Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1no living beings. 422 SOTRAKRITANGA. of immovable beings, they will be born in bodies of movable ones, and when they leave the bodies of movable beings, they will be born in bodies of immovable ones. When they are born in bodies of immovable beings, it is no sin to kill them. (6) ‘(But if they make him renounce) injury to creatures which are, for the time being, movable beings, except on the order (from an established authority)—as the householder caused one of the captured thieves to be set free—(if they take this vow), those who make this renunciation, make a good renunciation; those who cause this renunciation to be made, cause a good renunciation to be made; in causing another to make this renunciation, they do not annul their own allegation. ‘Though in this way! a correct expression is found, some (monks) from anger or greed cause the householder to make the renunciation (without the necessary restriction). Is not this our interpretation right ? O long-lived Gautama, do you approve of it?’ (7) And Gautama spoke thus to Udaka, the son of Pédhala: “O long-lived Udaka, we certainly do not approve of it. The Sramazas or Brahmazas who say thus, speak thus, declare thus, and explain thus, do not speak as Sramazas or Nirgranthas, they speak noxious speech. They mislead laymen. They make void all vows undertaken for sparing particular living beings*. Why do I say this? Beings belong 1 I.e. by specifying the movable beings as beings which are movable ones for the time being. ? E.g. if a man vows to kill no Brahmaaa (and does not add the restriction ‘for the time being’), he may kill no man or animal whatever ; for the soul of that man or animal may, in the past, have been embodied in a Brahmaaa. BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 423 to the Circle of Births; though they be (now) immovable beings, they will (some time) become movable ones, (&c., all as in § 6, down to) when they leave the bodies of movable beings, they will be born in the bodies of immovable ones. When they are born in the bodies of movable beings, it is a sin to kill them.” (8) And Udaka, the son of Péddla, spoke thus: ‘Which beings do you call movable beings ? movable ones or others ?’ And Gautama spoke thus to Udaka, the son of Pédhéla: “O long-lived Udaka, what you call beings which are, for the time being, movable ones, we call movable beings; and what we call movable beings, you call beings which are, for the time being, movable ones. Both expressions are equal, and mean the same thing. O long-lived one, why do you think it more correct to say: beings which are, for the time being, movable ones; and why do you think it incorrect to say: movable beings, that you censure the one expression, and applaud the other? This your interpretation is not right. (9)
2O long-lived one, why do you think it more correct to say: beings which are, for the time being, movable ones; and why do you think it incorrect to say: movable beings, that you censure the one expression, and applaud the other? This your interpretation is not right. (9) “And the Venerable One has spoken thus: Some men there are who say: we cannot, submitting to the tonsure, renounce the life of a householder and enter the monastic state, but we shall gradually conform to the Gétra (i.e. community of the monks). Accordingly they make known the limits’, fix the limits, determine the limits (beyond which they will not go in the enjoyment of worldly goods); and 1 Literally, the number. A sample of such vows is given in the beginning of the Uvasaga Das4o, see Hoernle’s edition, § 16 ff. 424 SOTRAKRITANGA. renounce injury to movable beings, except on the order? (of an established authority)—as the householder caused one of the captured thieves to be set free. And this turns out to their benefit. (10) “ Movable beings are called so, when they get this character ? through the taking effect of the Karman relating to movable beings. But when their duration of life as movable beings comes to its close, the (soul), embodied in a movable being, leaves its life as such and becomes embodied in an immovable being. Immovable beings are called so, when they get this character through the taking effect of the Karman relating to immovable beings. But when their duration of life as an immovable being comes to its close, the (soul), embodied in an immovable being, leaves its life as such and takes again a new form of existence; they are (then) called * animated beings, (animals) of large bodies, or of long life.” (11) And Udaka, the son of Pédh4la, spoke thus to the Venerable Gautama: ‘Is there not a chance, that a follower of the Sramazas, though he has renounced slaughter of but one class of living beings, ceases altogether to injure any*? Why do 1 Abhiyéga. Sflanka enumerates four kinds of abhiydga: gaza-, bala-, devaté-abhiy6éga, and gurunigraha. * N4ma, literally, name. 5 They are called (vuééanti=ufyanté) is apparently equivalent with: they get the name (néma); ‘name,’ however, means in Gaina and Bauddha terminology as much as ‘the nature of the thing.’ The words of the text, therefore, come to mean: ‘they become or are animated beings,’ &c. “ The question discussed in the following paragraphs is whether, at some future time, all movable beings in the Samsfra might not die out, and none but immovable beings be left. This idea is combated at great length by Gautama. BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 425
