Dear John Kelly:
> Also, when I say that I do not consider the Mahaava.msa to be
> Buddhist scripture, I'm using scripture in the sense of "canonical
> scripture". By this definition, all the commentaries are not
> scripture either, and in the same way must be taken with a grain of
> salt. The scriptures that I am most interested in, and that have
> the most value to me in my life and my quest to end suffering, are
> those contained in the Pali Canon.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
There are some criteria about these matters... The Milinda Pañna,
for example, is not canonical at all: speaking the truth, it´s a
paraphrasis of some Upanishad´s excerpts ( some time ago I detected
exactly the Upanishad and the main passages on it, but my notes about
this particular issue on exegesis are somewhere in my desk)... only
for giving a hand to Alexander´s Ragtime Band!
The Visuddhimagga, The Atthasallini, the Dhammasangani and
Vibhanga Tiikas, etc are much, much more substantial on buddhistic
doctrine than other texts, so one can put them at the Canon shelf
without doubt or error. The Mahavamsa, the Early Burma/Myanmar
buddhistic chronicles, etc, are consistent only about Pali language...
>
> As to the underlying topic, my feeling is that all killing has
> karmic consequences to some degree, but that does not necessarily
> mean that killing is wrong for all people in all situations.
Anyway, as I´ve said, an Arahant that becomes and active subject
on History and Royal Chronicles is however a very rare event!!!!!
mettaya, Ícaro
>
> Thanks for the interesting posts, everyone.
>
> Metta,
> John
> --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" <rjkjp1@...> wrote:
> > --- Dear Christine and John,
> >
> > The Mahavamsa is not part of the Tipitaka but is a chronicle of
> > Kings and the Sangha, and of immense value, I feel.
> > When we look at the texts do we believe they we can distinguish
> > what is true and what is not; do we think we have greater
> > understanding than the monks of old who passed on the teachings?
> On
> > this list someone believes he knows that suttas explaining
literal
> > rebirth were added in by misguided monks, another doesn't accept
> the
> > Abhidhamma. I read on another site someone saying that the Buddha
> > couldn't have made the 8 garukka rules for nuns, or said some of
> the
> > other things he said about woman. Some think that the
explanations
> > about sukkhavipassaka arahants are monk inventions. As the sasana
> > declines there will be less refutation of such doubts and
> gradually
> > the texts will be neglected and replaced with ideas current in
the
> > culture at the time. It seems many wish to hasten this.
> >
> > The King was fighting in Sri lanka after the Tamil kings invaded
> > from India and had almost taken over the country.
> >
> > The duty of a King is grave and not to be envied. In one of the
> > Jatakas the Buddha is born as a prince but remembers that his
last
> > life was 60,000 years being roasted in hell. And that was because
> in
> > his prior life he was a King, (who no doubt had to fight and
> inflict
> > punishment). So he refused to be King again.
> > Still whenever I hear of a wise person taking difficult duty I am
> > happy as I believe it is for the betterment of the society;
> > otherwise only buffoons and ruffians will become presidents,
> > generals, diplomats and police.
> >
> > The arahants
> > knew that this king would do much for the Sangha and wanted to
> help
> > him out of his depression. (he became deeply depressed after
> > considering the deaths of all thos involved in the war)..
> > The abbreviated paragraph in the Mahavmasa may not do full
justice
> > to all the discussion they had with the King. But when you are
> > relating hundreds of years and a long line of kings we can
perhaps
> > forgive the author some occasional dialogue editing.
> >
> > In the Dhammapada atthakattha there is the following story:
> > http://www.vipassana.info/f.htm
> > ""Tambadathika served the king as an executioner of thieves for
> > fifty-five years; he had just retired from that post. One day,
> after
> > preparing rice gruel at his house, he went to the river for a
> bath;
> > he had intended to take the specially prepared rice gruel on his
> > return. As he was about to take the rice gruel, Thera Sariputta,
> who
> > had just arisen from sustained absorption in Concentration (jhana
> > samapatti), stood at his door for alms-food. Seeing the thera,
> > Tambadathika thought to himself, "Throughout my life, I have been
> > executing thieves; now I should offer this food to the thera."
So,
> > he invited Thera Sariputta to come in and respectfully offered
the
> > rice gruel.
> > After the meal, the thera taught him the Dhamma, but Tambadathika
> > could not pay attention, because he was so agitated as he
> > recollected his past life as an executioner. When the thera knew
> > this, he decided to ask Tambadathika tactfully whether he killed
> the
> > thieves because he wished to kill them or because he was ordered
> to
> > do so. Tambadathika answered that he was ordered to kill them by
> the
> > king and that he had no wish to kill. Then the thera asked, "If
> that
> > is so, would you be guilty or not ?" Tambadathika then concluded
> > that, as he was not responsible for the evil deeds, he was not
> > guilty. He, therefore, calmed down, and requested the thera to
> > continue his exposition."""
> >
> > Perhaps if I had to put that into a sentence or two it might
sound
> > like I'm trying to say killing is no big deal. But if we know the
> > purpose of Sariputta - to calm the Executioner, so he could
listen
> > to Dhamma - we will understand better.
> >
> > It is said that giving even the washings of a teacup to some fish
> > will bring great merit. And then giving to a normal human much
> more.
