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

Re: Commentaries {Re: Re-reading the Pali Canon {Re: [Pali] Re: Bhikkhuni ordination and the Vinaya}}

Expand Messages
  • Piya Tan
    Bhante & Dharma friends, Attached is a PDF for the Sutta Discovery file on the first nun discussion. Do give me your brickbats. I m trying to balance between
    Message 1 of 59 , Jun 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Bhante & Dharma friends,

      Attached is a PDF for the Sutta Discovery file on the "first nun" discussion. Do give me your brickbats.

      I'm trying to balance between sharing my portion of "wrong views" in this exciting discussion and working for my own awakening through a meditative study of the early suttas (or at least laying the groundwork so that I can continue working on them in the next life). That is I am unable to complete the annotated translation of the four Nikayas.

      Combining meditation with sutta study and keeping in touch with Dharma-centred monks is a great way to live Buddhism.

      So let us do what true Buddhists do: let's argue mindfully with compassion

      May I learn more from all this that I may be wise through seeing my foolishness.

      Piya


      Kumaara Bhikkhu wrote:

      > At 01:05 PM 30-05-05, Ngawang Dorje wrote:
      > >> Heck, there are even some suttas that I can't honestly trust. I know that one of them is rather obviously edited: Dakkhinavibhanga Sutta (MN142). <
      > >
      > >May I know why you said that the sutta is edited?
      >
      > I'm sure Piya can give you a very complete answer to that, but for a start, let me point out something rather glaring.
      >
      > According to the sutta, MahaPajapati Gotami, still a lay follower, wished to offer robe cloth to the Buddha, who then asked her to give it to the Sangha instead. Then, the Buddha supposedly mentioned the BhikkhuniSangha as if it already existed. Since it is exceedingly plain in the Mahavagga of the Vinaya Pitaka that MahaPajapati Gotami was the first bhikkhuni, how can we reconcile this?
      >
      > For details, see MLDB, p1349, n1291.
      >
      > To reconcile this, we have to either conclude that either this sutta has been edited or the Mahavagga (or both!). I'm inclined to believe that it is the sutta and would like to hear more about it from Piya. Over to you, Bro. Piya.
      >
      > peace
      >
      > Kum�ra Bhikkhu
      >
      > ������� An old error is always more popular than a new truth. (German proverb)
      >
      >
      > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
      > [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
      > [Files] http://www.geocities.com/paligroup/
      > [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
      > Paaliga.na - a community for Pali students
      > Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or web only.
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      > �


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Piya Tan
      Bhante Kumara, Here is my paper on Mahapajapati. Hope it is useful. Namakkara.m Piya ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Message 59 of 59 , Jun 4, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Bhante Kumara,

        Here is my paper on Mahapajapati. Hope it is useful.

        Namakkara.m

        Piya

        Kumaara Bhikkhu wrote:

        > At 01:05 PM 30-05-05, Ngawang Dorje wrote:
        > >> Heck, there are even some suttas that I can't honestly trust. I know that one of them is rather obviously edited: Dakkhinavibhanga Sutta (MN142). <
        > >
        > >May I know why you said that the sutta is edited?
        >
        > I'm sure Piya can give you a very complete answer to that, but for a start, let me point out something rather glaring.
        >
        > According to the sutta, MahaPajapati Gotami, still a lay follower, wished to offer robe cloth to the Buddha, who then asked her to give it to the Sangha instead. Then, the Buddha supposedly mentioned the BhikkhuniSangha as if it already existed. Since it is exceedingly plain in the Mahavagga of the Vinaya Pitaka that MahaPajapati Gotami was the first bhikkhuni, how can we reconcile this?
        >
        > For details, see MLDB, p1349, n1291.
        >
        > To reconcile this, we have to either conclude that either this sutta has been edited or the Mahavagga (or both!). I'm inclined to believe that it is the sutta and would like to hear more about it from Piya. Over to you, Bro. Piya.
        >
        > peace
        >
        > Kum�ra Bhikkhu
        >
        > ������� An old error is always more popular than a new truth. (German proverb)
        >
        >
        > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
        > [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
        > [Files] http://www.geocities.com/paligroup/
        > [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
        > Paaliga.na - a community for Pali students
        > Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or web only.
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        > �


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.