English
should reflect further – ‘This self-confession that I desire to make, is this self-confession true, or not?’ If, Upāli, the bhikkhu, reflecting, knows thus – ‘This self-confession is untrue, it is not true,’ then, Upāli, that self-confession should not be made. “But if, Upāli, the bhikkhu, reflecting, knows thus – ‘This self-confession is true, it is not untrue,’ then, Upāli, the bhikkhu should reflect further – ‘This self-confession that I desire to make, is this self-confession connected with benefit Is it a taking or not? If, Upāli, a monk reflecting thus knows: ‘This taking for oneself is connected with harm, not connected with benefit,’ that, Upāli, taking for oneself should not be taken. But if, Upāli, a monk reflecting thus knows: ‘This taking for oneself is connected with benefit, not connected with harm,’ then, Upāli, that monk should reflect further: ‘Taking this for myself, will I obtain the support of fellow monks, seen and gathered, according to Dhamma and Vinaya, or not?’ If, Upāli, a monk reflecting thus knows: ‘Taking this for myself, I will not obtain the support of fellow monks, seen and gathered, according to Dhamma and Vinaya,’ that, Upāli, taking for oneself should not be taken. But if, Upāli, a monk reflecting thus knows: ‘Taking this for myself, I will obtain the support of fellow monks, seen and gathered, according to Dhamma and Vinaya,’ then, Upāli, that monk should reflect further: ‘Will this taking for myself cause, for the Sangha, on account of it, quarreling, contention, dispute, controversy, schism, division, separation, or disunity, or not?’ If, Upāli, a monk reflecting thus knows: ‘This taking for myself will cause, for the Sangha, on account of it, quarreling, contention, dispute, controversy, schism, division, separation, or disunity,’ that, Upāli, taking for oneself should not be taken. But if, Upāli, a monk reflecting thus knows: ‘This taking for myself will not cause, for the Sangha, on account of it, quarreling, contention, dispute, controversy, schism, division, separation, or disunity,’ that, Upāli, taking for oneself should be taken. Thus, Upāli, a taking for oneself endowed with these five factors, when taken, will later be without regret. 8. By the Accuser Qualities to be reflected upon 399. "Venerable sir, by a bhikkhu who wishes to admonish another, how many qualities should be reflected upon within oneself before admonishing another?" "Upāli, by a bhikkhu who wishes to admonish another, five qualities should be reflected upon within oneself before admonishing another. "Upāli, by a bhikkhu who wishes to admonish another, this should be reflected upon: 'Am I pure in bodily conduct? Am I endowed with pure bodily conduct— unblemished, irreproachable? Does this quality exist in me, or not?' If, Upāli, a bhikkhu is not pure in bodily conduct, not endowed with pure bodily conduct— unblemished, irreproachable— then others will say to him: 'Come now, venerable sir, train in bodily conduct!' Such will be their words. "Furthermore, Upāli, by a bhikkhu who wishes to admonish another, this should be reflected upon: 'Am I pure in verbal conduct? Am I endowed with pure verbal conduct— unblemished, irreproachable? Does this quality exist in me, or not?' If, Upāli, a bhikkhu is not pure in verbal conduct, not endowed with pure verbal conduct— unblemished, irreproachable— then others will say to him: 'Come now, venerable sir, train in verbal conduct!' Such will be their words. "Furthermore, Upāli, by a bhikkhu who wishes to admonish another, this should be reflected upon: 'Is my mind established in loving-kindness towards my fellow practitioners, without ill-will? Does this quality exist in me, or not?' If, Upāli, a bhikkhu's mind is not established in loving-kindness towards his fellow practitioners, without ill-will, then others will say to him: 'Come now, venerable sir, establish a mind of loving-kindness towards your fellow practitioners!' Such will be their words. "Furthermore, Upāli, by a bhikkhu who wishes to admonish And by one who wishes to admonish another, this should be reflected upon: 'Am I indeed learned, a preserver of teachings, a collector of teachings? Are those teachings, beautiful in the beginning, beautiful in the middle, beautiful in the end, which proclaim the holy life complete and pure, with meaning and with letter, are such teachings well-learned by me, held in mind, familiar by speech, contemplated by mind, well-penetrated by view? Does this quality exist in me, or not?' If, Upāli, a bhikkhu is not learned, not a preserver of teachings, not a collector of teachings; if those teachings, beautiful in the beginning, beautiful in the middle, beautiful in the end, which proclaim the holy life complete and pure, with meaning and with letter, if such teachings are not well-learned by him, not held in mind, not familiar by speech, not contemplated by mind, not well-penetrated by view, then there will be those who say to him: 'Come, venerable