Re: [Pali] Re: Was the Buddha Obliged to Observe Vinaya Rules?, no 1.
- Venerable Pandita,
Op 17-dec-2009, om 9:50 heeft ashinpan het volgende geschreven:
> Well, I have checked both files. They are produced by the same-------
> software (XeTeX) using the same set of fonts. I am at a loss why
> one is ok while the other is not. Can you tell me the version of
> the Adobe Reader you are using?
N:I do not know about this, but I have to ask the technicians of the
shop. Thank you, please do not trouble.
> > Failing to see the connection is perhaps the reason that----------
> laypeople do
> > not know that they can learn a great deal from rules pertaining to
> > conduct in daily life. .... (snipped)
> P: I agree. Vinaya and Abhidhamma are closer than what people are
> generally aware of. I intend to write a paper on that topic.
N: Now, that would be truly wonderful and much needed. And please
include satipa.t.thaana. Abhidhamma and satipa.t.thaana/vipassanaa go
hand in hand.
> P: In the meantime, I would like to remark that if you meet the
> Buddha as a teacher in suttas, you can meet him as an administrator
> in Vinaya.
N: I am thinking of the Buddha's wisdom, compassion and purity. It is
said that specifically compassion is seen in the Vinaya, but it is
also said that in the Vinaya all three excellent qualities are
evident. For my feeling (this is personal) the word administrator
does not point enough to the Buddha's excellent qualities.
> > I would like to add from the Pa.tisambidhaamagga, Knowledge not
> > shared by Disciples: Knowledge of others' faculties, and
> knowledge of
> > beings' biases and underlying tendencies (Ch LXVIII and LXIX. ) Only
> > the Buddha with his omniscience knew the dispositions and latent
> > tendencies of beings. Out of compassion he made an exception.
> P: I do agree with you. However, I cannot add your contribution to
> my paper because the prevalent opinion of modern scholars is that
> Pa.tisambhidhaamagga belongs to the "post-canonical" phase (See von
> Hinuber "Handbook of Pali Literature" 59-60).
N: But there is no need to add my contribution to your paper, this is
not of any importance. I know that some scholars think that the
Pa.tisambhidhaamagga belongs to the "post-canonical" phase. I do not
mind, but I just look at the contents and I find these most helpful.
I do not go into arguing about historical facts since there is no end
> P: So I cannot cite Pa.tis to support my argument unless I can-------
> prove that Pa.tis belongs to the so-called phase of "Early
> Buddhism". This is a different sort of game, you know. (Sometimes I
> ask myself why I am playing such an intellectual game. The answer
> is: this is one of the few things that I love to do and also do
> well. And I also hope that my work will somehow contribute towards
> the common good.)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]