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

Re: [Pali] The Twin Miracle, Yamaka Patihara

Expand Messages
  • Kumara Bhikkhu
    The entry in the Dictionary of Pali Proper Names is also very interesting: http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/y/yamaka_paatihaariya.htm
    Message 1 of 16 , Feb 8, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      The entry in the Dictionary of Pali Proper Names is also very interesting:
      http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/y/yamaka_paatihaariya.htm

      Kumara Bhikkhu wrote thus at 01:48 PM 09-02-13:
      >It's a story from the Dhammapada Commentary.
      >Here's a very interesting commentary on the commentary:
      >http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/07/26/opinion/Are-Thai-Buddhists-More-Heretical-Than-the-Heretic-30134559.html
      >
      >
      >thomaslaw03 wrote thus at 09:03 AM 08-01-13:
      >>Dear Pali friends,
      >>
      >>I am interested in the story of the Twin Miracle (Yamaka Patihara)
      >>that the Buddha showed in Sravasti (?). The story seems rather
      >>unusual, superstitious, and irrational. Could anyone give some
      >>explanations and textual information of the story please?
      >>
      >>Thank you.
      >>
      >>Thomas Law
    • Frank K
      Dear Thomas, There are definitely many elements in the story (after reading Ven. Kumara s links today) that I find unusual and irrational, but I am curious
      Message 2 of 16 , Feb 9, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Thomas,

        There are definitely many elements in the story (after reading Ven.
        Kumara's links today) that I find unusual and irrational, but I am curious
        what elements you find superstitious?

        A couple of other famous stories in the suttas I find very hard to believe
        are the story of Angulima in MN becoming an arahant after killing so many
        people and trying to kill a Samma Sambuddha, and the story in the Udana of
        the Buddha using the incentive of guaranteeing his cousin Nanda celestial
        nymphs as a way to encourage him to not disrobe. Especially with so many
        passages in the canon explicitly detailing right speech and the danger of
        the smallest lie, I find it extremely offensive that a Buddha would need or
        even entertain the use of a white lie as a way to help his disciples
        advance in their practice. In the Angulimala story, I find it really hard
        to believe he could even attain stream entry, let alone arahantship.
        Elsewhere in the canon it says one can not attain arahantship in the
        present life if one commits a heinous crime such as killing ones parents,
        causing a schism in the sangha, etc, and trying to kill a Samma Sambuddha
        and successfully executing 99 other strangers is somehow is ok?

        Metta,
        Frank

        On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 5:03 PM, thomaslaw03 <thomaslaw03@...>wrote:

        > **
        >
        >
        > Dear Pali friends,
        >
        > I am interested in the story of the Twin Miracle (Yamaka Patihara) that
        > the Buddha showed in Sravasti (?). The story seems rather unusual,
        > superstitious, and irrational. Could anyone give some explanations and
        > textual information of the story please?
        >
        > Thank you.
        >
        > Thomas Law
        >
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Nina van Gorkom
        Dear Frank, ... N: We have to carefully consider conditions. If we do not consider the story in the suttas we may misunderstand the meaning. As tto showing
        Message 3 of 16 , Feb 11, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Frank,
          Op 9-feb-2013, om 17:41 heeft Frank K het volgende geschreven:

          > Especially with so many
          > passages in the canon explicitly detailing right speech and the
          > danger of
          > the smallest lie, I find it extremely offensive that a Buddha would
          > need or
          > even entertain the use of a white lie as a way to help his disciples
          > advance in their practice. In the Angulimala story, I find it
          > really hard
          > to believe he could even attain stream entry, let alone arahantship.
          -------
          N: We have to carefully consider conditions. If we do not consider
          the story in the suttas we may misunderstand the meaning.
          As tto showing devatas to Nanda, the Buddha wanted to teach him a
          lesson. We read in the commentary to the Udaana (P. Masefield, p.
          454): <But why did the Lord cause the horney-minded venerable Nanda
          to sruvey Nymphs? To drive out defilements with similar ease.... so
          did the lord, skilled in taming those capable of being guided,
          exacerbate the venerable Nanda, of excessive lustfulness, by showing
          him the deva-nymphs, desiring (thereafter)to drive this out without
          remainder with the medicine that is the ariyan path..>
          The Buddha knew exactly people's accumulations and the right
          medicine. Nanada attained arahatship.
          -----
          Angulima accumulated in past lives both good and bad inclinations.
          When he met the Buddha it was the right time for his accumulated
          wisdom to ripen and to attain arahatship.
          This story should encourage us, knowing that accumulated
          understanding is never lost, no matter how many unwholesome
          tendencies condition the arising of strong akusala.
          ------
          Nina.



