit fraud/benefit scrounger", even between virtues trader (householder) and "benefit scrounger", who, even if not in need, prefer to take not really given then to lighten their bonds and debt. Neither of glory nor of shine, the Uposatha of the cow-boys and faceless (Jains). The secound is called thief.

Certain domain, when get oc-copy-ed with strong wrong degenerating tendencies, doesn't change, it simply disappears, is no more present in this world build from conceit, and batched by bones.
Posted by: saddhamma
« on: November 24, 2019, 03:59:50 AM »

Sīlena sugatiṃ yanti.

Through virtue they go to a good bourn.

Sīlena bhoga-sampadā.

Through virtue is wealth attained.

Sīlena nibbutiṃ yanti.

Through virtue they go to Liberation.

Tasmā sīlaṃ visodhaye.

Therefore we should purify our virtue.


Sadhu, sadhu, sadhu Bhante for bringing in the topic of virtue, so relevant to this discussion on public donations usage. This dhamma quote that Bhante has provided is another ambrosia of the saddhamma on the benefits of noble virtue, so nourishing and refreshing.

I am sure Bhante already know that for one to possess the aggregate of noble virtue which lead to noble right liberation, noble right view must come first. Virtue defiled by the three lower fetters is susceptible to fueling extreme views based on virtue. A good example is the view that Bhante has formed about the tradition of the Noble Ones being against making proper use of public donations, although the Buddha has not laid down such a rule. Such a view is beset with suffering, leading to stabbing others who are not of the same view with verbal daggers. Even with examples in the vinayapitaka showing precedence for monastic usage of public donations, Bhante still insists on a view that overshoots what is considered to be proper usage in the world.

Perhaps the Gaṇikā sutta from Udana 6.8 can help Bhante to see the danger in the extremes that relying on virtue without noble right view can lead to.

Here I offer a translation of the udana 6.8 verses only.  _/\_ _/\_ _/\_

yañca pattaṃ yañca pattabbaṃ
That which is attained and that which should be attained,

ubayametaṃ rajānukiṇṇaṃ āturassānusikkhato.
both these are strewn with stain by the miserable one in [wrong] training.       

ye ca sikkhāsārā,
Those for whom the training rules is the essence,

sīlabbatajīvitabrahmacariyaupaṭṭhānasārā,
[taking] virtue and observances, life of celibacy, and service as the essence,   

ayameko anto.
this is one extreme.

ye ca evaṃvādino: 'natthi kāmesu doso'ti
And those who say this: 'there is no fault in sensual pleasures',

ayaṃ dutiyo anto.
this is the second extreme.

iccete ubho antā kaṭasivaḍḍhanā.
Thus both these extremes swell the cemeteries.

kaṭasiyo diṭṭhiṃ vaḍḍhenti.
And the cemeteries keep wrong view in motion.

ete te ubho ante anabiññāya
For those who have no direct knowledge of both these extremes,

oliyanti eke atidhāvanti eko.
some lag behind and some go too far.
                                                               
ye ca kho te abhiññāya
But they for whom there is direct knowledge,
                                                               
tatra ca nāhesuṃ tena ca na maññiṃsu.
there does not come to be that-by-which there, and no conceiving therein.       
                                                               
vaṭṭaṃ tesaṃ natthi paññāpanāyā ti.
For those there is no round for designation.

Posted by: Johann
« on: November 23, 2019, 06:35:31 PM »

Thanks for forgiving Bhante.  _/\_ _/\_ _/\_

And thanks for adding Cunda the smith sutta (Snp 1.5) on this thread. It is such a delectable discourse, a real ambrosia, nourishing and refreshing!

Even this Dhamma, if having wrong perceptions and not further explained, if received in wrong circumstances, can be of more harm then help for a not so wise and just feeding his defilement, Nyom. Can be additional food for rebel.

It's in as far "badly" translated, as "Any householder" speaks actually of Noble Ones, such relativations, soft and even more, are usual in Dhamma-giving for doing a favor, for trade.

So maybe good if answering the topic "Relay on what and whom?" in short, after the many food for thoughts:

One, seeking for long term happiness, should relay on unrelated to world bonds, real giver, and on what is given by this goodness, to gain the liberal Domain for oneself. Relaying on given for release and abstain from different.

