English
Like a fruit of a tree, desires have been declared by the Blessed One… Like a sword-blade, desires have been declared by the Blessed One… Like a stake or a spear, desires have been declared by the Blessed One… Like a snake's head, desires have been declared by the Blessed One. They are full of suffering, full of vexation; the danger in them is greater. Even so, the monk Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture-trainer, when spoken to by those monks, persisted in that evil view, clinging to it firmly, and declared: "Friends, I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One in such a way that those things declared by the Blessed One to be obstructive are not capable of obstruction for one who indulges in them." When those monks were unable to dissuade the monk Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture-trainer, from that evil view, then those monks approached the Blessed One; having approached, they reported this matter to the Blessed One. Then the Blessed One, on account of this incident, on account of this matter, convened the assembly of monks and questioned the monk Ariṭṭha, formerly a vulture-trainer: "Is it true, Ariṭṭha, that such an evil view has arisen in you: 'I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One in such a way that those things declared by the Blessed One to be obstructive are not capable of obstruction for one who indulges in them'?" "Indeed, venerable sir, I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One in such a way that those things declared by the Blessed One to be obstructive are not capable of obstruction for one who indulges in them." "By whom, foolish man, do you understand the Dhamma to have been taught by me in this way? Have I not, foolish man, in many ways declared obstructive things to be obstructive? And they are indeed capable of obstruction for one who indulges in them. Desires have been declared by me to have little enjoyment, to be full of suffering, full of vexation; the danger in them is greater. Like a bone-skeleton, desires have been declared by me… Like a piece of meat, desires have been declared by me… Like a torch of grass, desires have been declared by me… Like a pit of glowing coals, desires have been declared by me… Like a dream, desires have been declared by me… Like borrowed goods, desires have been declared by me… Like a fruit of a tree… Desires, I have said, are like a sword without a sheath. Desires, I have said, are like a spear and a stake. Desires, I have said, are like a snake's head. They bring much suffering, much distress, and the danger in them is greater. Yet you, foolish man, with your wrong grasp, both slander us, and harm yourself, and produce much demerit. That, foolish man, will be for your harm and suffering for a long time. This, foolish man, is not for the conversion of the unconverted… (etc.) And thus, monks, you should recite this training rule: 418. “Should any monk say thus: ‘I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One in such a way that those things declared by the Blessed One to be impediments are not sufficient to be impediments when indulged in,’ that monk should be told by the monks: ‘Do not, venerable sir, speak thus; do not slander the Blessed One. It is not good to slander the Blessed One. The Blessed One would not speak thus. In many ways, friend, the Blessed One has declared things that are impediments to be impediments, and they are sufficient to be impediments when indulged in.’ If that monk, being told by the monks, should persist in the same way, that monk should be admonished by the monks up to the third time for the relinquishing of that. If, being admonished up to the third time, he relinquishes it, that is good. If he does not relinquish it, it is a pācittiya.” 419. “Any” means whoever, of whatever kind… (etc.) “Monk” means… (etc.) this is the monk intended in this context. “Should say thus”: “I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One in such a way that those things declared by the Blessed One to be impediments are not sufficient to be impediments when indulged in.” “That monk” means that monk who speaks thus. “By the monks” means by other monks. Those who see, those who hear, should tell him: “Do not, venerable sir, speak thus; do not slander the Blessed One. It is not good to slander the Blessed One. The Blessed One would not speak thus. In many ways, friend, Obstructive things are said by the Blessed One to be obstructive. And indeed, for one who practices them, they are sufficient for obstruction." He should be spoken to a second time. He should be spoken to a third time. If he gives it up, that is good. If he does not give it up, there is an offense of wrong-doing. If, having heard, they do not speak, there is an offense of wrong-doing. That bhikkhu, even in the midst of the Sangha, should be pulled and spoken to: "Venerable sir, do not speak thus! Do not slander the Blessed One! Indeed, slandering the Blessed One is not good! Indeed, the Blessed One would not