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Frank K
          Dear Nina, In the case of Nanda, the problem isn t that the Buddha took him to the deva realms to show him that there were sensual pleasures far greater than
          Message 4 of 16 , Feb 11, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Nina,
            In the case of Nanda, the problem isn't that the Buddha took him to the
            deva realms to show him that there were sensual pleasures far greater than
            earthly ones. The problem is the Buddha guaranteed his cousin Nanda
            celestial nymphs if he didn't disrobe and remained in the order. If the
            Buddha had made the guarantee in a not so ironclad way, I wouldn't have a
            problem with that either. For example, if he said, "Nanda, if you don't
            disrobe, I will show you how to develop samatha to the point where you
            could easily attain celestial nymphs." Then the Buddha would be stating a
            truth, and not making ironclad guarantees that seem to be not something an
            enlightened being would say.

            In the case of Angulimala, is there any other precedent in the Canon where
            someone can commit such heinous crimes as Angulimala and still attain
            arahantship or even stream entry in that safe lifetime? King Ajattasattu ,
            according to the commentaries, in DN2 would have attained stream entry had
            he not had the heavy kamma of killing his father. Instead, he went to hell
            for a long time, aeons later became a paccekabuddha. Devadatta, the
            Buddha's cousin, who tried to kill the Buddha many times went to hell for a
            long long time. Angulimala who also tried to kill the Buddha, and
            successfully killed many innocent strangers in cold blood, became an
            arahant that life? There's no precedent for anything like that. It just
            doesn't make any sense.Very hard to believe. Even someone who only has the
            parami to become a deva, they wouldn't be a homocidal maniac that life.

            metta,
            Frank


            On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 1:10 AM, Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> wrote:

            > **
            >
            >
            > Dear Frank,
            > Op 9-feb-2013, om 17:41 heeft Frank K het volgende geschreven:
            >
            >
            > > Especially with so many
            > > passages in the canon explicitly detailing right speech and the
            > > danger of
            > > the smallest lie, I find it extremely offensive that a Buddha would
            > > need or
            > > even entertain the use of a white lie as a way to help his disciples
            > > advance in their practice. In the Angulimala story, I find it
            > > really hard
            > > to believe he could even attain stream entry, let alone arahantship.
            > -------
            > N: We have to carefully consider conditions. If we do not consider
            > the story in the suttas we may misunderstand the meaning.
            > As tto showing devatas to Nanda, the Buddha wanted to teach him a
            > lesson. We read in the commentary to the Udaana (P. Masefield, p.
            > 454):
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > The Buddha knew exactly people's accumulations and the right
            > medicine. Nanada attained arahatship.
            > -----
            > Angulima accumulated in past lives both good and bad inclinations.
            > When he met the Buddha it was the right time for his accumulated
            > wisdom to ripen and to attain arahatship.
            > This story should encourage us, knowing that accumulated
            > understanding is never lost, no matter how many unwholesome
            > tendencies condition the arising of strong akusala.
            > ------
            >
            > Nina.
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Nina van Gorkom
            Dear Frank, ... N: I find the commentary quite clear. The Buddha knew what was best for a particular person and he had vaca sacca, always speaking the truth.
            Message 5 of 16 , Feb 12, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear Frank,
              Op 11-feb-2013, om 17:19 heeft Frank K het volgende geschreven:

              > The problem is the Buddha guaranteed his cousin Nanda
              > celestial nymphs if he didn't disrobe and remained in the order. If
              > the
              > Buddha had made the guarantee in a not so ironclad way, I wouldn't
              > have a
              > problem with that either. For example, if he said, "Nanda, if you
              > don't
              > disrobe, I will show you how to develop samatha to the point where you
              > could easily attain celestial nymphs." Then the Buddha would be
              > stating a
              > truth, and not making ironclad guarantees that seem to be not
              > something an
              > enlightened being would say.
              -----
              N: I find the commentary quite clear. The Buddha knew what was best
              for a particular person and he had vaca sacca, always speaking the
              truth.
              ------
              >
              > F:In the case of Angulimala, is there any other precedent in the
              > Canon where
              > someone can commit such heinous crimes as Angulimala and still attain
              > arahantship or even stream entry in that safe lifetime?
              -----
              N: He had killed, but not committed a heinous crime like killing
              parents or the Buddha. A heinous crime is an impediment. There was
              not such an imediment.
              Nina.