Sīlena sugatiṃ yanti.

Through virtue they go to a good bourn.

Sīlena bhoga-sampadā.

Through virtue is wealth attained.

Sīlena nibbutiṃ yanti.

Through virtue they go to Liberation.

Tasmā sīlaṃ visodhaye.

Therefore we should purify our virtue.


Posted by: saddhamma
« on: November 23, 2019, 06:18:30 PM »

Thanks for forgiving Bhante.  _/\_ _/\_ _/\_

And thanks for adding Cunda the smith sutta (Snp 1.5) on this thread. It is such a delectable discourse, a real ambrosia, nourishing and refreshing!
Posted by: Johann
« on: November 23, 2019, 06:01:29 PM »

And just to inform forther: telling a monk: "go and ask" or thinking "if he desires, needs, he can do as well as we common do" isn't really of much merits in all circumstances. Does Nyom think that those near or in the Noble Domain desire of what "householders" hold on, and go after it?

May Bhante forgive me if my offer to provide Bhante contact information was offensive. Bhante mentioned that Bhante already asked BPS. I was just pointing out to Bhante that BPS are the wrong owners to ask, and only wished to point Bhante to the right owners if Bhante was still interested in asking.

Nothing to ask for pardon if with good intention. And no demands on possible given. But, as Nyom thinks to know possible ways well: How could a monk, without fault, without reason for remorse, approach an householder, even a trader, and ask for his goods? And how does it looks for the world when Monks ask for Dhamma in householder Domain? Good to forget common ways if wishing to understand the Noble Domain. Yet good as well for Nyom to get sure that being given, still able, still in different spheres, for making progress toward a more refine, if wishing so.

It's not custom in this tradition, not even in good areas, to approach neighbors in the afternoon and consume uninvited.
Posted by: Johann
« on: November 23, 2019, 05:49:30 PM »

Things are often not well considered, and very cherry picked, looking after the "go's" before the "don'ts", but with the objection to gain desired, defend a stand and not to act in ways of Noble.

Also the very practical and live seeing and understanding of homeless life can not easy be known if dwelling in and using householder domain.

May Nyom do and undertake of what seems good and right in his relations, best in line with Dhamma, and no need to feel burdened by other relations circumstances. They might not relay on common assumed rights, but on given.
Posted by: saddhamma
« on: November 23, 2019, 05:29:59 PM »

There is a case where social almsgiving [food in the derived case] (of which isn't public domain actually either) for the poor can be used by monks, but only in special cases and no more then two times.
Perhaps Bhante may have forgotten about other cases in the suttas and vinaya of given in the public domain, where monks and householders alike freely made use. One example in the vinayapitaka is the woodland grove where the Buddha met the group of thirty friends of high standing who were amusing themselves in the grove with their wives, while the Buddha was meditating in that same woodland grove. Surely there must have been similar public donations of groves by kings or generous land owners that monastics and householders alike made use of. Another case is the public donation of resthouses for travelers, both monastics and householders (see the background story involving Venerable Anuruddha on the rule about sleeping in the same place with a woman).

And just to inform forther: telling a monk: "go and ask" or thinking "if he desires, needs, he can do as well as we common do" isn't really of much merits in all circumstances. Does Nyom think that those near or in the Noble Domain desire of what "householders" hold on, and go after it?

May Bhante forgive me if my offer to provide Bhante contact information was offensive. Bhante mentioned that Bhante already asked BPS. I was just pointing out to Bhante that BPS are the wrong owners to ask, and only wished to point Bhante to the right owners if Bhante was still interested in asking.
Posted by: Johann
« on: November 23, 2019, 04:12:10 PM »

It's voluntary to change relation, Nyom.

Common related and Public Domain related, isn't the Noble Domain. And no interest in getting involved in culture thieving, the heritage, of the Sangha. Not to speak that putting things under this common domains requires approve to be used also for bad things, aside of approve of akusala. No comment on directly trade and livelihood on it.

It's also not proper to approach householers and ask (not to speak of use not really given). Also this ways have been pointed out in practical ways, that assumings are total different as real approaches.

