English
seven years and seven months, involving the giving of eighty-four thousand gold plates, silver plates, and bronze plates, each filled respectively with silver, gold, and jewels; eighty-four thousand elephants, all adorned with ornaments; eighty-four thousand horses; eighty-four thousand chariots; eighty-four thousand cows; eighty-four thousand maidens; eighty-four thousand couches; eighty-four thousand crores of garments; and immeasurable food of various kinds, such as hard and soft foods— compared to this great offering, a gift given to one stream-enterer is more fruitful. More fruitful than a gift given to a hundred stream-enterers is a gift to one once-returner. More fruitful than that, a gift to one non-returner. More fruitful than that, a gift to one Arahant. More fruitful than that..." to a Paccekabuddha, then to a Perfectly Self-Enlightened One, then a gift given to the Sangha led by the Buddha is more greatly fruitful, then the building of a monastery dedicated to the Sangha of the four directions, then taking refuge is more greatly fruitful, so it is declared. And this has been said: “Whatever great gift, householder, the brahmin Velāma gave, and whoever would feed one endowed with right view, this is more greatly fruitful than that.” (A.N. 9.20) And so on. Thus, the fruit of taking refuge should be understood. The discourse on the fruit of taking refuge is finished. Discourse on the defilement and division of taking refuge Therein, worldly taking refuge is defiled by ignorance, doubt, wrong knowledge, and so on, concerning the three objects; it is not greatly radiant, not shining, impure, not clear, not greatly expansive, not noble. Here, ignorance means not knowing the qualities of the three objects, confusion about them. “Is it the Buddha, or is it not?” and so on, is wavering doubt. Wrong knowledge means conceiving of their qualities as non-qualities, thus holding a perverted view, so it should be understood. However, for supramundane taking refuge, there is no defilement. And worldly taking refuge has two kinds of division: blameworthy and blameless. Therein, the blameworthy occurs by dedicating oneself to other teachers and so on; it has an undesirable fruit. The blameless, however, occurs at the time of death. For worldly taking refuge, like the undertaking of precepts, is not limited by a specific time, but lasts only until the end of life. Therefore, its division is by the breaking of the aggregates; it is fruitless because it has no ripening. However, for supramundane taking refuge, there is no division at all. For even in another existence, a noble disciple does not dedicate himself to another teacher. Thus, the defilement and division of taking refuge should be understood. Why is purification not included here? Does not the elucidation of purification also lead to skill in that? This is true. But it is not included because it is implicitly shown by the inclusion of defilement. For those causes of defilement, such as ignorance, etc., all of them... by not producing them, and by abandoning those that have arisen, purification occurs. Thus, here, the elaboration of “refuge, going for refuge,” and so on, should be understood. The reason for not stating this aforementioned elaboration here is shown by saying, “If that were to be stated here,” and so on. There, “from the description of refuge” means from the description of refuge stated in the Sāmaññaphala Sutta. The discourse on the defilement and distinction of going for refuge is finished. The discourse on the declaration of being a lay follower “Thus should be held” means “thus should be known.” Here, “who is a lay follower?” is a question about its nature, so it means “what are the characteristics of a lay follower?” “Why?” is a question about the cause. It shows by what operative cause the word “lay follower” is established in that person. Therefore, it says, “why is one called a lay follower?” For a word, the operative cause of its referent is the reason for that meaning’s existence. “What is his virtue?” means what kind of virtue does this lay follower have, and by how much virtue is he called virtuous? “What is his livelihood?” means what is his right livelihood? That, however, occurs by avoiding wrong livelihood, so it is also distinguished. “What is the failure?” means the failure of which virtue or livelihood? For what is immediately preceding, there is either a rule or a prohibition. “Success?” Here too, the same method applies. “This miscellaneous matter should be understood.” How should it be understood? It is said: “Who is a lay follower?” Any householder, whether a khattiya or another, who has gone for the three refuges. Going for refuge is the cause here, not distinctions of caste and so on. For it has been said: “When, Mahānāma, one has gone for refuge to the Buddha, to the Dhamma, to the Saṅgha, by this much, Mahānāma, one is a lay follower.” “Why is one a lay follower?” Because of attending to the