Pali Text Contradictions

Homage to the Fortunate One, the Worthy One, the One Rightly and Completely Enlightened.

The Dhammapada
To see the essence in the unessential and the essence as unessential, means
one can never get to the essence, wandering, as one is, on the path of wrong
thought. 11
But to see the essence in the essential and the unessential as the unessential,
means one does get to the essence, being on the path of right thought. 12
I am using the word "text" in the broader sociological way, which incorporates spoken and remembered
texts, not just written texts.
It is easy to say "The Buddha did not teach dogma", but it is hard to give up our dogma about the
Buddha's teaching. He taught us to "make a thorough investigation" so that we might do so.
I'd like to express my appreciation to the past enlightened disciples of the Buddha [the Elders - Thera],
who have maintained the records of the Buddha's teaching, such that his teaching is still knowable
today. I am happy to say I have found comparatively few corruptions in the texts, due to their dilligence.
I am defining a contradiction as: two definitions that do not logically match, for example: one of the
definitions has additional information, which is taken as a necessary or essential part of the definition.
The nature of definitions, is obviously to define, which requires being precise. I generally find the more
complicated and extended definition, is an example of "proliferation" [papanca], which the Buddha's
teaching is said to negate [see the Discourse on the Eight Thoughts of a Great Man]. Therefore, my
approach to the Buddha's teaching is a logical one.
I believe the Buddha's teaching is logical, but outside doctrine has been accepted as the Buddha's
teaching. Those doctrines, on thorough investigation [MN 56 = MN i 379, A iv 183-4 etc] of the basic
principles, are found to contradict those basic principles. They are therefore, to be rejected. This is in
accordance with the advice the Buddha gave to determine if a theory is his teaching. To identify the
outside doctrines, I believe one must identify the contradictions in the texts and determine which
definition matches basic principles the best. For me, the alternative to this kind of logical approach to
the Buddha's teaching, is blind faith, which involves statements like: "this cannot be comprehended
unless we develop higher states of mind". Right Comprehension or Right View is a necessary initial step
on the path, but it is not yet Right Insight or Wisdom. When we test our hypothesis or view, which we
believe is right, and find it actually stops suffering in this very life, then we know, rather than just
believe. Thus we have Wisdom.
Scholars consider the first four Paali Nikaayas as more original texts in the Collection of Discourses
[Sutta Pi.taka - ref?]. Scholars also have found evidence to generally date these four Paali Nikaayas
[ref?]. This is how they would be listed regarding general originality, with the most original first:
Samyutta, Majjhima, Diigha, Anguttara. Of course any discourse even in a generally earlier or more
original collection, could be corrupt to varying degrees. I think we will find in this study that
proliferated ideas are found more in the later dated texts.
Of course, any source of early texts would be accepted, the most well regarded being the Pali Canon,
but to have an unbiased approach, I think we should also include early text sources in other languages,
1

e.g. Sanskrit, Chinese or Tibetan. Sanskrit is very poor as a language source for early texts, as many
were burnt during invasions of India by people with little or no religious tolerance.
One Buddhist Scholar, Dr K Jamanadas, has suggested why many changes to the Pali Canon have been
made and by whom. His conclusions offer a plausible explanation for many of the inconsistencies in the
Pali texts. The few other inconsistencies not accounted for by his explanation could have been changes
made by scholastic monks with good intentions, but who were working from untested theory which they
held to as the truth [dogma].
A NOTE FOR WEBMASTERS: html anchor names have been added to the code of the table below and
each item therein. So if you manage a website and want to link directly to the start of the table or the
start of any item therein, you need to view the code of this page and see what the anchor name is, then
create your link with the reference of:
http://www.geocities.com/josmith_1_2000/Pali_Text_Contradictions.htm#anchor_name.

External Idea, adopted as the Buddha's Teaching

[some ascribed to him too, but not compatible
with basic principles].

Earlier Idea, ascribed directly to the Buddha

[compatible with basic principles].

APPROACHING THE BUDDHA'S TEACHING

We need the commentators to understand the
Buddha's teaching. I

"Anuttaro purisadamma saarathii - He is the

unexcelled trainer of those to be tamed". If the
Buddha is such, then he certainly does not need any
help to teach us his teaching. This, of course, is quite
different from needing translators.

We need the commentators to understand the

Buddha's teaching. II

"Akaaliko Bhagavataa Dhammo - The Buddha's

teaching [Dhamma] is timeless". If what the Buddha
taught was timeless, then we don't need
commentators to re-interpret it in our time. Any way,
the commentators are definitely not of our time.

We need the commentators to understand the

Buddha's teaching. III

The Buddha said he had no "secret doctrine".