So my Nyom leave the householders ways in their range and good to not participate and approve the pulling of heritage of the Noble Ones into this range, not encourage, not to speak from doing, if after long term wellfare, let it be their merits and demerits, as they wish, of what counts for Nyom as well.

There is a case where social almsgiving [food in the derived case] (of which isn't public domain actually either) for the poor can be used by monks, but only in special cases and no more then two times.

It's not without reason that my person says, Nyom is certain not related but to a good amount in relation with corrupters of families and marxists, pseudo-liberal, not fearing to take of what is not given, common householders, villagers, making a living on sozial work and favor, approve of lower...

May Nyom join the rebel group at suttacentral or commerial shareplaces, their they aren't that conservative, and do not fear misconduct, villagers ways are high regarded there and encouraged to follow in taking and giving what isn't given. There they follow the aim to cut all down to the lowest equal for harmonious consume and trades in the world.

And just to inform forther: telling a monk: "go and ask" or thinking "if he desires, needs, he can do as well as we common do" isn't really of much merits in all circumstances. Does Nyom think that those near or in the Noble Domain desire of what "householders" hold on, and go after it?

May Nyom go out, and let go of taking on trust on assuming that given without knowing, and try to ask for the Sanghas use without bonds to Common and Public domains, to find out for himself. Seeing the requirement, and if only purified on one side, would be of great merits, if rightly obtained is given into sublime field. It might be that in case of public, he wouldn't easy find the owner to ask, as already death. And in the other cases he might see that even a copy of what commonhouseholders hold, will be hardly obtained without backpulling strings.

Rare, very rare, is generosity with purification involved, beyond common trade, the more rare is purifying exchange of goodness of Dhamma. And soon no more present in this world, as it currently look like.
Posted by: saddhamma
« on: November 23, 2019, 03:57:25 PM »

Dear Bhante,
Thanks to Bhante for not being too troubled about my use of Wisdom Publications generous public donation of their sutta translations.  _/\_ _/\_ _/\_

To add: the source of the sutta, owner Buddhist Publication Society: the current trading monk, ( Nyanatusita Bhikkhu ) isn't pleased to see Dhamma-Dana and share for the Sangha, as personally approached and asked and it's strongly to doubt whether obo.genaud actually had asked, went beyound common, and pleasing to the Noble Ones. Their shares for commons are simply a market and honor pressured gifts, likewise the speech of Noble Ones and that of smart trader are often very similar, abstaining from both, praise and blame, but the first out of avoiding accumulations and the secound for gain.

May Bhante not blame BPS translators. Wisdom Publications own the copyrights and authorization for what translations get donated. I can give Bhante information about the Wisdom Publication Copyright contact person if Bhante would like to ask the real owners about donating more of their translations than what is currently available in the Public Domain for use by monastics.

And taking of what isn't given, even if stolen, even if "back", is still taking what isn't given and not Noble, as well. Relays on wrong view, rights, and demanding.

But Bhante, the bhikkhu sangha are the owners, custodians and preservers of the dhammavinaya in any language. So I wonder why Bhante thinks translations that have been donated to the general public and recognised as such by the world, cannot be used by monastics. I cannot think of a more deserving group to make use of such public donations than monastics if used properly without violating the terms of the corresponding Public Domain license. Isn't Bhante's views and opinions on proper use of Public Domain translations by monastics overshooting what is considered to be proper usage in the world?
Posted by: Johann
« on: November 23, 2019, 02:48:52 PM »

To add: the source of the sutta, owner Buddhist Publication Society: the current trading monk, ( Nyanatusita Bhikkhu ) isn't pleased to see Dhamma-Dana and share for the Sangha, as personally approached and asked and it's strongly to doubt whether obo.genaud actually had asked, went beyound common, and pleasing to the Noble Ones. Their shares for commons are simply a market and honor pressured gifts, likewise the speech of Noble Ones and that of smart trader are often very similar, abstaining from both, praise and blame, but the first out of avoiding accumulations and the secound for gain.

It's the villagers way to "steal" stolen, cheat each other, to battle for trade and gain and sell pseudo-liberality to bind for own lifelihood.

And taking of what isn't given, even if stolen, even if "back", is still taking what isn't given and not Noble, as well. Relays on wrong view, rights, and demanding.