3“ The question discussed in the following paragraphs is whether, at some future time, all movable beings in the Samsfra might not die out, and none but immovable beings be left. This idea is combated at great length by Gautama. BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 425 I say this? Beings belong to the Circle of Births, though they be (now) immovable beings, they will (some time) become movable ones, and though they be movable beings, they will become immovable ones. When they leave the bodies of immovable beings, all are born in bodies of movable ones, and when they leave the bodies of movable beings, all will be born in bodies of immovable ones. When they are born in bodies of immovable beings, they may be killed }.’ (12) And the Venerable Gautama spoke thus to Udaka, the son of Péddla: “O long-lived one, we? do not admit what you say; viz. that there is a chance that a follower of the Sramazas should cease to do injury to any kind of living beings. Why do we say this? Beings belong to the Circle of Births, (&c., all as above, down to) when they are born in bodies of movable beings, it is a sin to kill them. They are called animated beings, (animals) of large bodies, or of long life. There are always a great many animate beings, (the slaughter of) which a follower of the Sramazas must renounce, there are none, (the slaughter of) which he need not renounce. If he ceases, or has done with, or has given up (injuring) the large class of movable beings, his renunciation is 1 The meaning is, that at some future time movable beings may have ceased to exist, since they are all born as immovable beings, and vice vers&. If the latter is the case, a layman, who abstains from killing animals, practically does injury to no being whatever ; if the former is the case, he cannot transgress his vow even if he would. ? The text has the Sanskrit word asm&kam, of which the commentator alleges that it was thus pronounced by all people in Magadha, compare note 2, p. 358. 426 SOTRAKRITANGA. good. What you or somebody else says, that there is a chance of a layman’s ceasing to do an injury altogether, by renouncing slaughter of one kind of beings; this interpretation of yours is not right.” (13)
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1no living beings. 422 SOTRAKRITANGA. of immovable beings, they will be born in bodies of movable ones, and when they leave the bodies of movable beings, they will be born in bodies of immovable ones. When they are born in bodies of immovable beings, it is no sin to kill them. (6) ‘(But if they make him renounce) injury to creatures which are, for the time being, movable beings, except on the order (from an established authority)—as the householder caused one of the captured thieves to be set free—(if they take this vow), those who make this renunciation, make a good renunciation; those who cause this renunciation to be made, cause a good renunciation to be made; in causing another to make this renunciation, they do not annul their own allegation. ‘Though in this way! a correct expression is found, some (monks) from anger or greed cause the householder to make the renunciation (without the necessary restriction). Is not this our interpretation right ? O long-lived Gautama, do you approve of it?’ (7) And Gautama spoke thus to Udaka, the son of Pédhala: “O long-lived Udaka, we certainly do not approve of it. The Sramazas or Brahmazas who say thus, speak thus, declare thus, and explain thus, do not speak as Sramazas or Nirgranthas, they speak noxious speech. They mislead laymen. They make void all vows undertaken for sparing particular living beings*. Why do I say this? Beings belong 1 I.e. by specifying the movable beings as beings which are movable ones for the time being. ? E.g. if a man vows to kill no Brahmaaa (and does not add the restriction ‘for the time being’), he may kill no man or animal whatever ; for the soul of that man or animal may, in the past, have been embodied in a Brahmaaa. BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 423 to the Circle of Births; though they be (now) immovable beings, they will (some time) become movable ones, (&c., all as in § 6, down to) when they leave the bodies of movable beings, they will be born in the bodies of immovable ones. When they are born in the bodies of movable beings, it is a sin to kill them.” (8) And Udaka, the son of Péddla, spoke thus: ‘Which beings do you call movable beings ? movable ones or others ?’ And Gautama spoke thus to Udaka, the son of Pédhéla: “O long-lived Udaka, what you call beings which are, for the time being, movable ones, we call movable beings; and what we call movable beings, you call beings which are, for the time being, movable ones. Both expressions are equal, and mean the same thing. O long-lived one, why do you think it more correct to say: beings which are, for the time being, movable ones; and why do you think it incorrect to say: movable beings, that you censure the one expression, and applaud the other? This your interpretation is not right. (9)