Authentic discourses of the Buddha are very clear
and simple - down to earth. If he gave brief
instructions that the listeners could not understand,
the listeners asked him to elaborate and he did.
Suggesting a words regarding the Dhamma had many
meanings at the time of the Buddha, is promoting a
secret doctrine. It means the teaching needs to be
explained by the one suggesting this, or some other.
In effect, one doing so, is establishing themselves or
their colleagues, as interpreters/teachers and fostering
dependence on them. This is common in the
development of religions, but is not a feature of the
Buddha's teaching.
If we accept the Buddha's teaching is precise and he
gave precise definitions to words that he stuck to,
then our duty is to try to work out which of multiple
meanings of words suggested by later texts, give life
2

to the teaching, such that it is most relevant to ending

suffering here and now.
Many traditions of Buddhism establish certain Take only the Buddha as the teacher, see here and
disciples of the Buddha as authoritative, by here. Don't praise or blame individuals, speak only of
praising them, or having the Buddha praise them right and wrong ideas/practices, see the Discourse on
[as with later-day Theravada], or by subverting Non-Conflict. Surely there have been Enlightened
the importance of the early texts all together [as Disciples in various traditions of Buddhism:
with Zen]. Then that tradition has those disciples Theravada [School of the Elders], Hinayana [Small
promote its doctrines, or then develops a separate Vehicle], Mahayana [Great Vehicle], Vajrayana
textual tradition altogether.
[Diamond Vehicle], but the one tradition extablished
[or maybe adopted or continued] by the Buddha was
the Noble Tradition. Maybe we could say it is the
Buddhayana [Buddha vehicle].
About one third of the 152 suttas in the Pali
Majjhima Nikaya are attributed to disciples of the
Buddha that the tradition has established as
experts/teachers assisting the Unexcelled Teacher.
The Buddha's teaching [Buddha-saasanaa] may
last about 5,000 years. We are over half way, but
the texts have been maintained purely [without
error].

The Buddha's teaching [Buddha-saasanaa] is a

conditioned thing and impermanent.
[Buddha-]Dhamma is unconditioned and permanent.
The texts, a conditioned record of the Buddha's
teaching, whether committed to memory or writing,
are impermanent. They undergo changes over time,
but the Buddha gave a study method for his teaching
to identify corruptions.

There are three collections of the Buddha's own The Buddha never referred to the Abhidhamma, he
words: Sutta, Vinaya and Abhidhamma. The mentioned the Dhamma and Vinaya. Some suggest
Buddha taught the Abhidhamma to his mother he included the Abhidhamma in Dhamma, but that
who had been reborn as a god [angel] in heaven. cannot be proven and there is ample evidence against
it being the case. Some of this evidence is:
The Theravada history records that Mogalliputta
Tissa, the preceptor of Asoka, was the President of
the Third Monks' Conference in Asoka's reign. In that
conference, the first seven books of the Abhidhamma
were recorded to be writings of Mahakassapa and
Sariputta. The Theravada history records that
Mogalliputta Tissa enlarged them, added one of his
own books called "Katha vatthu" and was the first to:
1. call those eight books "Abhiddhamma"; 2. call the
first collection of the Buddha's words "Sutta"; and 3.
refer to all three as Pi.taka - baskets.
The Sutta and Vinaya of the different schools are on
the whole identical, the Abhidhamma is very
different.
The Mahayana school does not regard the third
Pi.taka as the Buddha's words. They consider it the
collection of all later works, including commentaries.
3

UNDERSTANDING ETHICS
The Buddha said his teaching is very subtle. Therefore we should pay close attention to what he said.
The traditional Five Precepts are the definition of There was a Stream Enterer who had a problem with
Noble Ethics. They are also a minimal practice alcohol. If we take Noble Ethics to mean the
of Ethics for lay people. [Taking them happens to traditional Five Precepts, then a drunkard Stream
be best done with a priest. That is, it is one Enterer is a contradiction, since all Noble People are
Buddhist ceremony, one that defines a said to have Unbroken Noble Ethics.
"Buddhist".]
By comparative methods of the Dhamma and Vinaya,
universal ethics is seen to be defined as the avoiding
the Four Vices of Conduct [kamma-kilesa] or the
avoiding the Four Cases of Defeat. With this
definition, there is no contradiction regarding a
drunkard Stream Enterer, as the traditional Fifth
Precept is not one of those serious cases of defeat or
one of the four vices of conduct, but a lesser training
rule, the keeping of which may be seen as a "good
habit". A Stream Enterer probably does not maintain
all "good habits", but we are not told if an Arahant
does. The discourse on Boons [Mangala Sutta] says
"to be moderate in intoxicants is a superior boon"
["majjapaanaa ca sanynyamo... etammangalamuttamang"].
Ethics is not received from a priest, but the method
[the training rules or precepts] may be taught by a
monk. Ethics is a training one undertakes on oneself.
Ethics for monks is given a secondary category
"lesser ethics" in this discourse, right after it
defines Ethics for monks as observing the
monks' rules [Patimokkha]!