If wishing for simply much wealth (incl. knowledge), many relations, fame, that is also a voluntary way, but the other direction of gain and maintain wisdom and release, not the Noble way. So those are two different paths, that of the "householder" and "homeless". When they get mixed up, they then to unify at the lower and lose of the higher alternative.

A person can cite and remember even all Dhamma by as a spoon does not recognize the taste of the soup, wouldn't see his own defilements, and therefore commentars and pointing out, by stories seeming not relevant, the guidance of others, is very importand to make the taste accessible.
Posted by: Johann
« on: November 23, 2019, 02:17:16 PM »

Dear Bhante Johann,
Thanks to Bhante for sharing his views about what entails the tradition of the Noble Ones. I was hoping Bhante could also elaborate a bit this statement:
Quote from: ??
householders way decorating it with the Gems to gain some shine like shine.
Are householders no longer part of the triple Gems in Bhante's tradition?
As Nyom probable pointed out in the Sutta shared, answering already the question (for what even reason ask, considering that). Householder here means, no virtue, as not penetrated the Senses and does not refer to outwardly clothes, includes a huge amount of people in robes as well, trading with Dhamma, making a lifelihood on it and from corrupting families (those running around in disguise... hiding and act for most accumulations)

Quote from: Nyom Ebo
Bhante knows my preference for definition of Nobility by the Buddha so may Bhante allow me to share Venerable Nanamoli's translation of Aranavibhanga Sutta as an alternative definition of the tradition of the Noble Ones.
I have removed direct links to conform to the rules of this forum so I hope it is not too much trouble for Bhante.

It touches my person and possible others only that far when wrong conducts and bad relations are approved.
It's not in my persons sphere to finally know whether Nyom takes and gives what not given (has reason to take on trust or not, acts on wrong or right view) but signs say he might still used to commons and villagers ways.

Things "trouble" Atma only as far as to assist toward what is kusala and prefent others from wrong view and wrong actions on it.

As far as aware the person of the source, a former related of the punk and rebel sect around Sujato and to adaptation of making the Tipitaka a legal trade subject via Oxford's objections, does not give toward the Sangha, has no relation to the Gems and intents in spheres of householders and rebels.

(The Dhamma shared former on ati.org, was given consciously and personal by Upasaka John B., and received for the Sangha and it's follower then, before he abounded it later to the related of the householder-sects and Robin hoods. It can be used and taken, shared on trust,  found on zugangzureinsicht.org or accesstoinsight.eu, if wishing to relay on given.)

If wishing to know whether given for purpose outward the common, householder, ways and intended without string back to world, good if Nyom personally ask whether he can take and share it for the Sangha and faithfull follower and thereby not only keep his Silas clean but also based on them, would make relation, great merits to dedicate rightly attained here when perceiving the Sublimity within, reflecting on the Savaka Sangha.
Posted by: saddhamma
« on: November 23, 2019, 01:51:36 PM »

Dear Bhante Johann,
Thanks to Bhante for sharing his views about what entails the tradition of the Noble Ones. I was hoping Bhante could also elaborate a bit this statement:
Quote from: ??
householders way decorating it with the Gems to gain some shine like shine.
Are householders no longer part of the triple Gems in Bhante's tradition?

Bhante knows my preference for definition of Nobility by the Buddha so may Bhante allow me to share Venerable Nanamoli's translation of Aranavibhanga Sutta as an alternative definition of the tradition of the Noble Ones.
I have removed direct links to conform to the rules of this forum so I hope it is not too much trouble for Bhante.

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa

THUS HAVE I HEARD. On one occasion the Blessed One was living at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. There the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus thus:

"Bhikkhus." - "Venerable sir," they replied. The Blessed One said this:

2. "Bhikkhus, I shall teach you an exposition of non-conflict.

Listen and attend closely to what I shall say." - "Yes, venerable sir," the bhikkhus replied. The Blessed One said this:

3. "One should not pursue sensual pleasure, which is low, vulgar, coarse, ignoble, and unbeneficial; and one should not pursue self-mortification, which is painful, ignoble, and unbeneficial. The Middle Way discovered by the Tathāgata avoids both extremes; giving vision, giving knowledge, it leads to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbāna.[1257] One should know what it is to extol and what it is to disparage, and knowing both, one should neither extol nor disparage but should teach only the Dhamma. One should know how to define pleasure, and knowing that; one should pursue pleasure within oneself. One should not utter covert speech, and one should not utter overt sharp speech~ One should speak unhurriedly, not hurriedly. One should not insist on local language, and one should not override normal usage. This is the summary of the exposition of non-conflict.

