Vinaya Pitaka (3): Khandhaka
by I. B. Horner | 2014 | 386,194 words | ISBN-13: 9781921842160
The English translation of the Khandhaka: the second book of the Pali Vinaya Pitaka, one of the three major ‘baskets’ of Therevada canonical literature. It is a collection of various narratives. The English translation of the Vinaya-pitaka (third part, khandhaka) contains many Pali original words, but transliterated using a system similar to the I...
An act of suspension for not relinquishing a wrong view
Kd.11.32.1 At one time the Awakened One, the Lord was staying at Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove in Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. Now at that time a wrong view had arisen to a monk named Ariṭṭha who had formerly been a vulture-trainer, like this[1]:
“In so far as I understand dhamma taught by the Lord, it is that in following those things called stumbling-blocks by the Lord, there is no stumbling-block at all.”
BD.5.36 Several monks heard: “A wrong view has arisen to the monk named Ariṭṭha who was formerly a vulture-trainer, like this: ‘In so far as I understand … there is no stumbling-block at all.’”
Then these monks approached the monk Ariṭṭha who had formerly been a vulture-trainer, and having approached, they spoke thus to the monk Ariṭṭha who had formerly been a vulture-trainer:
“Is it true, as is said, reverend Ariṭṭha, that a wrong view has arisen to you, like this: ‘In so far as I understand … there is no stumbling-block at all’?”
“Undoubtedly, your reverences, as I understand dhamma taught by the Lord, it is that in following those things called stumbling-blocks by the Lord, there is no stumbling-block at all.”
Kd.11.32.2 “Do not speak thus, reverend Ariṭṭha, do not misrepresent the Lord; misrepresentation of the Lord is not at all seemly, and the Lord certainly would not speak thus. Reverend Ariṭṭha, in many a figure are things that are stumbling-blocks called stumbling-blocks by the Lord, and in following these there is a veritable stumbling-block. Sense-pleasures are declared by the Lord to be (things) affording little satisfaction, of much pain, of much tribulation, where in is more danger. Sense-pleasures are declared by the Lord to be like a skeleton, of much pain, of much tribulation, wherein is more danger. Sense-pleasures are declared by the Lord to be like a lump of meat … to be like a fire-brand of dry grass … to be like a pit of glowing embers … to be like a dream … to be like something borrowed … to be like the fruits of a tree Vin.2.26 … to be like a slaughter-house … to be like an impaling stake … Sense-pleasures are declared by the Lord to be like a snake’s head, of much pain, of much tribulation, wherein is more danger.”
Yet the monk Ariṭṭha who had formerly been a vulture-trainer, on being spoken to thus by these monks, expressed that wrong view as before, obstinately holding to it, adhering to it: “Undoubtedly, your reverences, as I understand dhamma taught by the Lord, it is that in following those things called stumbling-blocks by the Lord, there is no stumbling-block at all.”
Kd.11.32.3 BD.5.37 And since those monks were unable to dissuade the monk Ariṭṭha who had formerly been a vulture-trainer from that wrong view, then those monks approached the Lord; and having approached, they told this matter to the Lord. Then the Lord on this occasion, in this connection, having had the Order of monks convened, questioned the monk Ariṭṭha who had formerly been a vulture-trainer, saying:
“Is it true, as is said, that to you, Ariṭṭha, a wrong view like this arose: ‘In so far as I understand dhamma … there is no stumbling-block at all’?”
“Undoubtedly, Lord, as I understand dhamma … no stumbling-block at all.”
“To whom then do you, foolish man, understand that dhamma was taught thus by me? Are not, foolish man, things that are stumbling-blocks called in many a figure stumbling-blocks by me, and in following these is there not a veritable stumbling-block? Sense-pleasures are declared by me to be things affording little satisfaction, of much pain, of much tribulation, wherein is more danger … Sense-pleasures are declared by me to be like a snake’s head, of much pain, of much tribulation, wherein is more danger. And yet you, foolish man, not only misrepresent me because of your own wrong grasp, but you also injure yourself, and give rise to much demerit which for a long time will be for you, foolish man, of woe and pain. It is not, foolish man, for pleasing those who are not (yet) pleased …” And having rebuked him, having given reasoned talk, he addressed the monks saying:
“Well then, monks, let the Order carry out a (formal) act of suspension for not giving up a wrong view[2] against the monk Ariṭṭha who was formerly a vulture-trainer, (and with) no eating with an Order.