sir, first learn the scriptures!' Indeed, there will be those who say this to him. Furthermore, Upāli, by a bhikkhu who wishes to admonish another, this should be reflected upon: 'Are both Pātimokkhas well-received by me in detail, well-analyzed, well-practiced, well-determined – by rule, by explanation? Does this quality exist in me, or not?' If, Upāli, for a bhikkhu, both Pātimokkhas are not well-received in detail, not well-analyzed, not well-practiced, not well-determined – by rule, by explanation, and when asked: 'Friend, where was this said by the Blessed One?' he cannot respond, then there will be those who say to him: 'Come, venerable sir, first learn the Vinaya!' Indeed, there will be those who say this to him. Upāli, by a bhikkhu who wishes to admonish another, having reflected upon these five qualities within himself, the other should be admonished. 9. Qualities to be established by the admonisher 400. "Venerable sir, by a bhikkhu who wishes to admonish another, how many qualities should be established within himself before admonishing another?" What is it? "O Upāli, a monk who wishes to admonish another, having established five qualities within himself, should admonish the other – I will speak at the right time, not at the wrong time; I will speak what is factual, not what is not factual; I will speak gently, not harshly; I will speak what is beneficial, not what is unbeneficial; I will speak with a mind of loving-kindness, not with inner ill-will. O Upāli, a monk who wishes to admonish another, having established these five qualities within himself, should admonish the other." 10. Discourse Connected with the Admonisher and the Admonished 401. "Venerable sir, for a monk who admonishes contrary to the Dhamma, in how many ways should remorse be established?" "Upāli, for a monk who admonishes contrary to the Dhamma, remorse should be established in five ways – 'You admonished at the wrong time, not at the right time, that is enough for your remorse; you admonished with what is not factual, not with what is factual, that is enough for your remorse; you admonished harshly, not gently, that is enough for your remorse; you admonished with what is unbeneficial, not with what is beneficial, that is enough for your remorse; you admonished with inner ill-will, not with a mind of loving-kindness, that is enough for your remorse.' Upāli, for a monk who admonishes contrary to the Dhamma, remorse should be established in these five ways. For what reason? So that no other monk might think that what is not factual should be admonished." "But Venerable sir, for a monk who is admonished contrary to the Dhamma, in how many ways should non-remorse be established?" "Upāli, for a monk who is admonished contrary to the Dhamma, non-remorse should be established in five ways – 'You were admonished at the wrong time, not at the right time, that is enough for your non-remorse; you were admonished with what is not factual, not with what is factual, that is enough for your non-remorse; you were admonished harshly, not gently, that is enough for your non-remorse; you were admonished with what is unbeneficial, not with what is beneficial, that is enough for your non-remorse; you were admonished with inner ill-will, not with a mind of loving-kindness, that is enough for your non-remorse.' Upāli, for a monk who is admonished contrary to the Dhamma, non-remorse should be established in these five ways." should be given. "Venerable sir, in how many ways should a monk who admonishes according to the Dhamma be given freedom from remorse?" "Upāli, a monk who admonishes according to the Dhamma should be given freedom from remorse in five ways – The venerable one admonished at the right time, not at the wrong time, this is enough for your freedom from remorse; The venerable one admonished with what is true, not with what is untrue, this is enough for your freedom from remorse; The venerable one admonished gently, not harshly, this is enough for your freedom from remorse; The venerable one admonished for benefit, not for harm, this is enough for your freedom from remorse; The venerable one admonished with a mind of loving-kindness, not with inner ill-will, this is enough for your freedom from remorse. Upāli, a monk who admonishes according to the Dhamma should be given freedom from remorse in these five ways. For what reason? So that another monk might also think it right to admonish with what is true." "But Venerable sir, in how many ways should a monk who has been admonished according to the Dhamma be given remorse?" "Upāli, a monk who has been admonished according to the Dhamma should be given remorse in five ways – The venerable one was admonished at the right time, not at the wrong time, this is enough for your remorse; The venerable one was admonished with what is true, not with what is untrue, this is enough for your remorse; The venerable one was admonished gently, not harshly, this is enough for your remorse;