4. "'One should not pursue sensual pleasure, which is low, vulgar, coarse, ignoble, and unbeneficial; and one should not pursue self-mortification, which is painful, ignoble, and unbeneficial.' So it was said. And with reference to what was this said?

"The pursuit of the enjoyment of one whose pleasure is linked to sensual desires[1258] - low, vulgar, coarse, ignoble, and unbeneficial - is a state beset by suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the wrong way.[1259] [231] Disengagement from the pursuit of the enjoyment of one whose pleasure is linked to sensual desires - low, vulgar, coarse, ignoble, and unbeneficial - is a state without suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the right way.

"The pursuit of self-mortification - painful, ignoble, and unbeneficial - is a state beset by suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the wrong way. Disengagement from the pursuit of self-mortification - painful, ignoble, and unbeneficial - is a state without suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the right way.

"So it was with reference to this that it was said: 'One should not pursue sensual pleasure, which is low, vulgar, coarse, ignoble, and unbeneficial; and one should not pursue self-mortification, which is painful, ignoble, and unbeneficial.'

5. "'The Middle Way discovered by the Tathāgata avoids both these extremes; giving vision, giving knowledge, it leads to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbāna.' So it was said. And with reference to what was this said? It is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulne1?s, and right concentration. So it was with reference to this that it was said: 'The Middle Way discovered by the Tathāgata avoids both these extremes ... to Nibbāna.'

6. "'One should know what it is to extol and what it is to disparage, and knowing both, one should neither extol nor disparage but should teach only the Dhamma.' So it was said. And with reference to what was this said?

7. "How, bhikkhus, does there come to be extolling and disparaging and failure to teach only the Dhamma? When one says: 'All those engaged in the pursuit of the enjoyment of one whose pleasure is linked to sensual desires - low ... and unbeneficial - are beset by suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and they have entered upon the wrong way,' one thus disparages some. When one says: 'All those disengaged from the pursuit of the enjoyment of one whose pleasure is linked to sensual desires -low ... and unbeneficial - are without suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and they have entered upon the right way,' one thus extols some.

"When one says: 'All those engaged in the pursuit of selfmortification - painful, ignoble, and unbeneficial - [232] are beset by suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and they have entered upon the wrong way,' one thus disparages some. When one says: 'All those disengaged from the pursuit of self-mortification - painful, ignoble, and unbeneficial - are without suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and they have entered upon the right way,' one thus extols some.

"When one says: 'All those who have not abandoned the fetter of being[1260] are beset by suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and they have entered upon the wrong way,' one thus disparages some. When one says: 'All those who have abandoned the fetter of being are without suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and they have entered upon the right way,' one thus extols some. This is how there comes to be extolling and disparaging and failure to teach only the Dhamma.

8. "And how, bhikkhus, does there come to be neither extolling nor disparaging but teaching only the Ohamma? When one does not say: 'All those engaged in the pursuit of the enjoyment of one whose pleasure is linked to sensual desires ... have entered upon the wrong way,' but says instead: 'The pursuit is a state beset by suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, -and it is the wrong way,' then one teaches only the Dhamma.[1261] When one does not say: I All those disengaged from the pursuit of the enjoyment of one whose pleasure is linked to sensual desires ... have entered upon the right way,' but says instead: 'The disengagement is a state without suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the right way,' then one teaches only the Dhamma.

"When one does not say: 'All those engaged in the pursuit of self-mortification ... have entered upon the wrong way,' but says instead: 'The pursuit is a state beset by suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the wrong way,' then one teaches only the Dhamma. When one does not say: 'All those disengaged from the pursuit of self-mortification ... have entered upon the right way,' but says instead: 'The disengagement is a state without suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the right way,' then one teaches only the Dhamma.

"When one does not say: 'All those who have not abandoned the fetter of being ... have entered upon the wrong way,' [233] but says instead: 'As long as the fetter of being is unabandoned, being too is unabandoned,' then one teaches only the Dhamma.