When considering the monk's lifestyle, the books of

the Discipline show at Mv IV.16.12 = V i 172 that
only the first two categories of the monks' rules
[Patimokkha] are defined as Ethics, not all
categories.
If one understands the second categories of the
monks' rules to be specific to the monk's life and not
an essential part of the definition of ethics, then there
is no contradiction with other places that point to
ethics as only the first category of the monks'
rules/the Four Vices of Conduct.

At the First Sangha Council, 500 monks decided The Buddha allowed any community of monks to put
not to put aside any of the minor rules.
aside any of the minor rules, if it deemed doing so
consistent with being easy to support. This shows the
Buddha's wisdom in recognising differences in
cultural practices and shows that we should keep a
proper perspective on the minor rules. They are
MINOR and Ethics is more important to focus on as
a necessary component of progress on the path.
Even though most Theravada monks will say "we
will not put aside minor rules and thus follow the
Elders' [Theras'] example at the First Council", in
4

real life, rules are often "unofficially" put aside. Even

though it is in accordance with the Buddha's
allowance, to say one will not, but one then does, is
hypocrisy.
Not only are rules said not to be put aside, but minor
rules are given higher status in some communities of
monks. Touching or accepting money for personal
use is a minor rule, but some communities of monks
will not join the recitation of the monks' rules
[Patimokkha] with monks who touch or accept
money for personal use. In effect, that is raising a
minor rule up to the status of the second category.
On top of this, some practices deemed as not
necessary, or extra, are raised up to the status of
essential. This is seen with the 13 Dhutanga practices
[#2 and 4, not occurring in the suttas, see M iii 40
and A v 219, or Vinaya, see V 131, 198], where some
monasteries only accept monks that follow the ones
the Abbot follows. The Buddha said he sometimes
followed some of these practices and other times he
didn't.

UNDERSTANDING MEDITATION
The Buddha said his teaching is very subtle. Therefore we should pay close attention to what he said.
The Four Form States [4 Ruupa-jhaana] are deep
states of meditation and not all necessary for
Enlightenment. Only the first of the four is
necessary.

Right Concentration is defined as 'any concentration

with the previous path factors' which can happen in
everyday life. Right Concentration is also defined as
the Four Form States [4 Ruupa-jhaana]. These
definitions are compatible if one understands the
Four Form States to occur in everyday life too. This
table shows how they might be so.
The Buddha taught only the Four FormLESS States
[4 Aruupa-jhaana] are not necessary for
Enlightenment, but he said they are good to develop,
e.g. as a natural suppressant of the pains of old age. It
is generally accepted that the Four FormLESS States
[4 Aruupa-jhaana] are deep states of meditation.

The Four Form States [4 Ruupa-jhaana] have

only 5 factors: vitakka, vicaara, piiti, sukha,
ekodibhaava [or ekagataa], stopping at
concentration/samaadhi.

The Four Form States [4 Ruupa-jhaana] have 10

factors: viveka, the five mentioned to the left,
upekkhaa, sati, sampajanya, pari-suddhi [or
visuddhi]. The Buddha often changed/extended the
common understanding of his day. Possibly the later
texts present the common understanding of the day,
which saw Samaadhi as Enlightenment. I believe this
idea is still current in some Hindu circles.

Kindness [metta] and the other Sublime Abidings M 21 : M i 126-129: In the Simile of the Saw, the
are not necessary practices, but optional extras. Buddha teaches, Loving Kindness is a defining
characteristic of his disciples. He says that one who
5

develops anger towards a person who mistreats one,

is not his disciple. Most people get angry at simply a
few unwelcome words from another, but in the
discourse mentioned above, the Buddha spoke about
being cut up limb by limb by another. The decisive
difference is Right View confirmed in experience [=
Right Insight]. That is attaining at least Stream Entry
Fruit, [the second level of the Noble discipline].
A 1.53-55 : A i 10-11: "Mendicants, if a mendicant
cultivates goodwill for as long as a finger snap, he is
called a mendicant. He is not destitute of awareness
[jhaana], he carries out the Master's teaching, he
responds to advice, and he does not eat the country's
alms food in vain. So what should be said of those
who make much of it?" So if one has this kind of
unshakable Kindness, one is a Noble Disciple and
has [ruupa-]jhaana; from comparative study of early
discourses, I suggest they have only the first
[ruupa-]jhaana though.
The Five Hindrances are: H1 = sensual desire - A comparative study shows that the traditional
kaama chanda, H2 = ill will - byaapaada, H3 = placing of the fifth hindrance is probably wrong.
sloth and torpor - thiina-middha, H4 = distraction Matching the second of the 10 Fetters, it would have
and worry - udhacca-kukkucca, H5 = doubt to come in first place in the list of hindrances.
vicikicchaa.
This misplacement would be due to the idea given by
the Nun Dhammadinna at MN 44, that Right View
and Right Aspiration of the Noble Eightfold Path,
were the Wisdom Training and came *after*
concentration. It could also reflect the experience of
later study monks looking after the texts, who had
not yet developed one of the fruits of Stream Entry,
unshakable faith, but probably who thought they
were Noble Ones [= conceit].
Sati, translated as: mindfulness or awareness, is
the most important ingredient to develop in
meditation.

