Re: pa.tikaroti

Hello Jayarava,

Many thanks for your thoughtful response. Here are my observations on some of the issues raised by you.

>Jayarava: "1.

Re confession. I think you are overstating your objection to the term when you say "The word 'confession' is a complete misunderstanding. " Although pa.tikaroti does not 'mean' confession, it

is obvious to any native English speaker that what Ajaatasattu is doing is "confessing" in the dictionary sense of "acknowledgement of a fault, wrongdoing, a sin" (OED Concise), but also (note Piya) he is in that section making a "declaration of one's religious beliefs" or a "statement of one's principles" (OED Concise) by going for refuge to the Tiratana. Piya's use of "confession" in the subtitle to the chapter is, then, quite acceptable as English, despite the small possibility of being misunderstood by someone not well versed in

Buddhadhamma."

DC: I really can't find any objection to your above reasoning, but my upbringing does not allow me to accept it either. You may recollect that I mentioned that "it was how we understood the passage as traditional Buddhists. May be we are wrong. But I notice one or two things that is not clear to me: (1) The OED definitions are what an Englishman would understand if he hears the word "confession." But what we are discussing is whether Ajatasattu's statement can be construed as a "confession." The point I tried to make was that we didn't think of that as a confession, because it was not a "confession" according to Dhamma-vinaya. We think the English word "confession" misrepresents what happened. (2) We do not understand "going for refuge to Tiratana" as "declaration one's religious beliefs" or "statement of one's principles." There are no "religious beliefs" in the teaching of the Buddha. For Dhamma-vinaya is not a religion.

>Jayarava: "Although I agree that pa.tikaroti does not mean confession I am also left with a question - which may be off topic for this group, but let's file it under philology and me wanting to find out *why* a word means what it does. In what way can telling the Buddha about killing his father be seen to make amends? In what sense does talking about it "correct" it, especially in the light of the Buddha's comments to the Bhikkhus after Ajaatasattu leaves that "he is done for"?"

DC: (1) "Why a word means what it does"--This will be a very abstract discussion; we will have to go into the nature of language, 'What is the meaning of meaning' and so on. I'll write about that later because I need a little time to think about this. Are you acquainted with the Ara.navibhanga sutta of MN? Reading that would be a good background for this discussion.
(2) "In what way can telling the Buddha about killing his father be seen to make amends?" No way, that is the whole basis of my earlier statements. He will have to suffer for his evil deed. The purpose is different. Let me try and explain my understanding. King admitted that he killed his father. What the king told the Buddha was that to accept the fact that 'he acknowledges killing his father and evil deed (akusala).' I hope I have made myself clear. It is different from confessing--confession is: 'I killed my father.' That is just a preamble to the subsequent request to the Buddha. What is the purpose of the request? In dhamma, until you accept a wrong-doing as a wrong-doing you cannot correct yourself. As I mentioned in my previous e-m, the whole of Vinaya is based on this principle. In Dhamma, only one can help oneself.
(3) "he is done for"--What is meant here is that because of the evil-deed, he didn't become a sotapanna. According to dhamma, killing one's father is one of the five heinous crimes. Such a person need to travel long in sa.msaara before he can progress in the path. What the Buddha was trying to explain to the monks was that though the king understood the Dhamma intellectually, because his mind (citta, mano, vi~n~naa.na) was not pure enough to achieve the sotapanna status. This is a very good example where intellectual understanding of Dhamma is of very little use.

With mettaa,

DC

D. G. D. C. Wijeratna

----- Original Message ----
From: jayarava <jayarava@...>
To: Pali@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 4:13:24 PM
Subject: [Pali] Re: pa.tikaroti

--- In Pali@... com, DC Wijeratna <dcwijeratna@ ...> wrote:

>

> To: Jayarava

> From DC

>

> Here is how we understand the meaning of the 'pa.tikarosi' ...

Hi DC thanks for your comments and spelling out the background to the

term. A very useful discussion.

Re confession. I think you are overstating your objection to the term

when you say "The word 'confession' is a complete

misunderstanding. " Although pa.tikaroti does not 'mean' confession, it

is obvious to any native English speaker that what Ajaatasattu is

doing is "confessing" in the dictionary sense of "acknowledgement of a

fault, wrongdoing, a sin" (OED Concise), but also (note Piya) he is in

that section making a "declaration of one's religious beliefs" or a

"statement of one's principles" (OED Concise) by going for refuge to

the Tiratana. Piya's use of "confession" in the subtitle to the

chapter is, then, quite acceptable as English, despite the small

possibility of being misunderstood by someone not well versed in

Buddhadhamma.

Although I agree that pa.tikaroti does not mean confession I am also

left with a question - which may be off topic for this group, but

let's file it under philology and me wanting to find out *why* a word

means what it does. In what way can telling the Buddha about killing

his father be seen to make amends? In what sense does talking about it

"correct" it, especially in the light of the Buddha's comments to the

Bhikkhus after Ajaatasattu leaves that "he is done for"?

Again any insights you can offer will be much appreciated.

mettaaya

Jayarava







____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]