Kd.11.32.4 “And thus, monks, should it be carried out: First, the monk Ariṭṭha should be reproved, having reproved him he should be made to remember, having made him remember he should be accused of the offence, having accused him of the offence, the Order should be informed by an experienced competent monk, saying: ‘Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. A wrong view has arisen to the monk Ariṭṭha who was formerly a BD.5.38 vulture-trainer, like this: Vin.2.27 In so far as I understand dhamma taught by the Lord … there is no stumbling-block at all. He does not give up this view. If it seems right to the Order, let the Order carry out a (formal) act of suspension for not giving up a wrong view against the monk Ariṭṭha who was formerly a vulture-trainer (and with) no eating with an Order. This is the motion. Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. A wrong view has arisen … He does not give up this view. The Order is carrying out a (formal) act of suspension for not giving up a wrong view against the monk Ariṭṭha who was formerly a vulture-trainer (and with) no eating with an Order. If the carrying out of the (formal) act of suspension for not giving up a wrong view against the monk Ariṭṭha who was formerly a vulture-trainer (and with) no eating with an Order is pleasing to the venerable ones, let them be silent; he to whom it is not pleasing should speak. And a second time I speak forth this matter … And a third time I speak forth this matter … It is pleasing to the Order; therefore it is silent. Thus do I understand this’. And, monks, proclaim in residence after residence: ‘A (formal) act of suspension for not giving up a wrong view has been carried out against the monk Ariṭṭha who was formerly a vulture-trainer (and with) no eating with an Order.’
Twelve on an act not by rule
Kd.11.33.1 “Monks, if a monk is possessed of three qualities … = Kd.11.2–Kd.11.5. Instead of did of censure read act of suspension for not giving up a wrong view …
Twelve on an act by rule
Not in Horner’s translation.
Six on desiring
Not in Horner’s translation.
Forty-three duties
… if he does not quarrel with monks.”
Told are the Eighteen Observances (connected with) a (Formal) Act of Suspension for Not Giving Up a Wrong View.
Kd.11.34.1 Then the Order carried out a (formal) act of suspension for not giving up his wrong view against the monk Ariṭṭha who was formerly a vulture-trainer, (and with) no eating with an Order. He, when the (formal) act of suspension for not giving up his wrong view had been carried out against him by the Order, left the Order. Those who were modest monks looked down upon, criticised, spread it about, saying: “How can this monk named Ariṭṭha who was formerly a vulture-trainer leave the Order when a (formal) act of suspension for not giving BD.5.39 up a wrong view is earned out against him by the Order?” Then these monks told this matter to the Lord. Then the Lord on this occasion, in this connection, having had the Order of monks convened, questioned the monks, saying:
“Is it true, as is said, monks, that the monk Ariṭṭha who was formerly a vulture-trainer left the Order when a (formal) act of suspension for not giving up a wrong view was carried out against him by the Order?” Vin.2.28
“It is true, Lord.” The Awakened One, the Lord rebuked them, saying:
“How, monks, can this foolish man leave the Order when a (formal) act of suspension for not giving up a wrong view was carried out against him by the Order? It is not, monks, for pleasing those who are not (yet) pleased …” And having rebuked them, having given reasoned talk, he addressed the monks, saying:
“Well then, monks, let the Order revoke[3] the (formal) act of suspension for not giving up a wrong view.
Forty-three cases that should not be revoked
Kd.11.34.2 “Monks, if a monk is possessed of five qualities … = Kd.11.6.2–Kd.11.6.2 …
Forty-three cases that should be revoked
… the (formal) act of suspension for not giving up a wrong view may be revoked.
Kd.11.34.3 Told are the Eighteen Cases where a (Formal) Act of Suspension for Not Giving Up a Wrong View may be Revoked.
Kd.11.35.1 “And thus, monks, should it be revoked. Monks, that monk against whom a (formal) act of suspension for not giving up a wrong view has been carried out, having approached the Order … see Kd.11.12 Instead of act of censure read act of suspension for not giving up a wrong view. Instead of Seyyasaka read the monk So-and-so … ‘… Thus do I understand this..”
Told is the Seventh (Formal) Act: that of Suspension for Not Giving Up a Wrong View.
Told is the First Section: that on (Formal) Acts.
In this Section are seven items: this is its key:
BD.5.40 Monks who are followers of Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka,
themselves makers of strife,
approached similar ones and incited them to strife, /
And strifes not arisen were born and those arisen expanded.
Modest, well behaved monks looked down upon. The expounder[4], /
The Awakened One, standing on what is verily dhamma,
self-developing, foremost of men, conqueror,
enjoined a (formal) act of censure at Sāvatthī. /
And what is carried out not in the presence of,
when there is no interrogation, no acknowledgement,
and what is carried out for no offence,
for one not (leading on to) confession, for one confessed, /
And what is carried out not having reproved,
not having made to remember, not having accused,
and too what is carried out not in the presence of,
not by rule, by an incomplete assembly, /
Again what is carried out when there is no interrogation,
not by rule, by an incomplete assembly,
and too what is carried out not on the acknowledgement,
not by rule, by an incomplete assembly, /
And too what is carried out when there is no offence,
not by rule, by an incomplete assembly,
and also for (an offence) which does not lead on to confession when it is
not by rule and the assembly is incomplete, /
And likewise for one that is confessed, if also
not by rule, by an incomplete assembly, Vin.2.29
and likewise not having reproved him, if also
not by rule, by an incomplete assembly, /
And likewise not having made him remember,
not by rule, by an incomplete assembly, /
and likewise not having accused him,
not by rule, by an incomplete assembly. /
The bright occasions[5] should also be inferred exactly according to the dark occasions.[6]
And the Order, so desiring, may carry out censure against this one: /
BD.5.41 The quarrel (-maker), the ignorant, the liver in company with.