Mindfulness or awareness is the most important

ingredient to develop in meditation and surely the
Buddha spoke about it very often. The Pali word
"sati", on the other hand, is spoken of very little by
the Buddha in the discourses and it is sometimes
used with the still current meaning of "memory" in
the Hindu tradition. I think this is evidence of
"semantic change".
On the other hand, current Pali texts have the Buddha
speaking of the Four Form States [4 Ruupa-jhaana]
many many times. For example, nearly every second
discourse in the Majjhima Nikaaya explains them. A
detailed comparative study of the Four Form States
[with their 10 factors mentioned above] shows them
to be a full presentation of the path, not simply the
definition of Right Concentration. [So the simpler
definition of Right Concentration, mentioned above,
6

takes it's true place.]

"Zen" is the Japanese pronunciation of the Chinese
word "Chan[rising tone]" which is the Chinese
pronunciation of the Indian word "jhaana". "Jhaana"
as a translation for mindfulness or awareness would
seem to match some Zen traditions' idea of
meditation and the Insight Meditation Tradition's
focus on Mindfulness.
The Buddha found a suitable place for striving: a
shady tree, by the river and near a village for
alms food. He [1] sat under the Bodhi tree and
[2] determined not to move from that place
[sitting posture] until he attained enlightenment.

The Buddha found a suitable place for striving: a

shady tree, by the river and near a village for alms
food. He [2] determined not to move from that place
until he attained enlightenment. Then he [1] started
sitting meditation under the Bodhi tree.
The order of the two events has been reversed. This
has the effect of changing the meaning of
"determined not to move from that place", to
"determined not to move from that [sitting] posture".
This affects the way one understands the way the
Buddha practiced.
Thinking the Buddha determined to sit and not move
till he attained enlightenment, contradicts his later
teaching that practice is to be done in all four
postures. It leads to clinging to sitting as "real
practice" and possibly sitting for long periods and
thus indirectly inflicting pain on oneself, which is a
subtle version of "self-mortification."

UNDERSTANDING WISDOM
The Buddha said his teaching is very subtle. Therefore we should pay close attention to what he said.
Wisdom is the outcome of Right Concentration, Wisdom is the third of three trainings [tisikkhaa]. It
a natural consequence.
is not a natural consequence of the second training
[meditation], but a training in itself, which requires
effort. See Right Effort below.
The First Noble Truth is: There is suffering.

"There is suffering" translates as "dukkham atthi" or

"dukkham hoti", which we do not find the Buddha
ever saying. The Buddha says "in summary: the five
clinging components are suffering" [pancaupaadaanakkhandaa dukkhaa], which may be
summarised as "CLINGING is suffering". To leave
out "clinging" is to miss the essential point.
"There is suffering" as a summary/paraphrase of the
First Noble Truth, is simply foolish, because the
Buddha said in the First Discourse that the Four
Noble Truths were unheard of before. This would
mean the society he lived in did not know suffering
existed! There were ascetics and philosophers in the
Buddha's time already trying to solve the problem of
7

suffering.
The First Noble Truth is: Life is suffering.