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Frank K
              Dear Nina, ... So trying to deliberately murder a Samma Sambuddha, and failing only because the Buddha stopped him, is not considered heinous? Just a petty
              Message 6 of 16 , Feb 12, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Nina,

                > F:In the case of Angulimala, is there any other precedent in the
                > > Canon where
                > > someone can commit such heinous crimes as Angulimala and still attain
                > > arahantship or even stream entry in that safe lifetime?
                > -----
                > N: He had killed, but not committed a heinous crime like killing
                > parents or the Buddha. A heinous crime is an impediment. There was
                > not such an imediment.
                >
                > Nina.
                >
                >
                So trying to deliberately murder a Samma Sambuddha, and failing only
                because the Buddha stopped him, is not considered heinous? Just a petty
                crime, a misdemeanor, a mere impediment? In my book, when you have the
                intention, have planned it out, carried it out and almost certainly would
                have succeeded with that action 99% of the time if not for extraordinary
                intervention, the kammic fruit for that is much closer to 99% of full
                kammic fruit than 0%.


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Chanida
                Dear Frank, I understand your confusion. Things can appear very contradictory. But how would you think about the following story? (My example is perhaps out of
                Message 7 of 16 , Feb 12, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  Dear Frank,

                  I understand your confusion. Things can appear very contradictory. But how would you think about the following story? (My example is perhaps out of date, but it could probably give you some ideas.)

                  1. A teenager wanted to buy a game with the small money he had.
                  2. His father showed him a more sophisticated gaming machinery, in which he was much more interested, and guaranteed that he would obtain it if he would keep that money and continued assisting with their family business.
                  3. As time passed, the son grew up, having an amount of money in hand which was sufficient to buy a car.
                  4. Ridiculed by his friends for desiring for a gaming machine which is 'not suitable for an adult,' the son agreed and then decided to buy a car instead.

                  In this case, do you think that the father lied in guaranteeing his son that he would obtain the gaming machinery? I think that it is not the case. It was just the son himself changed his mind, even though he could obtain what he was promised.

                  In the same way, if Nanda continued on his ordination, he certainly would have to practise according to the discipline and the dhamma. Such is meritorious and contributes to sufficient merit (puñña) for him to be reborn as a 'devaputta' with celestial nymph retinue after death, if his mind still desired so. However, as he continued his practice and ridiculed by his fellow monks for such an inappropriate desire. He agreed, abandoned such desire and, instead, pursue a higher (highest) goal, i.e., nibbāna.

                  As for the case of Aṅgulimāla and Ajātasattu, it is the work of mixed kamma that complecates things. Everyone has done miscellaneous kammas. But it is the strongest vipāka that takes priority.

                  Will explain more when I have time, and if it is still needed. But in brief, Ajātasattu's bad kamma is like a horse, while his good kamma is like a dog. The horse runs faster. This is opposite in the case of Aṅgulimāla who was ordained and properly practised himself under the Buddha's guidance. You may find further information that his monk's life was not at all easy. But he tolerated it and trained himself appropriately, and finally won.

                  With mettā,
                  Chanida
                • Kumara Bhikkhu
                  Very well said, Chanida. Sadhu! About the Ven Nanda s story, I d like to add that Buddha probably saw what would happen. One might say that it s somewhat
                  Message 8 of 16 , Mar 17 9:00 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Very well said, Chanida. Sadhu!

                    About the Ven Nanda's story, I'd like to add that Buddha probably saw
                    what would happen. One might say that it's somewhat crafty of the
                    Buddha (and of the father in your analogy), but it's completely
                    compassionate. On the similar note, Anathapindika was also somewhat
                    crafty in bribing his son to attend talks by the Buddha.

