It is always useful to check what the commentators have to say about the
interpretation of a particular term. Now majja is that which when drunk
causes one to become intoxicated (pamatto), and the commentators take it as
apposition to suraa and meraya in that they are intoxicants. I believe that
this is correct. The translation below is therefore to be corrected
accordingly. Please refer to previous posts.

By the way, who invented The Four Noble Truths? One of the early western
buddhologist I suppose. Everything becomes clear, however, when they are
seen, not as truths, but as Four Realities to ariyas, namely noble persons.

Best,

Ole Pind

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: Pali@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Pali@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af Benjamin
Jerome
Sendt: 14. august 2005 17:37
Til: Pali@yahoogroups.com
Emne: Re: [Pali] the 5th precept


Dear Friends,

In the SN we read the pali phrase in question:

[simile of soil in fingernail compared to great earth]

"So too, bhikkhus, those beings are few who abstain
from wine, liquors, and intoxicants that are a basis
for negligence. But these beings are more numerous
who do not abstain from wines, liquors, and
intoxicants that are a basis for negligence. For what
reason? Because, bhikkhus, they have not seen the
Four Noble Truths. What four? ...
"Therefore, bhikkhus, an exertion should be made to
understand: 'this is dukkha' ...
[end of quote]
(SN mahavagga, saccasamyutta, sutta 64)

So according to this people drink because they have
not seen the 4 noble truths. If one still delights
in drinking and desires to do it, then this person
might do it. But restraint (meaning one wants to but
does not) is meritorious according to MN 60.
But if one loses the delight and desire, then that
is different than "restraint", it is samma-sankappo
based upon knowledge of the ariya-sacca. This
individual would not even desire the intoxication.
Yet it seems that if for some reason he physically did
drink, then he would still be "abstaining" through
virtue of non-delight and avoidance of "I-making"
(fading away).
For the puthujjana, indulging in drink causes many
obvious forms of suffering. But for those instructed
in dhamma, we can understand that it also causes many
anxious thoughts connected with "I". If "I drink"
then that is definitly not abstaining. This thought
becomes the basis for thoughts like "I'm bad, because
I drink." But if it is just "there is drinking" were
is the delight of it and what is the point of doing it
at all?
But this may not be acceptable to others who are
concerned with their impression upon others. As
Bhikkhu Nyanatusita pointed out, our observable kamma
influences those around us.
-Ben



____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs







- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[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