The Order may carry out a (formal) act of censure in regard to moral habit,
good habits, against one who has fallen away from right views,[7] /
And against whoever speaks dispraise of the Awakened One, dhamma, the Order,
and the Order may also carry out a (formal) act of censure against three (kinds of) monks: /
The one who is a maker of strife, the ignorant one, the one intent on living in company;
likewise in regard to moral habit, good habits, right views, /
And against whoever speaks dispraise of the Awakened One, dhamma, the Order.
The one against whom a (formal) act of censure has been carried out
conducting himself properly, thus: /
Ordination, guidance, attendance by a novice,
the one against whom censure has been carried out should do
nothing in regard to exhortation, even although agreed upon. /
He should not fall into that same offence, into a similar one, or into one higher[8] than it,
and such a one would neither find fault with a (formal) act,
nor with those who carry it out, /
He should not suspend a regular (monk’s) Observance, Invitation,
such a one should not have to do with commands, authority, /
Leave, reproving, making remember and quarrels.
Ordination, guidance, attendance by a novice, /
Exhortation and even if agreed upon: the five qualities are not the end.[9]
If he falls into that same offence and into a similar one and one that is higher than it, /
And finding fault both with a (formal) act and with those who carry it out: this is not the end.[10]
Observance, Invitation, commands, authority, /
Leave, reproving too, making remember, quarrelling, BD.5.42
whoever is bound by these eight qualities, censure is not allayed for him.[11] /
The bright occasions should also be inferred
exactly according to the dark occasions.
And Seyyasaka too, ignorant, full of offences, living in company: /
The Self-Awakened One, great sage, enjoined a (formal) act of guidance.
(Followers of) the two monks, Assaji and Punabbasu, at Kiṭāgiri /
Indulged in a variety of bad habits and were not talked round.
The self-Awakened One, the Conqueror (enjoined) at Sāvatthī (formal) act of banishment. /
Sudhamma was a resident in Citta’s Macchasanda,
Sudhamma jeered at the lay follower Citta with talk on birth. /
The Truth-finder enjoined a (formal) act of reconciliation.
At Kosambī when the monk Channa, not wanting to see an offence, / Vin.2.30
The incomparable Conqueror enjoined (the Order) to suspend him for not seeing.
Channa did not want to make amends for that same offence. /
The leader enjoined a (formal) act of suspension for not making amends for.
The wrong view of Ariṭṭha was founded on ignorance. /
Suspension for not giving up the wrong view was proclaimed by the Conqueror.
A (formal) act of guidance, banishment, likewise reconciliation, /
A (formal) act for not seeing, for not making amends for, and for not giving up a wrong view.
Frivolity, bad habits, harming, and also a wrong mode of livelihood: /
These are additional cases in the (formal) act of banishment.
Two fives (beginning): non-receiving, dispraise, are two pentads particularly named[12], /
These are additional cases in the (formal) act of reconciliation.
And two among the (formal) acts are similar: censure and guidance; /
BD.5.43 And there are the remaining cases: banishment and reconciliation.
The three (formal) acts of suspension are alike in their division.
What remains in any (formal) act is to understood as in the case of censure. / Vin.2.31
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
Down to the phrase, “It is not, foolish man, for pleasing those who are not (yet) pleased …” (towards the end of Kd.11.32.3) = Bu-Pc.68.1 (Vin.4.133–Vin.4.135) which then formulates a “rule of training.” Translated at BD.3.21–BD.3.24, with notes.
[3]:
As Oldenberg, Vin.2.310–Vin.2.311 remarks, “we should expect” mā (or na) paṭippassambhetu, let not revoke; cf. Kd.11.16.1.
[4]:
padassaka (Sanskrit pradarśaka). Sinhalese edition reads parassato; Siamese edition parīsato (variant readings padassako, padassato).
[5]:
sukkavāra … kaṇhavāra, figuratively pure and impure, right and wrong.
[6]:
sukkavāra … kaṇhavāra, figuratively pure and impure, right and wrong.
[7]:
adhisīlam ajjhācāre atidiṭṭhivipannassa.
[9]:
na sammati, meaning does not cease, is not appeased, and signifying here that a formal act cannot be revoked because there are more than these five qualities to consider, and which may stand in the way of the revocation. Cf. sammanti at Dhp.5.
[10]:
na sammati, meaning does not cease, is not appeased, and signifying here that a formal act cannot be revoked because there are more than these five qualities to consider, and which may stand in the way of the revocation. Cf. sammanti at Dhp.5.
[11]:
n’ upasammati.
[12]:
atināmaka; ati-, meaning very much, specially.