2O long-lived one, why do you think it more correct to say: beings which are, for the time being, movable ones; and why do you think it incorrect to say: movable beings, that you censure the one expression, and applaud the other? This your interpretation is not right. (9) “And the Venerable One has spoken thus: Some men there are who say: we cannot, submitting to the tonsure, renounce the life of a householder and enter the monastic state, but we shall gradually conform to the Gétra (i.e. community of the monks). Accordingly they make known the limits’, fix the limits, determine the limits (beyond which they will not go in the enjoyment of worldly goods); and 1 Literally, the number. A sample of such vows is given in the beginning of the Uvasaga Das4o, see Hoernle’s edition, § 16 ff. 424 SOTRAKRITANGA. renounce injury to movable beings, except on the order? (of an established authority)—as the householder caused one of the captured thieves to be set free. And this turns out to their benefit. (10) “ Movable beings are called so, when they get this character ? through the taking effect of the Karman relating to movable beings. But when their duration of life as movable beings comes to its close, the (soul), embodied in a movable being, leaves its life as such and becomes embodied in an immovable being. Immovable beings are called so, when they get this character through the taking effect of the Karman relating to immovable beings. But when their duration of life as an immovable being comes to its close, the (soul), embodied in an immovable being, leaves its life as such and takes again a new form of existence; they are (then) called * animated beings, (animals) of large bodies, or of long life.” (11) And Udaka, the son of Pédh4la, spoke thus to the Venerable Gautama: ‘Is there not a chance, that a follower of the Sramazas, though he has renounced slaughter of but one class of living beings, ceases altogether to injure any*? Why do 1 Abhiyéga. Sflanka enumerates four kinds of abhiydga: gaza-, bala-, devaté-abhiy6éga, and gurunigraha. * N4ma, literally, name. 5 They are called (vuééanti=ufyanté) is apparently equivalent with: they get the name (néma); ‘name,’ however, means in Gaina and Bauddha terminology as much as ‘the nature of the thing.’ The words of the text, therefore, come to mean: ‘they become or are animated beings,’ &c. “ The question discussed in the following paragraphs is whether, at some future time, all movable beings in the Samsfra might not die out, and none but immovable beings be left. This idea is combated at great length by Gautama. BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 425
3“ The question discussed in the following paragraphs is whether, at some future time, all movable beings in the Samsfra might not die out, and none but immovable beings be left. This idea is combated at great length by Gautama. BOOK 2, LECTURE 7. 425 I say this? Beings belong to the Circle of Births, though they be (now) immovable beings, they will (some time) become movable ones, and though they be movable beings, they will become immovable ones. When they leave the bodies of immovable beings, all are born in bodies of movable ones, and when they leave the bodies of movable beings, all will be born in bodies of immovable ones. When they are born in bodies of immovable beings, they may be killed }.’ (12) And the Venerable Gautama spoke thus to Udaka, the son of Péddla: “O long-lived one, we? do not admit what you say; viz. that there is a chance that a follower of the Sramazas should cease to do injury to any kind of living beings. Why do we say this? Beings belong to the Circle of Births, (&c., all as above, down to) when they are born in bodies of movable beings, it is a sin to kill them. They are called animated beings, (animals) of large bodies, or of long life. There are always a great many animate beings, (the slaughter of) which a follower of the Sramazas must renounce, there are none, (the slaughter of) which he need not renounce. If he ceases, or has done with, or has given up (injuring) the large class of movable beings, his renunciation is 1 The meaning is, that at some future time movable beings may have ceased to exist, since they are all born as immovable beings, and vice vers&. If the latter is the case, a layman, who abstains from killing animals, practically does injury to no being whatever ; if the former is the case, he cannot transgress his vow even if he would. ? The text has the Sanskrit word asm&kam, of which the commentator alleges that it was thus pronounced by all people in Magadha, compare note 2, p. 358. 426 SOTRAKRITANGA. good. What you or somebody else says, that there is a chance of a layman’s ceasing to do an injury altogether, by renouncing slaughter of one kind of beings; this interpretation of yours is not right.” (13)
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.