When one does not say: 'All those who have abandoned the fetter of being ... have entered upon the right way,' but says instead: 'When the fetter of being is abandoned, being also is abandoned,' then one teaches only the Dhamma.

"So it was with reference to this that it was said: 'One should know what it is to extol and what it is to disparage, and knowing both, one should neither extol nor disparage but should teach only the Dhamma.'

9. "'One should know how to define pleasure, and knowing that, one should pursue pleasure within oneself.' So it was said. And with reference to what was this said?

"Bhikkhus, there are these five cords of sensual pleasure.

What five?

Forms cognizable by the eye sounds cognizable by the ear. .. odours cognizable by the nose fIavours cognizable by the tongue ... tangibles cognizable by the body that are wished for, desired, agreeable, and likeable, connected with sensual desire and provocative of lust. These are the five cords of sensual pleasure. Now the pleasure and joy that arise dependent on these five cords of sensual pleasure are called sensual pleasure a filthy pleasure, a coarse pleasure, an ignoble pleasure. I say of this kind of pleasure that it should not be pursued, that it should not be developed, that it should not be cultivated, and that it should be feared.

"Here, bhikkhus, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, a bhikkhu enters upon and abides in the first jhāna ... the second jhāna ... the third jhāna ... the fourth jhāna. This is called the bliss of renunciation, the bliss of seclusion, the bliss of peace, the bliss of enlightenment. I say of this kind of pleasure that it should be pursued, that it should be developed, that it should be cultivated, and that it should not be feared.

[234] "So it was with reference to this that it was said: 'One should know how to define pleasure, and knowing that, one should pursue pleasure within oneself.'

10. "'One should not utter covert speech, and one should not utter overt sharp speech.' So it was said. And with reference to what was this said?

"Here, bhikkhus, when one knows covert speech to be untrue, incorrect, and unbeneficial, one should on no account utter it. When one knows covert speech to be true, correct, and unbeneficial, one should try not to utter it. But when one knows covert speech to be true, correct, and beneficial, one may utter it, knowing the time to do so.

"Here, bhikkhus, when one knows overt sharp speech to be untrue, incorrect, and unbeneficial, one should on no account utter it. When one knows overt sharp speech to be true, correct, and unbeneficial, one should try not to utter it. But when one knows overt sharp speech to be true, correct, and beneficial, one may utter it, knowing the time to do so.

"So it was with reference to this that it was said: 'One should not utter covert speech, and one should not utter overt sharp speech.'

11. "'One should speak unhurriedly, not hurriedly.' So it was said. And with reference to what was this said?

"Here, bhikkhus, when one speaks hurriedly, one's body grows tired and one's mind becomes excited, one's voice is strained and one's throat becomes hoarse, and the speech of one who speaks hurriedly is indistinct and hard to understand.

"Here, bhikkhus, when one speaks unhurriedly, one's body does not grow tired nor does one's mind become excited, one's voice is not strained nor does one's throat become hoarse, and the speech of one who speaks unhurriedly is distinct and easy to understand.

"So it was with reference to this that it was said: 'One should speak unhurriedly, not hurriedly.'

12. "'One should not insist on local language, and one should not override normal usage.' So it was said. And with reference to what was this said?

"How, bhikkhus, does there come to be insistence on local language and overriding of normal usage? Here, bhikkhus, in different localities they call the same thing a 'dish' [pāti], [235] a 'bowl' [patta], a 'vessel' [vittha], a 'saucer' [serāva], a 'pan' [dhāropa], a 'pot' [pot}.a], a 'mug' [hana] or a 'basin' [pislla]. So whatever they call it in such and such a locality, one speaks accordingly, firmly adhering [to that expression] and insisting: 'Only this is correct; anything else is wrong.' This is how there comes to be insistence on local language and overriding normal usage.[1262]

"And how, bhikkhus, does there come to be non-insistence on local language and non-overriding of normal usage? Here, bhikkhus, in different localities they call the same thing a 'dish' ... or a 'basin.' So whatever they call it in such and such a locality, without adhering [to that expression] one speaks accordingly, thinking: 'These venerable ones, it seems, are speaking with reference to this.' This is how there comes to be noninsistence on local language and non-overriding of normal usage.

