Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

15631Re: asatthikaa caravan or armed?

Expand Messages
  • Yuttadhammo
    Dec 1, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Friends,

      Just some thoughts on this strange argument; obvious it is pretty silly to think of Bhikkhunis going around carrying weapons :)

      First, the formation satthika is not used anywhere to mean "with a weapon" - it is used to mean "of the caravan", i.e. caravaners (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/caravanner), in the Pāyāsi Sutta.

      Second, nowhere is a sattha allowed, so it seems incongruous to suggest that bhikkhunis go around carrying one - a satthaka is explicitly allowed for bhikkhus cutting robes (Cv 5); ostensibly this refers to a miniature (-ka) knife (sattha).

      Third, the anāpatti clause, "anāpatti satthena saha gacchati" isn't what one would expect if the meaning were "carrying a knife"; it's not a common expression, but it is used elsewhere, e.g. pācittiya 67:

      “esāyyo, pabbajitena saha gacchatī””ti.

      One would expect something like the common "cīvaraṃ dhāreti" if the meaning were "carrying a knife".

      Fourth, weapons in general are considered "untouchable" by the commentary, touching which is subject to a dukkaṭa... can't find the canonical basis for it, but here's the passage in the commentary (to pārājika #2):

      sabbañca āvudhabhaṇḍādiṃ āmasantassa dukkaṭaṃ vuttaṃ, idaṃ anāmāsadukkaṭaṃ nāma.

      Hope this is welcome. Sorry that the DPR can't figure out asatthika yet :)

      Blessings,

      Yuttadhammo

      --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> wrote:
      >
      > Dear Bryan and Sister Dipa,
      > thank you. The life of a bhikkhu and bhikkhuni is a life with non-
      > violence. Think of the Parable of the Saw: even if robbers would saw
      > off your limbs, you still should have mettaa. It is not in the spirit
      > of the teachings to carry weapons. Caravan would be the only
      > possibility I would think.
      > Nina.
      > Op 1-dec-2011, om 4:34 heeft Bryan Levman het volgende geschreven:
      >
      > > Presumably the sentence could mean either nuns shouldn't wander
      > > without weapons in dangerous places and/or a nun shouldn't wander
      > > without companions in such places, both of which things we might
      > > say to our own children if they were travelling to an unsafe
      > > location (stay with your friends, and keep a pepper spray in your
      > > purse); so in the end I'm not sure if both meanings were meant,
      > > although the "travel in a caravan" definition seems the most
      > > logical if we have to pick one.
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • Show all 14 messages in this topic