"Life is suffering" translates as "jiivitam dukkham",

which we do not find the Buddha ever saying. The
Buddha says "in summary: the five clinging
components are suffering" [pancaupaadaanakkhandaa dukkhaa], which may be
summarised as "CLINGING life is suffering". To
leave out "clinging" is to miss the essential point.
"Life is suffering" as a summary/paraphrase of the
First Noble Truth, is based on the first part of the
definition of suffering in the First Discourse, which
speaks of "birth, aging and death". These, of course,
can be interpreted in a purely physical way. [The
Thai tradition says "gert, gair, jep, dai - birth, aging,
injury and death" are suffering, but there is no
"injury" in the original text.] These three items can
also be interpreted in a psychological way, in line
with the psychological meaning the Buddha gave to
other terms such as "the world can be found in this
fathom long body with its senses and perceptions".
That psychological view is: birth, aging and death of
an ego identity or self-image, which relates directly
to the " 'I am' conceit". This way of understanding
can be tested, here an now, in this very life. It does
not require blind faith. Therefore it is compatible
with basic principles.
The definition of suffering in the First Discourse has
a short "a" at the end of the word "dukkha" in "sokaparideva dukkha". It is translated as "pain", the sixth
item in the list: "birth, aging and death..., sorrow,
grief, pain...", but I suggest it should be a long "a", as
with "Jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapidukkhaa and
domanass(a)-upaayaasaapi dukkhaa" and should be
the end of the sentence meaning: "Sorrow and grief
are suffering". The other single items: sorrow, grief,
distress & despair are obviously psychological. So
having a short "a" and translating the word as "pain"
would be the odd one out, being the only one that is
obviously physical. [The addition of "injury" in the
Thai tradition, mentioned above, would be in line
with the physical interpretation of the First Noble
Truth.]

The Second Noble Truth is: Craving is the cause Craving is one of the later links in Dependent
of suffering.
Origination. There the first cause is traced back
further to "ignorance". "Ta.nhaa", which is the Pali
word translated here as "craving", is taught in
Hinduism as the cause of suffering.
The Third Noble Truth is: To end the result we
must end the cause.

In deep [trance-like] states of meditation, higher

mental functions, including craving, temporarily
stop. This is why those outside the Buddha's
8

teaching, think of those states as liberation. In the

Buddha's teaching, liberation is to experienced in
everyday life. He left the teachers he studied with
before Enlightenment, because their teaching could
not give him that. They taught deep meditative states
were Enlightenment.
To end suffering one must end ignorance of when we
are clinging. Ignorance is the original cause in
Dependent Origination and the last fetter to be
eradicated on the path. [See the 10 fetters.]
The Fourth Noble Truth is: The path to the
ending of suffering is the Noble Eightfold Path.
It is the only path the Buddha taught. It is
summarised by the Nun Dhammadinna in
Culavedalla Sutta - MN 44, as Wisdom, Ethics
and Meditation.

The Middle Path is summarised as Ethics, Meditation

and Wisdom [in that order only] and each authentic
discourse of the Buddha is a presentation of the path
in simpler or more extended form. More than 50
different presentations have been identified in the
discourses of the Buddha. We must see the letter and
the spirit of the Buddha's teaching, or we will cling to
just one presentation as THE ONE and ONLY.
The Noble [Tenfold] Path is the same as the
traditional Noble Eightfold Path except it has two
extra items at the end: Right Insight and Right
Liberation. Right Insight obviously matches Wisdom.
All authentic presentations of the path fall into the
phases of Ethics, Meditation and Wisdom and do not
change the order of these three trainings, as is done
when the traditional Noble Eightfold Path is taken as
the complete path [ending with Samaadhi, see the
note above re the factors of the Four Form States and
this table].

Right Effort in the traditional Noble Eightfold

Path is of four kinds.

Right Effort is of four kinds, but Right Effort in the

traditional Noble Eightfold Path must be understood
to be only one of those four, otherwise we have to
give up the idea of a logical and practical path
altogether, as having ALL types of effort at that point
in the path, would imply that there is NO effort made
before that point in the path. See this table.

The Buddha is said to have attained partial

enlightenment under the Bodhi Tree at age 35
and full enlightenment [pari-nibbaana] at the end
of his life, age 80. The enlightenemnt under the
Bodhi Tree is said to be "with a remainder" [saupaadi-sesa] and enlightenment at the end of his
life is said to be "without a remainder" [anupaadi-sesa]. "Upaadi" is interpreted as the five
aggregates/components which make up
experience/life.

The Buddha said he "IS liberated without

remainder", which would have happened under the
Bodhi Tree at age 35. Partial enlightenment would
have happened earlier when he realised Stream Entry.
The Buddha refers to the end of the life of a Arahant
as "the breaking up of the body" [kaayassa bhedaa],
not as "parinibbaana" which is a later coined term.
"Upaadi" is said to be a contraction of "upaadaana"
which can mean "clinging". In the definition of
suffering [the First Noble Truth] it is mostly
translated as clinging.
The Buddha spoke of the five-aggregates as separate
9

things from the five-clinging-aggregates. It is the

latter that he gave as the summary of suffering in the
First Noble Truth. The Arahant, having eradicated the
five-clinging-aggregates, has eradicated suffering and
only has the five aggregates left, without suffering.
All conditioned things are suffering.