"So it was with reference to this that it was said: 'One should not insist on local language, and one should not override normal usage.'

13. "Here, bhikkhus, the pursuit of the enjoyment of one whose pleasure is linked to sensual desires -low ... and unbeneficial - is a state beset by suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the wrong way. Therefore this is a state with conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, disengagement from the pursuit of the enjoyment of one whose pleasure is linked to sensual desires low ... and unbeneficial - is a state without suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the right way. Therefore this is a state without conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, the pursuit of self-mortification - painful, ignoble, and unbeneficial - is a state beset by suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the wrong way. Therefore this is a state with conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, disengagement from the pursuit of selfmortification - painful, ignoble, and unbeneficial - is a state without suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the right way. [236] Therefore this is a state without conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, the Middle Way discovered by the Tathāgata avoids both these extremes; giving vision, giving knowledge, it leads to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbāna. It is a state without suffering ... and it is the right way. Therefore this is a state without conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, extolling and disparaging and failure to teach only the Dhamma is a state beset by suffering ... and it is the wrong way. Therefore this is a state with conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, not extolling and not disparaging and teaching only the Dhamma is a state without suffering ... and it is the right way. Therefore this is a state without conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, sensual pleasure - a filthy pleasure, a coarse pleasure, an ignoble pleasure - is a state beset by suffering ... and it is the wrong way. Therefore this is a state with conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, the bliss of renunciation, the bliss of seclusion, the bliss of peace, the bliss of enlightenment, is a state without suffering ... and it is the right way. Therefore this is a state without conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, covert speech that is untrue, incorrect, and unbeneficial is a state beset by suffering ... Therefore this is a state with conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, covert speech that is true, correct, and unbeneficial is a state beset by suffering ... Therefore this is a state with conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, covert speech that is true, correct, and beneficial is a state without suffering ... Therefore this is a state without conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, overt sharp speech that is untrue, incorrect, and unbeneficial is a state beset by suffering ... Therefore this is a state with conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, overt sharp speech that is true, correct, and unbeneficial is a state beset by suffering ... Therefore this is a state with conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, overt sharp speech [237] that is true, correct, and beneficial is a state without suffering ... Therefore this is a state without conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, the speech of one who speaks hurriedly is a state beset by suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the wrong way. Therefore this is a state with conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, the speech of one who speaks unhurriedly is a state without suffering ... Therefore this is a state without conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, insistence on local language and overriding of normal usage is a state beset by suffering ... Therefore this is a state with conflict.

"Here, bhikkhus, non-insistence on local language and nonoverriding of normal usage is a state without suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the right way. Therefore this is a state without conflict.

14. "Therefore, bhikkhus, you should train yourselves thus: 'We shall know the state with conflict and we shall know the state without conflict, and knowing these, we shall enter upon the way without conflict.' Now, bhikkhus, Subhuti is a clansman who has entered upon the way without conflict."[1263]

That is what the Blessed One said. The bhikkhus were satisfied and delighted in the Blessed One's words.


[1257] This is substantially identical with the proclamation with which the newly enlightened Buddha opened his first discourse to the five bhikkhus, before teaching them the Four Noble Truths.

[1258] This is a more complicated expression for the pursuit of sensual pleasure.

[1259] MA: It is "beset by suffering, vexation," etc., through the suffering and vexation, etc., of its results and the suffering and vexation, etc., of its attendant defilements.

[1260] This is craving for being.

[1261] That is, extolling and disparaging come about when one frames one's statements in terms of persons, some of whom are praised and others blamed. One teaches "only the Dhamma" when one frames one's statements in terms of the state (dhamma) - the mode of practice - without explicit references to persons.

[1262] This problem of "insistence on local language" must have been particularly acute in the Saŋgha, when the bhikkhus lived a life of constant wandering and had to pass through many localities each with their distinct dialects.

[1263] Ven. Subhuti was the younger brother of Anāthapiṇḍika and became a bhikkhu on the day Jeta's Grove was offered to the Saŋgha. The Buddha appointed him the foremost disciple in two categories - those who live without conflict and those who are worthy of gifts.

Quote from: obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/wp/mn/mn.139.ntbb.wp.htm