> > But giving to someone who has just the beginning of faith in the
> > Dhamma much more than that. Giving to someone who understands
> Dhamma
> > and keeps the precepts much more again , giving to a sotapanna
> much
> > much more and so on. Likewise it is much worse to kill a
sotapanna
> > (from the point of view of the kammic results) than to kill a
> normal
> > human being. Worse to kill a person of average morality than a
bad
> > man.
> > That is not to say that any killing is without result - simply
> that
> > the texts say that there are variations in kammic result. And
this
> > is what the arahants were stressing to the King. Nowhere do they
> say
> > that killing doesn't bring a result.
> >
> > They (and he) knew that the Kamma was bad but dwelling on evil
> done
> > in the past can make matters worse. Best to encourage the person
> to
> > do good deeds now and in the future. And the King, after that
> > discussion, seemed almost superhuman in the energy he put into
the
> > projects for the benefit of the Ti-ratana, Triple gem.
> > When I'm in Thailand I have had a few times someone confide in me
> > some illdeed that is bothering them and I always say words to the
> > effect of "Don't worry, its inconsequential, that's all in the
> > past, Now you are a man
> > (or woman ) of faith and the results of that are incomparable and
> > wonderful." And I mean it.
> > RobertK
> > p.s
> > About the war the King said ""Not for the joy of sovereignty is
> this
> > toil of mine[the war], my striving (has been) ever to establish
> the
> > doctrine of the Sambuddha""
> >
> > He listened to his mother(like a good buddhist son):
> > ""The king Dutthagamani also took counsel with his mother and by
> her
> > counsel formed thirty-two bodies of troops. In these the king
> placed
> > parasol-bearers and figures of a king;' the monarch himself took
> his
> > place in the innermost body of troops""
> >
> >
> >
> > "'Ninety-nine viharas have been built by the great king, and,
with
> > (the spending of) nineteen kotis, the Maricavattivihara; the
> > splendid Lohapasada
> > To his younger brother he said: 'All the work of the Great Thüpa
> > which is still unfinished, do thou complete, my dear Tissa,
caring
> > duly for it. Evening and morning offer thou flowers at the Great
> > Thupa and three times (in the day) command a solemn oblation at
> the
> > Great Thupa. All the ceremonies introduced by me in honour of the
> > doctrine of the Blessed (Buddha) do thou carry on, my dear,
> stinting
> > nothing. Never grow weary, my dear, in duty toward the
> > brotherhood (sangha).'""
> > http://lakdiva.org/mahavamsa/chap032.html
> >
> > In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" <cforsyth@...>
wrote:
> > > Dear Robert, John, all,
> > >
> > > Rob, I don't understand your question to John. On the surface,
> at
> > > least, the quote below from the Mahavamsa seems at odds with
the
> > > teachings of the Fortunate One, don't you think? There were
> > > reportedly 60,000 human beings killed by this King and his
army.
> > > (And, in the quote, the King and his soldiers seem to have been
> > > absolved from the vipaka of the deaths of 59,998.5 people which
> > are
> > > discounted and trivialised.) This war, if it occurred, was just
> a
> > > little footnote in history - not remembered today except in a
> > > relatively obscure text. If it occurred, then this killing was
> in
> > > brutal hand to hand combat. It takes a lot of intention,
> effort,
> > > fear and hatred to kill another human with a sword, knife,
spear
> > or
> > > hammer - there are litres of blood, and noise - a lot of
> running,
> > > tackling, struggling, pleading, cursing - multiplied 60,000
> times.
> > > (WMD are so easy by comparison.)
> > >
> > > Perhaps you are considering that the Arahant's explanation is
in
> > > terms of anatta, that there really are no humans killing or
> being
> > > killed? But, the consolation was being given to a worldling,
and
> > has
> > > no doubt been reflected on through the centuries by other
> > worldlings
> > > like me, who may not yet have penetrated the meaning of the
> 4NT.
> > > Additionally, there seems to be a dismissive devaluing of the
> > taking
> > > of the lives of Unbelievers ... my understanding is that the
> > Buddha
> > > taught us to respect, have tolerance for, and care about those
> who
> > > were followers of other teachers.
> > >
> > > John, I think it concerns me the most that the speech is said
to
> > have
> > > been made by an Arahant. Often if I am uncomfortable or
puzzled
> > > about anything in the Tipitaka, I put the concern aside hoping
> it
> > > will be clearer in the future, consoling myself that the
> Tipitaka
> > > bears the hallmark of approval of the Arahants. Perhaps this is
> > > naivety ... I have a memory (can't turn up the post) of someone
> > > stating that the Mahavamsa was examined and included in the
> > Tipitaka
> > > at the Sixth Buddhist Council in Burma in the fifties?
> > > ===============
> > > Quote, with speech attributed to an Arahant:
> > > "Only one and a half human beings have been slain here by thee,
O
> > > lord of men. The one had come unto the (three) refuges, the
> other
> > had
> > > taken unto himself the five precepts. Unbelievers and men of
evil
> > > life were the rest, not more to be esteemed than beasts. But as
> for
> > > thee, thou wilt bring glory to the doctrine of the Buddha in
> > manifold
> > > ways; therefore cast away care from the heart, O ruler of men
> > > (xxv.108-112)."
> > > ================
> > >