Triple Gem. It is said that by that going for refuge and by diligent action therein, through devotion, respect, reverence, and so on, one attends. For he attends to the Buddha, thus he is a lay follower. He attends to the Dhamma, to the Saṅgha, thus he is a lay follower. “What is his virtue?” The five abstinences. Here, “abstinence” means “vera” is called bad conduct in killing living beings and so on. the five abstinences, which are the essence of that morality, by their refraining from such thoughts, harm, and destruction. It has been said: ‘When, Mahānāma, a lay follower abstains from taking life, from taking what is not given, from sexual misconduct, from false speech, from distilled and fermented intoxicants which are the basis for heedlessness. To this extent, Mahānāma, a lay follower is moral.’ What is livelihood? Abandoning the five wrong trades, maintaining one's life righteously and equitably. It has been said: ‘Monks, these five trades should not be engaged in by a lay follower. Which five? Trade in weapons, trade in living beings, trade in meat, trade in intoxicants, trade in poisons. Monks, these five trades should not be engaged in by a lay follower.’ And here, trade in weapons means making or causing to be made, or acquiring ready-made weapons, and selling them. Trade in living beings means selling humans. Trade in meat means, like butchers and the like, raising deer, pigs, and so on, preparing their meat, and selling it. Trade in intoxicants means preparing any kind of intoxicant and selling it. Trade in poisons means preparing or collecting poison and selling it. In this regard, trade in weapons is said to be avoided because it causes harm to others. Trade in living beings because it makes them unfree. Trade in meat and poison because it is a cause of killing. Trade in intoxicants because it is a basis for heedlessness, so it should be understood. What is failure? That failure of that very morality and livelihood, its breaking, disturbing, greatly disturbing. This is his failure. Moreover, that by which he becomes an outcast, a stain, and an object of contempt, that too should be understood as his failure. And those, in essence, are the five qualities beginning with lack of faith. As it is said: ‘Monks, a lay follower endowed with five qualities becomes a lay outcast, a lay stain, and a lay object of contempt. Which five? He is faithless. He is immoral. He is superstitious, believing in omens. He believes in omens, not in kamma. And he seeks worthy recipients outside (the Sangha), and makes prior good deeds.” Here, “an inferior lay follower” means a low-ranking lay follower. “Faith reversed in the Buddha and others, and in deeds and their fruits” is lack of faith, wrong conviction. “Lacking faith” is endowed with the aforementioned lack of faith. “Immoral” is by way of the aforementioned failure in morality and failure in livelihood. “Superstitious” is endowed with the good fortune of sights, sounds, and thoughts, which are considered by foolish people as “by this sight, etc., this good fortune comes about.” “Believes in good omens” means he believes in good omens, such as those of sights, etc. “Not in deeds” means he does not believe in the ownership of deeds. “Outside of this” means outside of this teaching of the Omniscient Buddha, in an external doctrine. “Seeks those worthy of offerings” means he seeks out those who are wrongly practicing, thinking them worthy of offerings. “Makes prior good deeds” means he first performs wholesome actions such as giving and honoring. Here, by combining the seeking of those worthy of offerings and the making of prior good deeds into one, five qualities are to be understood. “Attainment” means his attainment of moral conduct and livelihood, and the five qualities such as faith, which make him a jewel. As it is said: “Monks, a lay follower endowed with five qualities is a jewel among lay followers, a lotus among lay followers, and a white lotus among lay followers. Which five? He is faithful, he is moral, he is not superstitious, he believes in deeds, not in omens, he does not seek those worthy of offerings outside of this, and he makes prior good deeds here.” Here, a lay follower is a jewel among lay followers because he brings joy to all four assemblies. A lay follower is a lotus among lay followers because of his qualities, beauty, fame, and sweet fragrance. Similarly, he is to be understood as a white lotus among lay followers. The rest here should be understood by reversing what was said in the context of failure. Thus, this miscellaneous section, beginning with “who is a lay follower,” should be understood in detail. The reason for not elaborating on this miscellaneous section here is given as “that is too weighty.” Because of not doing, etc. "In the beginning" means in the sense of beginning. "At the end" means at the very end. "By the end of the monastery" means by the portion of the chamber, meaning by the portion of the dwelling place,