                    Chanida wrote thus at 03:05 AM 13-02-13:
                    >Dear Frank,
                    >
                    >I understand your confusion. Things can appear very contradictory.
                    >But how would you think about the following story? (My example is
                    >perhaps out of date, but it could probably give you some ideas.)
                    >
                    >1. A teenager wanted to buy a game with the small money he had.
                    >2. His father showed him a more sophisticated gaming machinery, in
                    >which he was much more interested, and guaranteed that he would
                    >obtain it if he would keep that money and continued assisting with
                    >their family business.
                    >3. As time passed, the son grew up, having an amount of money in
                    >hand which was sufficient to buy a car.
                    >4. Ridiculed by his friends for desiring for a gaming machine which
                    >is 'not suitable for an adult,' the son agreed and then decided to
                    >buy a car instead.
                    >
                    >In this case, do you think that the father lied in guaranteeing his
                    >son that he would obtain the gaming machinery? I think that it is
                    >not the case. It was just the son himself changed his mind, even
                    >though he could obtain what he was promised.
                    >
                    >In the same way, if Nanda continued on his ordination, he certainly
                    >would have to practise according to the discipline and the dhamma.
                    >Such is meritorious and contributes to sufficient merit
                    >(puñña) for him to be reborn as a 'devaputta' with
                    >celestial nymph retinue after death, if his mind still desired so.
                    >However, as he continued his practice and ridiculed by his fellow
                    >monks for such an inappropriate desire. He agreed, abandoned such
                    >desire and, instead, pursue a higher (highest) goal, i.e., nibbāna.
                    >
                    >As for the case of Aṅgulimāla and Ajātasattu, it is
                    >the work of mixed kamma that complecates things. Everyone has done
                    >miscellaneous kammas. But it is the strongest vipāka that takes priority.
                    >
                    >Will explain more when I have time, and if it is still needed. But
                    >in brief, Ajātasattu's bad kamma is like a horse, while his
                    >good kamma is like a dog. The horse runs faster. This is opposite in
                    >the case of Aṅgulimāla who was ordained and properly
                    >practised himself under the Buddha's guidance. You may find further
                    >information that his monk's life was not at all easy. But he
                    >tolerated it and trained himself appropriately, and finally won.
                    >
                    >With mettā,
                    >Chanida
                  • Nina van Gorkom
                    Dear Frank, ... N: Conditions, conditions. We cannot understand all conditions thoroughly. We have to consider which factors make akusala kamma a heinous
                    Message 9 of 16 , Mar 20 8:19 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Dear Frank,
                      Op 12-feb-2013, om 17:23 heeft Frank K het volgende geschreven:

                      > N: He had killed, but not committed a heinous crime like killing
                      > > parents or the Buddha. A heinous crime is an impediment. There was
                      > > not such an imediment.
                      > >
                      > >
                      > F: So trying to deliberately murder a Samma Sambuddha, and failing
                      > only
                      > because the Buddha stopped him, is not considered heinous?
                      ------
                      N: Conditions, conditions. We cannot understand all conditions
                      thoroughly.
                      We have to consider which factors make akusala kamma a heinous crime,
                      and thus a hindrance to enlightenment.
                      -------
                      > F: Just a petty
                      > crime, a misdemeanor, a mere impediment? In my book, when you have the
                      > intention, have planned it out, carried it out and almost certainly
                      > would
                      > have succeeded with that action 99% of the time if not for
                      > extraordinary
                      > intervention, the kammic fruit for that is much closer to 99% of full
                      > kammic fruit than 0%.
                      -------
                      N: I understand your point of view, you are reasoning, you have a
                      logical view about things.
                      But kamma and vipaaka is most intricate and only Buddhas can
                      thoroughly understand it.
                      What is our understanding compared to the Buddha's omniscience?
                      The Buddha also knew the kusala and understanding Angulima had
                      accumulated in former lives. This was never lost and could bear
                      fruit. When considering kamma and result so many factors also
                      stemming from past lives have to be taken into consideration. We do
                      not have the Buddha's wisdom.
                      I understand that at first sight you find things incomprehensible.
                      But let us consider things more deeply, not just by logic.
                      We can never judge the deeds of someone else, who knows his past
                      accumulations? We also may have killed in former lives, but now: here
                      we are studying Dhamma. This sutta is also an encouragement that
                      kusala is never lost, somehow it will bear fruit, inspite of all the
                      tribulations one may experience.
                      Angulima was aware and developed understanding of whatever dhamma
                      appeared at the present moment, even akusala dhamma; he saw that as
                      just a conditioned reality. Only in that way he could attain
                      arahatship. So, let us never forget the dhamma appearing right now.
                      The only way.

                      Nina.



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • stefan_karpik
                      What Nina says is somewhat supported by Richard Gombrich in How Buddhism Began . He argues that Angulimala was a Kali devotee and his murders were part of his
                      Message 10 of 16 , Mar 21 5:02 AM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        What Nina says is somewhat supported by Richard Gombrich in 'How Buddhism Began'. He argues that Angulimala was a Kali devotee and his murders were part of his devotions. With that information, one can begin to see Angulimala as a very religious person practising misguided rites and rituals until the Buddha opened his eyes. Angulimala still puzzles me, but this makes him a little more understandable.

