Sādhu! Now updated with the latest changes. 
1 Like
It’s very rare for monastics that live in well-established, well-supported monasteries, but it’s not that uncommon for people who live in less comfy surroundings and have to fend for themselves.
Sudden visa issues, civil unrest, safety concerns especially for nuns, laypeople who lose interest halfway through vassa and stop supporting you or throw you out, winters with heaps of snow when you’re staying in a tent, …. All not uncommon.
These exceptions to the vassa rules are still very important today!
5 Likes
I’m not really sure how this should be handled TBH, but generally speaking the titles of ancient scripture are not italicized in English; but they are capitalized (“the Bible”). And it’s also normal to not italicize words if they are used commonly in a specific context. So I kind of lean towards using “in the Suttas”. Honestly I keep changing my mind on this one.
Seems wordy to me. Also, for clarity, state the main meaning first, then qualify:
these seven principles were used by the community as a whole in resolving problems and dealing with business, rather than being rules to be followed by individual members of the Sangha.
Tame the Pali! To a non-expert, this reads:
If the core of the JKYTFDUYTGDF as we have them now originated as a KUYFGKHYF to the KLUYGFUYFG, what might this original JYTFDUYTFD have looked like?
Interesting theory. It parallels the theory that the nikayas were created by the breakup of the original angas.
Here FYI is a description according to the Satapatha:
https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/satapatha-brahmana-english/d/doc63113.htm
stream-enterer
First, I’d avoid saying “taking” refuge, the Pali is “going”, and the difference is significant. Whole Dhamma talks have been given on this point!
Also this is a bit confusing, it’s not clear until later that you mean the use of this specific threefold formula. Perhaps, “The threefold formula of going for refuge”
Also, it’s found at Kp 1, presumably as a novice ordination.
Well, it depends what suttas you’re looking at!
But more to the point, the issue here is really what purpose this narrative construction really had. It’s not just decoration; it’s framing the life of the Buddha, and specifically the established of rules governing the community, within a particular framing that is supposed to inform how you read everything else. On one level, it’s obviously a co-opting of Brahmanical prestige. But at the same time, it doesn’t just dismiss the miracles, it tells us that the rules to follow should be taken seriously because they were laid down by this person. It is a mode of establishing authority and meaning.
I think you’re speaking here of the Vinaya account, or do you also mean the Snp story?
Also, interestingly, used by a wheel-turning monarch to bless the Wheel.
Pindapata time!
2 Likes
Indeed. It kind of becomes a no true Scotsman problem.
Indeed, yes. I think that kind of analysis is better when more focussed. In this case if you look at the main narratives of the mythic arc:
- (birth)
- post-awakening (Kd 1)
- Parinibbana (DN 16)
- First Council (Kd 21)
- Second Council (Kd 22)
There’s a fairly consistent pattern that we might call “mythic misting”: the further the events in the past, the less narratively concrete they are. This suggests that the authors were close in time to the Second Council, with events getting progressively more “legendary” the further they are in the past.
1 Like
I can understand what Ajahn wrote even though I’m not an expert.
Any free article/publication on this topic? I find it weird that jataka is part of anga because I thought jataka is late. Thank you in advance, Bhante.
1 Like
Thanks so much! I appreciate the feedback!
I didn’t capitalise suttas because it doesn’t quite seem like a collection of scriptures. When I speak of Vinaya, however, I use this as a shorthand for Vinaya Piṭaka, and so I capitalise it. This leads to the incongruity “suttas and Vinaya”, which is not nice. And so I will follow your lead. Suttas, in the plural, is really just another way of referring to the Canonical texts, and so capitalising it makes sense after all. Sutta in the singular, on the other hand, is a bit different. If it refers to a specific sutta, then it should be capitalised. If not, I think lower case is appropriate. And no italics in either case.
Good! Writing is hard. Often what comes out as a first try is too wordy. It is a lot of work, and sometimes beyond my abilities, to make the prose crisp and succinct.
LOL! But, yes.
Yes, and it would make sense if similar principles were used to structure the various Canonical material.
Thanks. Lots of purification by water, but I cannot see any mention of a bhiṅkāra.
That was a slip; I use “going” elsewhere. And who, if I may ask, gave that Dhamma talk?
My clear sense is that the “density” of the super-normal is far higher in the said Vinaya material. Yes, there are few outlier suttas, such as DN 24 and MN 49, but overall the suttas contain less such material.
Yet I agree that
And so a better comparison would be the autobiographical material given in suttas, such as of MN 4, MN 12, MN 26, MN 36, MN 128, AN 3.36, etc. Such a comparison, in fact, strengthens my point significantly. DN 16, which does contain some super-normal events, would then be seen as fitting better with the Khandhaka material, to which it is related, than the suttas given above.