speak thus! Friend, in many ways obstructive things are said by the Blessed One to be obstructive. And indeed, for one who practices them, they are sufficient for obstruction." He should be spoken to a second time. He should be spoken to a third time. If he gives it up, that is good. If he does not give it up, there is an offense of wrong-doing. That bhikkhu should be admonished. And thus, bhikkhus, he should be admonished. By a competent and capable bhikkhu, the Sangha should be informed: 420. "May the Sangha, venerable sirs, hear me. To the bhikkhu named So-and-so such a wicked view has arisen: 'I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One in such a way that those obstructive things which are said by the Blessed One to be obstructive, for one who practices them, are not sufficient for obstruction.' He does not give up that view. If it is suitable for the Sangha, the Sangha should admonish the bhikkhu named So-and-so for the giving up of that view. This is the motion. "May the Sangha, venerable sirs, hear me. To the bhikkhu named So-and-so such a wicked view has arisen: 'I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One in such a way that those obstructive things which are said by the Blessed One to be obstructive, for one who practices them, are not sufficient for obstruction.' He does not give up that view. The Sangha admonishes the bhikkhu named So-and-so for the giving up of that view. Whoever among the venerable ones approves of the admonition of the bhikkhu named So-and-so for the giving up of that view, let him be silent. Whoever does not approve, let him speak. "A second time... I declare this matter... ...and so on... for the third time I declare this matter: "May the Sangha, venerable sirs, listen to me. To the bhikkhu of such-and-such a name, such a wicked view has arisen: ‘I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One in such a way that those things declared by the Blessed One to be impediments are not sufficient to be impediments when indulged in.’ He does not relinquish that view. The Sangha admonishes the bhikkhu of such-and-such a name for the relinquishing of that view. Whosoever of the venerable ones approves of the admonition of the bhikkhu of such-and-such a name, for the relinquishing of that view, let him be silent; whosoever does not approve, let him speak. The bhikkhu of such-and-such a name has been admonished by the Sangha, for the relinquishing of that view. The Sangha approves, therefore it is silent. Thus do I hold this." An offense of wrong-doing for the motion. Wrong-doing for the two proclamations. At the conclusion of the proclamation, an offense of expiation. 421. In a lawful act, perceiving it as a lawful act, if he does not relinquish, there is an offense of expiation. In a lawful act, being doubtful, if he does not relinquish, there is an offense of expiation. In a lawful act, perceiving it as an unlawful act, if he does not relinquish, there is an offense of expiation. In an unlawful act, perceiving it as a lawful act, there is an offense of wrong-doing. In an unlawful act, being doubtful, there is an offense of wrong-doing. In an unlawful act, perceiving it as an unlawful act, there is an offense of wrong-doing. 422. No offense for one who does not admonish, for one who relinquishes, for one who is insane. The training rule concerning Ariṭṭha, the eighth, is concluded. 9. The training rule concerning association with one suspended 423. At that time, the Buddha, the Blessed One, was staying at Sāvatthī, in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's monastery. Now at that time, the group of six bhikkhus, knowing that the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, who spoke thus, [the bhikkhu formerly a vulture-killer (?)] had not acted in accordance with the Dhamma, and had not relinquished that view, ate together with him, lived together with him, and even slept together with him. Those bhikkhus who were of few wishes... ...and so on... they complained, grumbled, and criticized. – How can it be that the group-of-six bhikkhus, knowing that the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, who speaks thus, who has not performed the proper procedure, who has not renounced that view, would eat with him, or dwell with him, or even share a bed with him?…(etc.)… Is it true, bhikkhus, that you, knowing that the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, who speaks thus, who has not performed the proper procedure, who has not renounced that view, would eat with him, or dwell with him, or even share a bed with him? “It is true, Blessed One.” The Buddha, the Blessed One, rebuked them…(etc.)… How can it be, foolish men, that you, knowing that the bhikkhu Ariṭṭha, who speaks thus, who has not performed the proper procedure, who has not renounced that view, would eat with him, or dwell with him, or even share a bed with him! This, foolish men, is not for the conversion of the unconverted…(etc.)… And thus, bhikkhus, you should recite this training rule: 424.