                        --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Dear Frank,
                        > Op 12-feb-2013, om 17:23 heeft Frank K het volgende geschreven:
                        >
                        > > N: He had killed, but not committed a heinous crime like killing
                        > > > parents or the Buddha. A heinous crime is an impediment. There was
                        > > > not such an imediment.
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > F: So trying to deliberately murder a Samma Sambuddha, and failing
                        > > only
                        > > because the Buddha stopped him, is not considered heinous?
                        > ------
                        > N: Conditions, conditions. We cannot understand all conditions
                        > thoroughly.
                        > We have to consider which factors make akusala kamma a heinous crime,
                        > and thus a hindrance to enlightenment.
                        > -------
                        > > F: Just a petty
                        > > crime, a misdemeanor, a mere impediment? In my book, when you have the
                        > > intention, have planned it out, carried it out and almost certainly
                        > > would
                        > > have succeeded with that action 99% of the time if not for
                        > > extraordinary
                        > > intervention, the kammic fruit for that is much closer to 99% of full
                        > > kammic fruit than 0%.
                        > -------
                        > N: I understand your point of view, you are reasoning, you have a
                        > logical view about things.
                        > But kamma and vipaaka is most intricate and only Buddhas can
                        > thoroughly understand it.
                        > What is our understanding compared to the Buddha's omniscience?
                        > The Buddha also knew the kusala and understanding Angulima had
                        > accumulated in former lives. This was never lost and could bear
                        > fruit. When considering kamma and result so many factors also
                        > stemming from past lives have to be taken into consideration. We do
                        > not have the Buddha's wisdom.
                        > I understand that at first sight you find things incomprehensible.
                        > But let us consider things more deeply, not just by logic.
                        > We can never judge the deeds of someone else, who knows his past
                        > accumulations? We also may have killed in former lives, but now: here
                        > we are studying Dhamma. This sutta is also an encouragement that
                        > kusala is never lost, somehow it will bear fruit, inspite of all the
                        > tribulations one may experience.
                        > Angulima was aware and developed understanding of whatever dhamma
                        > appeared at the present moment, even akusala dhamma; he saw that as
                        > just a conditioned reality. Only in that way he could attain
                        > arahatship. So, let us never forget the dhamma appearing right now.
                        > The only way.
                        >
                        > Nina.
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                      • Chanida
                        Dear Frank, On preparing for the Sunday dhamma study class, I incidentally came across this relevant reference, being another version of the Buddha s guarantee
                        Message 11 of 16 , Mar 21 9:06 AM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Dear Frank,

                          On preparing for the Sunday dhamma study class, I incidentally came across this relevant reference, being another version of the Buddha's guarantee to Nanda in the commentary to AN.I which is probably clearer than the one from Dhammapadaṭṭhakathā you referred to:

                          "Nanda, evarūpā accharā samaṇadhammaṃ karontānaṃ na dullabhāti. Sace me, bhante bhagavā, pāṭibhogo hoti, ahaṃ samaṇadhammaṃ karissāmīti. Vissattho tvaṃ, nanda, samaṇadhammaṃ karohi. Sace te sappaṭisandhikā kālakiriyā bhavissati, ahaṃ etāsaṃ paṭilābhatthāya pāṭibhogoti." (AN-a 1.316-7)

                          Rough translation:

                          Buddha: "Nanda, such celestial nymphs are not hard to be obtained for those who practise samaṇa-dhamma."

                          Nanda: If the Blessed one will be my guarantor, I will do it.

                          Buddha: "Be confident, Nanda. Practise samaṇa-dhammmma. If there will be death with (future) rebirth for you, I am guarantor for the obtainment of those nymphs."

                          As for another example of another killer who attained dhamma, see the story of Tambadāṭhikacoraghātaka in the Dhammapadaṭṭhakathā 2.202-208.

                          As for the comparison of Ajātasattu, you may recollect that he did not practise himself according to Buddha's teachings as did Angulimala. The best Ajatasattu did was only 'dāna', and he has not abandoned any desire. See the story of Jotika where Ajātasattu's greed was mentioned.