In the Discourses [D 25 : D iii 56] and Discipline

[Book of the Discipline iii 1-6 = V i 1-6] the Buddha
taught to end all unwholesome action only, not ALL
action. See also the well know Dhammapada verse
183: "To not do all evil, to cultivate the wholesome,
To purify ones mind, this is the teaching of all
Awakened Ones." If the Buddha taught "All
conditioned things [sankhaaraa] are suffering." then
it must be read in the context of "sankhaaraupaadaana-khandha dukkhaa" - part of the definition
of suffering. That is, all conditioned things CLUNG
TO are suffering. Reading things out of context is a
common feature of religious blind faith.

The Seven Types of Noble Disciples mentioned The Seven types of Noble Disciples mentioned at M
at M 70 = M i 477-480, are phases experienced 70 = M i 477-480, are phases experienced by the
by people of different personality types.
same person as they progress along the path and
change their unwholesome/ignoble personality type
to a wholesome/noble one. See this comparative
table.
"I, me and mine" with "I-making and minemaking" vs "I, me, myself" with the ' "I am"
conceit'.

The Buddha said his teaching is very subtle.

Therefore we should pay close attention to what he
said. There are a large number of texts that refer to
both "I, me and mine" and "I, me, myself". We must
understand these terms in relation to the basic conceit
the Buddha spoke of, the ' "I am" conceit'. Conceit is
the second last fetter to eradicate on the path [see the
10 fetters], but we must understand the difference
between this and the Hindu teaching that thoughts of
"I" and "my" are illusory [Maaya] and delusory.
The first trans-like meditative state [Aruupa-jhaana]
of "awareness of infinite space" involves the ending
of the mental function of discriminating one's own
form [body] from other things in the universe. A
person outside the Buddha's teaching who
experiences it, would identify with this state as "I am
one with the universe." The other three trans-like
meditative states are even more subtle and blissful
than the first. As mentioned above in the section on
Meditation, these trans-like meditative states were
tested by the Buddha and found not to be
Enlightenment or the path to it.
The Dalai Lama has said he would not encourage his
followers to practice in a way contrary to modern
science. I believe the Buddha's teaching incorporates
the knowledge of modern science and goes beyond it.
10

I don't believe it contradicts modern science in any

way. Psychology teaches that discriminating between
oneself and others is a necessary part of healthy
mental development. This matches the Buddha's
teaching that the trans-like meditative states are not
Enlightenment or the path to it.
I have found avoiding thinking "I, me, myself"
regarding the five clinging components, which is
done in the form of "I am...", is more beneficial than
avoiding the thoughts of "I, me and mine" and "Imaking and mine-making", which turns out to be
avoiding the idea of "self", the Hindu idea of the path
to salvation. An impermanent self that experiences
impermanent suffering, is not in conflict with the
Buddha's teaching and is actually necessary for
progress on the path, as it is that impermanent self
that must take responsibility for wholesome and
unwholesome mental, verbal and bodily action
[kamma] and then want to purify itself of them.
The Three Knowledges [Tevijjaa] are not all
necessary for complete Enlightenment, only
some of them are.

The Buddha developed the Three Knowledges

[Tevijjaa A 3.(6).58 : A i 165 ; A 10.103-115 etc : A v
212-230 ; A 10.102 : A v 211 etc] on the night of his
Enlightenment. They are essential to his teaching, for
he said he has taught what is essential. The only
things I know of that he taught that were not
essential, he made clear that they were not, that is,
the FormLESS States of Trance-like Meditation
[Aruupa-jhaana, see above].
In the suttas, the Three Knowledges [Tevijjaa] appear
in the place of the Wisdom phase of the path, that is,
right after the Meditation phase. Due to poor
translation, the Three Knowledges [Tevijjaa] have
been misunderstood. The first of the three deals with
the past and this is were "past lives" is commonly
thought to be taught by the Buddha. The second deals
with the present and this is were "the arising and
passing of [external] beings" is commonly thought to
be taught by the Buddha. The third deals with the
future and is generally not mistranslated.

The first of the Three Knowledges [Tevijjaa] is

the knowledge of one's past lives.

Three words are commonly ALL "translated" as

"life" in the passage in the original text, but here is
no use of "jiivitam" in the original text, which is the
Pali word for "life".
"Jaati" is translated as "life". "Jaati" means "birth".
Taking "jaati" - "birth" to be physical, the translator
extends the meaning to "life". Thus the translation
becomes "knowledge of past lives" rather than
"knowledge of past births" which, if understood
psychologically, specifically 'the birth of ego
11

[egotistic states of mind]', can occur many times in

this very life.
"Aayu" is translated as "life" from the understanding
of "the whole period of life", but it can be understood
also as a period of time within a life.
"Nivaasa" is translated as "life" in "pubbe-nivaasaanussati-nyaa.na", thus we have "the knowledge of
recollection of past lives", but it means "habitation",
"dwelling" or "home".
The second of the Three Knowledges [Tevijjaa]
is the knowledge of the arising and passing of
[external] beings.