Interesting. I may just quote you on this! But it is still the case that the Buddha, when speaking of himself, rarely used super-normal powers to establish authority (an arguable exception in MN 49). This was done by later generations. And that is sort of the point I am trying to make. The frequency of the super-normal is one among many indicators of the relative chronology of these texts.
Well, my intro is obviously mostly concerned with the Vinaya, which is what I had in mind here. Still, the apparent mythological status of Bimbisāra will affect how we read any passage that includes his name.
Footnote added.
This is interesting. And I would make the point that such “misting” also goes the other way, that is, the closer in time the “recording” of an account was to the time of the Buddha, the less mythical it appears.
3 Likes
Well, you’re intelligent, well-read, and learned, so you’re at least somewhat expert. 
But sure. It’s just that the cognitive load increases. Using one Pali word in a sentence is okay, but the more you add the harder it gets to parse out. It’s not that there’s a right or wrong, but it is important to be aware of it so as to avoid it except where necessary. It’s one of those things where, when you’re ready to go over the final draft of a piece, you can keep an eye out for it and ask if there’s a clearer way to express it.
The Jatakas in the angas are usually understood to be the past life stories of the Buddha that are found in the Nikayas themselves. The collection of Jatakas is significantly later, but within the collection there is material of different dates; some of the verses and stories probably predate the Buddha, in fact, making them the oldest material in Pali. Not easy to say which parts, though!
Isn’t it the other way around?
This is a bit stiff. Perhaps something like:
Sāriputta realizes the truth of the teaching and rightaway shares it with his friend Moggallāna. Both now being stream-enterers, they go to the Buddha, who, declaring that they will become his chief disciples, gives them full ordination.
I know it’s never easy to get a flowing text with lots of references, but I think it’s better to try to separate out the references (in brackets) as much as possible, moving them to the end of sentences (or phrases). It makes it easier to parse the sentences if you don’t have to process the references as well.
There is a section that lists the qualities required of one who wishes to give ordinations (Kd 1:36.2.1–37.14.1). Then there are rules for the ordination of novice monks (Kd 1:50.1.1–52.1.1, Kd 1:54.1.1–60.1.1), and a discussion on the ordination of monastics of other religions (Kd 1:38.1.1–38.11.7).
This is an interesting discussion, but maybe treat the actual textual issue first, establish that, then draw it out to apply to ordination. Better to build the argument step by step than ask readers to take a leap, and then explain how you got there—especially in such a controversial topic.
Also, reword:
The validity of ordinations is a perennial issue discussed in monastic circles.
Perhaps word it to convey that they re-organized their texts. It seems they originally had a more conventional Khandhaka structure.
I’m not going to quote every instance, but this is another case where rewording would create a stronger sentence.
A series of exemptions states that monastics are allowed to travel for seven days if there is important business to be conducted, such as looking after a sick monastic or a family member (Kd 3:5.1.1–8.1.6).
Or better, open with the main point of the sentence:
Monastics are allowed to travel for seven days if there is important business to be conducted, such as looking after a sick monastic or a family member (Kd 3:5.1.1–8.1.6).
Again:
This chapter appears to allow a monastic to spend the rainy season in more than one place, a fact that is rarely commented on.
Again, one must wade through the entire sentence to reach the point. Remember, many readers read by ploughing through one word at a time, especially those who have English as a second language. When the point of the sentence is not clear at the start, they have to, as it were, consign all that information to their short-term memory, in anticipation of the words crystallizing into something meaningful. The longer it takes to reach the point, the harder they have to work.
So as a rule, only in certain circumstances—which admittedly are not easy to define—at least when writing non-fiction prose or in similar contexts, except of course when aiming for a particular stylistic effect, I personally, although I know every writer is different, usually, but not always, find myself reorganizing sentences to open with the main point—unless I’m pranking a friend.
Better:
Monastics are told to comply with “the wishes of kings”.
(Tired: tell the reader it is interesting. Wired: make it interesting.)
Vinayas (?)
(If the only thing we have to say about such events is that they are late, we are not listening to what they have to say, or wondering why the Sangha chose to add them. )
It’s astonishing, shocking really, that in English-language Buddhist studies no-one has done anything that supersedes Frauwallner’s work published 70 years ago. People criticize various aspects of his work, but criticism is easy, constructive scholarship is hard.
Ohh, and he was a Nazi, so there’s that.
Not really relevant, but I did a note on Pajjota here:
tl;dr, Pajjota had an extensive web of alliances, which calls into question exactly how ferocious he really was. It raises an interesting counterfactual; given that Pajjota had allied Avanti, Bhagga, Vaccha, Sūrasena, and Vajji, could the rise of Magadha gone otherwise?