                          Metta,
                          Chanida

                          --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Frank K <frank48k@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > The problem is the Buddha guaranteed his cousin Nanda
                          > celestial nymphs if he didn't disrobe and remained in the order. If the
                          > Buddha had made the guarantee in a not so ironclad way, I wouldn't have a
                          > problem with that either. For example, if he said, "Nanda, if you don't
                          > disrobe, I will show you how to develop samatha to the point where you
                          > could easily attain celestial nymphs." Then the Buddha would be stating a
                          > truth, and not making ironclad guarantees that seem to be not something an
                          > enlightened being would say.
                          >
                          > In the case of Angulimala, is there any other precedent in the Canon where
                          > someone can commit such heinous crimes as Angulimala and still attain
                          > arahantship or even stream entry in that safe lifetime?
                        • Frank K
                          Dear Chanida, The diacritics in your pali quotes are not coming out correctly through the pali email subscription or looking at the message itself on the yahoo
                          Message 12 of 16 , Mar 24 8:13 AM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Dear Chanida,
                            The diacritics in your pali quotes are not coming out correctly through the
                            pali email subscription or looking at the message itself on the yahoo server
                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/message/16021

                            Getting unicode to work on yahoogroups is possible, but it can be tricky.
                            You can try the velthuis converter that they've been discussing recently.

                            metta,
                            frank

                            On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Chanida <jchanida@...> wrote:

                            > **
                            >
                            >
                            > Dear Frank,
                            >
                            > On preparing for the Sunday dhamma study class, I incidentally came across
                            > this relevant reference, being another version of the Buddha's guarantee to
                            > Nanda in the commentary to AN.I which is probably clearer than the one from
                            > Dhammapadaṭṭhakathā you referred to:
                            >
                            > "Nanda, evarūpā accharā samaṇadhammaṃ
                            > karontānaṃ na dullabhāti. Sace me, bhante bhagavā,
                            > pāṭibhogo hoti, ahaṃ samaṇadhammaṃ
                            > karissāmīti. Vissattho tvaṃ, nanda,
                            > samaṇadhammaṃ karohi. Sace te sappaṭisandhikā
                            > kālakiriyā bhavissati, ahaṃ etāsaṃ
                            > paṭilābhatthāya pāṭibhogoti." (AN-a 1.316-7)
                            >
                            > Rough translation:
                            >
                            > Buddha: "Nanda, such celestial nymphs are not hard to be obtained for
                            > those who practise samaṇa-dhamma."
                            >
                            > Nanda: If the Blessed one will be my guarantor, I will do it.
                            >
                            > Buddha: "Be confident, Nanda. Practise samaṇa-dhammmma. If there
                            > will be death with (future) rebirth for you, I am guarantor for the
                            > obtainment of those nymphs."
                            >
                            > As for another example of another killer who attained dhamma, see the
                            > story of Tambadāṭhikacoraghātaka in the
                            > Dhammapadaṭṭhakathā 2.202-208.
                            >
                            > As for the comparison of Ajātasattu, you may recollect that he did
                            > not practise himself according to Buddha's teachings as did Angulimala. The
                            > best Ajatasattu did was only 'dāna', and he has not abandoned any
                            > desire. See the story of Jotika where Ajātasattu's greed was mentioned.
                            >
                            > Metta,
                            > Chanida
                            >
                            >
                            > --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Frank K <frank48k@...> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > The problem is the Buddha guaranteed his cousin Nanda
                            > > celestial nymphs if he didn't disrobe and remained in the order. If the
                            > > Buddha had made the guarantee in a not so ironclad way, I wouldn't have a
                            > > problem with that either. For example, if he said, "Nanda, if you don't
                            > > disrobe, I will show you how to develop samatha to the point where you
                            > > could easily attain celestial nymphs." Then the Buddha would be stating a
                            > > truth, and not making ironclad guarantees that seem to be not something
                            > an
                            > > enlightened being would say.
                            > >
                            > > In the case of Angulimala, is there any other precedent in the Canon
                            > where
                            > > someone can commit such heinous crimes as Angulimala and still attain
                            > > arahantship or even stream entry in that safe lifetime?
                            >
                            >
                            >


                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Kumara Bhikkhu
                            I wonder if it s because this group is set to text only (i.e, no html). Yes, Velthuis is the safest bet here.
                            Message 13 of 16 , Mar 30 9:39 PM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I wonder if it's because this group is set to text only (i.e, no
                              html). Yes, Velthuis is the safest bet here.

                              Frank K wrote thus at 11:13 PM 24-03-13:
                              >Dear Chanida,
                              >The diacritics in your pali quotes are not coming out correctly through the
                              >pali email subscription or looking at the message itself on the yahoo server
                              >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/message/16021
                              >
                              >Getting unicode to work on yahoogroups is possible, but it can be tricky.
                              >You can try the velthuis converter that they've been discussing recently.
                              >
                              >metta,
                              >frank
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.