"Satta" - "beings" in "sattaanam

cutuupapaatanyaa.na" is understood in a physical
way and thus thought of as external, but it can be
understood in a psychological way too, that is, being
egotistic, or an egotistic [way of] being.

The Stream Enterer has a maximum of seven

more lives before attaining Full Enlightenment.

As seen above, this would be a mistranslation of

"jati/births" [or "punnabhava/rebecomings"]. The
tradition does not say what those seven are, but
comparing other teachings it becomes clear that they
are the other phases of the fruit and path of the Noble
Path.

In the 10 Fetters [S v 61, A v 13] towards the

end, conceit [maana] is eradicated [therefore it is
#8], THEN restlessness [uddhacca] is eradicated
[therefore it is #9] and ignorance [avijjaa] is
eradicated last [therefore it is #10].

Comparing other suttas, it is clear that restlessness

[uddhacca] needs to be eradicated as part of the
training in Meditation and conceit [maana] is
eradicated in the training in Wisdom, specifically,
dealing with the ' "I am" conceit'. Therefore the order
should be: #8 restlessness [uddhacca - traditional #9],
#9 conceit [maana - traditional #8] and ignorance
[avijjaa - traditional #10].
One can see how this change could easily have been
made by scholar monks who didn't practice
meditation much and therefore downplayed it, which
is in line with the later idea of the "dry insight
arahant" - one without the complete Four Form
States [4 Ruupa-jhaana].

FOCUSSING ON THE EXTERNAL IS THE PREOCCUPATION OF COMMON

FOLK
The Buddha had 32 strange physical
characteristics.

A disciple of the Buddha happened to seek shelter in

a barn where the Buddha was staying, but the
disciple had never met the Buddha before. So the
disciple didn't recognise him as the Buddha, until
after they had talked for a while. This shows the
Buddha didn't look strange at all, otherwise the
disciple would have at least thought: "This may be
the Buddha".

The Wheel of the Dhamma [dhamma-cakka] is The Eye or Vision of the Dhamma [dhamma-cakkhu]
12

an external symbol of the Buddha's teaching. In is an inner quality developed from the Threefold
later [Chinese] versions of the First Discourse of Training. The similarity of the sound of both
the Buddha, it appeared magically turning in the compound words, in a time of oral transmission,
sky.
could easily have lead to mixing them up, or it was a
good opportunity for those that focussed less on
internal/personal development and more on the
external/religious paraphernalia, to be more
distracted by developing Buddhist iconology.
The wheel symbol probably predated the Buddha
image, which probably came via Alexander the
Great's conquests [which reached North Western
India, possibly overlapping the area the Buddha's
teaching had spread to] and the Greek's love of
making statues. One of the supposed "32 physical
signs of the Buddha" was curly locks of hair - not
native to Indians. But guess what, that is a feature of
Greek statues!
The Triple Gem is: the Buddha, The Dhamma
and the Bhikkhu-Sangha [Community of
Monks]. We have some discourses that end with
the listener taking refuge in this Triple Gem.

The Triple Gem is: the Buddha, The Dhamma and

the Ariya-Sangha [Noble Fourfold Community]. The
Noble Fourfold Community is made up of those
Monks, Nuns, Laymen and Laywomen who have
entered the Path.

WHEN FOCUSSING ON THE EXTERNAL HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED, THEN

RITES AND RITUALS TAKE HOLD
If we compare Buddhism to a tree, ceremonies
[rites and rituals] are the outer protective bark of
the tree; generosity [daana, or ethics/siila] is the
soft inner bark; meditation is the sapwood; and
wisdom is the heartwood.

At MN 29 the Buddha said that if his teaching is

compared to a tree: gain, honour and renown that a
person may receive because of his practice of the
teaching are the twigs and leaves; ethics is the outer
bark of the tree; meditation is the soft inner bark;
knowledge and vision [wisdom] is the sapwood; and
[panynyaa-visuddhi] perpetual liberation, unshakable
liberation of mind is the heartwood. So ceremonies
are not mentioned at all and therefore would not have
a part in his teaching. Of course, rites and rituals are
necessary for a priest's role.