I wonder if there’s a more specific reason for the single vs triple contrast, beyond emphasis. Repeating three times makes it fixed and memorized. Just once, it’s more of a nonce statement.
I’m not sure how this is going to pass through the publication pipeline. Generally, avoid structural elements like paragraphs and lists in footnotes. In the actual text, parts of notes can be divided with bar | rather than paragraph. In the Intro … I honestly can’t remember whether we support paragraphs or not.
Personally, I think this would work just fine as a list in the main article.
I don’t think this is wrong, but it’s reductive. I dunno, I just find this kind of discourse is only concerned to explain things away rather than understand them. The community was growing and spreading, and needed to find new ways to communicate their message. There was a synergy between new means of creative expression in the visual arts and the traditional texts. Artists illustrated texts, and texts grew more visual.
FYI these days I use “mentor” for upajjhāya and “tutor” for ācariya (who usually takes on a more personal role as an individual “tutor” rather than a classroom “teacher”).
5 Likes
No shame in getting a close reader to go over it. But it’s not easy to find someone!
Indeed. Perhaps related to the upabhṛt, a sacrificial ladle for pouring butter on the fire.
Sure, and I don’t disagree, just anticipating a more skeptical response.
2 Likes
The earliest text with this motif must be AN 3.36, which describes the Buddha-to-be’s three stilt houses, etc.
Thanks for taking on this editorial task! I hadn’t expected this, but it is clearly needed. I recall some time ago you mentioned the idea of getting a proper editor on board. That would certainly be helpful. I may even look out for one myself.
Yes, I have agonised over this. There are conflicting demands. On the one hand, I don’t want too many footnotes, because they too tend interrupt the reading experience. On the other hand, long references in the text are also interruptive. What I have tried to do is integrate them into the natural reading flow so as to minimise interruption, but I suppose this has not been successful, especially perhaps when the references are long and complicated. One way to overcome thus is to simplify the references, for instance, by giving only the start point of a range, but not the end point. At other times, the visible part of a refence may just include a rule number, whereas the link includes the appropriate segment. So I would suggest that a number of different approaches may be used dependent on the circumstances, including putting references in footnotes, putting them in parentheses at the end of sentences or clauses, or just leaving them unparenthesised in line.
So, I’ve looked at this more closely. It seems to me that the discussion of textual issues need some sort of framing. If I go straight to them, it becomes too abstract, and again will be hard to follow. At the end of the argument I do, in fact, discuss how the textual issues apply to ordination, thus creating a clear conclusion for the reader. I am not sure, but it seems satisfactory to me. I have made a few changes to the opening paragraph which hopefully make the argument easier to follow.
Thanks for this reminder.
I agree. The question is, which battles do I want to fight. I have never really considered this question before, and so I am unsure if now is the right tme to do so. For this reason, I have limited myself to what these episodes may say about the relative chronology.
Really? It’s weird to hear this. His writing makes him seem like a gentle and courteous person, a sort of anti-nazi. But perhaps there was a cohort of gentle and courteous nazis!
Well, the one motion and one announcement saṅghakamma is by far the more frequent. It seems to be the default structure.
Moved into the main text.
I’ve reserved “mentor” for pavattinī. I agree tutor is nice for ācariya. It’s difficult, however, to make a clear case for either tutor or teacher. Ācariyas could have one or more students, and so either rendering may be right.
Thanks again for taking the time to go through it. It’s nice to have intros, but it’s even nicer if people can follow the content!
3 Likes
爾時波羅奈國有一長者，名曰夜輸，種姓豪族饒財多寶，顏貌端正世之無雙。
I think Bhante meant AN 3.39? The Chinese parallel is very brief on the details on Yasa’s family. From what I can understand from the Chinese text, he’s from a wealthy and noble family and very handsome. No mention of the 3 stilt houses for 3 seasons.
Either Pali Vinaya incorporate the story from AN 3.39 or the Chinese parallel omitted the details.
1 Like
Sorry, I was actually thinking of the sleeping minstrel scenario. Anyway, thanks for the expert feedback WayChuang!
Lol. Well, remember when you came back from Oxford and you’re like, everyone was so civil? I think the upper classes always have that veneer to them.
Not at all, it’s a pleasure to be invited!
2 Likes
Indeed, thank you for your support!
1 Like
Latest version including all feedback is now up and running!
3 Likes
Hmmm… Bhante is pulling my leg! I’m certainly not an expert. I can’t understand some of your essays and book. They are too cerebral for me. Then, I console myself with that fact that Ajahn Brahmali jokingly mentioned that you got a big brain in his sutta retreat. It’s par for the course.
1 Like