Ceremonies are not essential, but they are part of There are many examples of the Buddha negating
the Buddha's teaching.
religious ceremonies: Sigalovaada Sutta DN 31 - he
turns a religious ceremony into the practice of being
dutiful in the various social relationships one has; in
the Maha-Parinibbaana Sutta (DN 16, Section 5 Para
3 5.3) : D ii 138, the Buddha said: Rather [than
offering flowers, scents etc], the male or female
mendicant, male or female lay disciple who keeps
practising the Dhamma in accordance with the
Dhamma [which could be understood as Ethics,
Meditation and Wisdom], who keeps practising
masterfully, who lives in accordance with the
Dhamma: that is the person who worships, honors,
13

respects, venerates and pays homage to the OneThus-Come with the highest homage; and so on... We
have a saying in English: "Imitation is the highest
compliment". Of course, rites and rituals are
necessary for a priest's role.
The Buddha taught us to take refuge in the Triple The Buddha taught us to develop unshakable FAITH
Gem. [This happens to be best done with a priest. in the Triple Gem. This is an inner quality and cannot
That is, it is one Buddhist ceremony, one that
be obtained by a ritual. The Buddha taught to take
defines a "Buddhist".]
refuge in oneself, or the Dhamma [which is realised
in oneself], or in one's actions [kamma-patisara.no],
which lead to the realising of the Dhamma. The
closest text I have found to take the three refuges
or to take refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and
Sangha is verses 188 - 192 of the Dhammapada,
which according to Dhammajoti (1995) is the same
in the Sanskrit, Tibetan and Chinese. I do not know
any other occurrence of this idea of taking refuge in
the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha ascribed to the
Buddha. Lay people spontaneously taking refuge in
the Triple Gem does often occur as a [suggested later
tacked-on] ending to discourses. Of course, rites and
rituals are necessary for a priest's role.

CULTURAL CONTRADICTIONS - COMMON CULTURE IS NOT NOBLE

CULTURE, BUT NOT ALL ASPECTS OF COMMON CULTURE ARE
OBSTRUCTIVE
In Thai culture one has to save "face". One The Buddha taught in the Vinaya that "the sangha grows
must not criticise, even if it is constructive. due to mutual admonition and mutual rehabilitation".
One must instead make indirect hints.
One sutta says: 'Therefore Mendicants, however people
may speak about you, whether are the right time or not,
appropriately or not, courteously or rudely, wisely or
foolishly, kindly or maliciously, you must train
yourselves thus: Unsullied shall our minds remain,
neither shall evil words escape our lips. Kind and
compassionate ever shall we abide with hearts
harbouring no ill-will. We shall envelop those speaking
in that way, with streams of kind thoughts unfailing.
Beyond them, we shall radiate the whole world with
constant thoughts of kindness, ample, expanding,
measureless, free from enmity, free from ill-will. Thus
you must train yourselves, mendicants.' Another sutta
says that on such an occasion a mendicant would then
investigate himself for any slight fault that may have
triggered
the
speech
of
that
person.
"Face" is another name for "self-image".
In Thai culture one has to use a higher level of The Buddha forbade teaching in Sanskrit and said to
language to show respect. Therefore the Pali teach in the language of the common people. The
texts have been translated to Thai, but in the principle behind this is more easily seen in the second
14

highest level of language. This means the part of this advice. Obviously Pali is not Sanskrit, but it
average person cannot read them and even the also is not the language of the common people. High
most highly educated monks have trouble.
Thai is also not the language of the common people.
Christianity is about 500 years younger than Buddhism,
but it has more adherents. Part of the reason for this
would be, they started to follow this advice of the
Buddha a few centuries ago.
English is from the same language family as Pali [IndoArian]. This makes it much easier for a speaker of
English to study and understand Pali. Thai, on minor
points such as script and some vocabulary, is from the
same language family, but on major points such as
grammar, is from a different language group [SinoTibetan].
Monks should not drink milk, but can eat
cheese after noon.

Go figure! There are many different ideas on what is

allowable after noon and conflicting ones like this one
will have their internally seemingly logical
explanations. The spirit [purpose] of the Buddha's
teaching on this topic is to avoid nourishing foods,
especially protein which is needed for muscle growth
and the production of semen. Milk has a low source of
protein, cheese a higher source. Therefore if either of
these were to be disallowed it would be cheese. Semen
production is not important for monks who are
maintaining chastity.

Monks are to follow the Vinaya, that is what The Dhamma and Vinaya are what keep the Noble
keeps them living in harmony. The Buddha Fourfold Sangha prosperous and living in harmony.
was from the aristocracy. He taught a level of There is no reflection of worldly class, or caste in the
behaviour [and culture] for the monks which Noble Fourfold Sangha. It is only the eradication of the
reflected his upbringing. So that monks could three roots of unwholesome action, or the 10 fetters,
be accepted by the aristocracy.
that determine the different classes of Noble Ones in the
Buddha's teaching.
Monks are to reflect daily on ten points, one being that
they are no longer part of society, that they are an
outcast. There are many monks' practices that would not
be acceptable to aristocrats that have not been brought
up in a Buddhist culture. Therefore this idea is
conditioned and worldly. We have the story of the
Buddha's own father being upset at seeing him going on
alms round.

15