Author Topic: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?  (Read 346 times)

Offline VisuddhiRaptor

  • Member
  • Posts: 319
    • View Profile
Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« on: June 21, 2017, 01:53:10 pm »
In SN 22.87 Vakkali Sutta, it appears the Lord Buddha admonished Samana Vakkali, as follows:

Quote
"For a long time, Lord, I have wanted to come and set eyes on the Blessed One, but I had not the strength in this body to come and see the Blessed One."

"Enough, Vakkali! What is there to see in this vile body? He who sees Dhamma, Vakkali, sees me; he who sees me sees Dhamma. Truly seeing Dhamma, one sees me; seeing me one sees Dhamma."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.087x.wlsh.html


Why did the Lord Buddha admonish & rebuke Samana Vakkali, here? It is not meritorious to worship the Buddhas?

 :jinsyx:

Offline Solodris

  • Member
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #1 on: June 21, 2017, 03:06:37 pm »
Seeing suffering is seeing the Dhamma, how can one worship suffering if this is the Dhamma?

Offline Samana Johann

  • Not a member, just an endured/enduring guest.
  • Member
  • Posts: 507
  • Doing forest monk in Cambodia
    • View Profile
    • sangham.net
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #2 on: June 21, 2017, 05:15:17 pm »
In SN 22.87 Vakkali Sutta, it appears the Lord Buddha admonished Samana Vakkali, as follows:

Quote
"For a long time, Lord, I have wanted to come and set eyes on the Blessed One, but I had not the strength in this body to come and see the Blessed One."

"Enough, Vakkali! What is there to see in this vile body? He who sees Dhamma, Vakkali, sees me; he who sees me sees Dhamma. Truly seeing Dhamma, one sees me; seeing me one sees Dhamma."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.087x.wlsh.html


Why did the Lord Buddha admonish & rebuke Samana Vakkali, here? It is not meritorious to worship the Buddhas?

 :jinsyx:


See http://www.freesangha.com/forums/introduction-time/samana-johann-(hanzze)/msg87388/#msg87388

People are attached to form, sound, smell, taste, bodily touch and that is why they seek out for that, neiter looking for the Tathagata nor for Dhamma.

One seeking the Tathagata or the Dhamma inside the sphere of the five sense (six) is not able to find. Because Vakkali thought it is importand to meet the Buddha in person, seeing a imperfect body, hearing... he was rebuked.

Like you got rebuked seeking out for a Monk in same way.

If worshipping form, sound, smell, taste, bodily touch and ideas, one is worshipping Mara, and such is of course demeritious. So be careful especialy about you ideas in regard of what is worthy for respect.

And do not assosiate with fools telling to kill a Buddha when seeing without telling you the meaning.

Worshipping a lifetime Mara and killing each Buddha, that is the poor existence of a normal Buddhist. Yet one is not able to help them, or?
« Last Edit: June 21, 2017, 05:32:12 pm by Samana Johann »
[ sangham.net Online monastery ✦ accesstoinsight.eu ✦ old use account Hanzze ]

Offline Samana Johann

  • Not a member, just an endured/enduring guest.
  • Member
  • Posts: 507
  • Doing forest monk in Cambodia
    • View Profile
    • sangham.net
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #3 on: June 21, 2017, 05:25:37 pm »
Seeing suffering is seeing the Dhamma, how can one worship suffering if this is the Dhamma?

A wise person is grateful to see suffering as well as the origin, the cessation and the way to cessation. What even if all four noble truth manifesting in the Tathagate, the Dhamma?

A fool turns away from both, the Tathagata and the Dhamma, encounter it. Why? Because of improper attention, tend to follow Mara, seeking refuge in pleasant or neither plesant nor unpleasant feelings, liking to escape from unpleasant one.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2017, 05:30:27 pm by Samana Johann »
[ sangham.net Online monastery ✦ accesstoinsight.eu ✦ old use account Hanzze ]

Offline VisuddhiRaptor

  • Member
  • Posts: 319
    • View Profile
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #4 on: June 21, 2017, 07:14:19 pm »
People are attached to form, sound, smell, taste, bodily touch and that is why they seek out for that, neiter looking for the Tathagata nor for Dhamma.

This is not correct. It is attachment that creates the idea of a "person" or "people". Please represent Buddha-Dhamma correctly. To quote:

Quote
Who, O Lord, has a sense-impression?"

"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One.

"I do not say that 'he has a sense-impression.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who has a sense-impression?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of sense-impression?' And to that the correct reply is: 'The sixfold sense-base is a condition of sense-impression, and sense-impression is the condition of feeling.'"

"Who, O Lord, feels?"

"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say that 'he feels.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who feels?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of feeling?' And to that the correct reply is: 'sense-impression is the condition of feeling; and feeling is the condition of craving.'"

"Who, O Lord, craves?"

"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say that 'he craves.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who craves?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of craving?' And to that the correct reply is: 'Feeling is the condition of craving, and craving is the condition of clinging.'"

"Who, O Lord, clings?"

"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One, "I do not say that 'he clings.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who clings?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of clinging?' And to that the correct reply is: 'Craving is the condition of clinging; and clinging is the condition of the process of becoming.' Such is the origin of this entire mass of suffering.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.012.nypo.html


:lipsseald:


One seeking the Tathagata or the Dhamma inside the sphere of the five sense (six) is not able to find. Because Vakkali thought it is important to meet the Buddha in person, seeing a imperfect body, hearing... he was rebuked.

This is not correct. The Tathagata, which is the Dhamma or Truth, can be found inside the sphere of the five senses. To quote:

Quote
At Savatthi. "Monks, the eye is inconstant, changeable, alterable. The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The mind is inconstant, changeable, alterable.

"One who has conviction & belief that these phenomena are this way is called a faith-follower: one who has entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill. He is incapable of doing any deed by which he might be reborn in hell, in the animal womb, or in the realm of hungry shades. He is incapable of passing away until he has realized the fruit of stream-entry.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn25/sn25.001.than.html


 :curtain:

Like you got rebuked seeking out for a Monk in same way.

No. This is again not correct. There is no "you" that is rebuked. Buddha-Dhamma states all things, without exception, are not-self (anatta) & sunnata (empty).

:lipsseald:

If worshipping form, sound, smell, taste, bodily touch and ideas, one is worshipping Mara, and such is of course demeritious. So be careful especialy about you ideas in regard of what is worthy for respect.

If this is correct, why do some atma-samana write many internet post on many forums demanding upakasa to respect them & condemning to hell any form/object that does not respect the Atma-Samana (Self-Samana)? Are these Atma-Samana demanding forms engage in Devil (Mara) worship?  :namaste:

And do not assosiate with fools telling to kill a Buddha when seeing without telling you the meaning.

There is no "you". Everything is anatta & sunnata in the mind of Tathagata. This is why the Samana was rebuked. The mind of the Samana Vakkali believed Tathagata was a "person" or a "you".  :lipsseald:

About the bala-citta (fool-mind), the Dhammapada states:


Quote
73. The fool seeks undeserved reputation, precedence among monks, authority over monasteries, and honor among householders.

74. "Let both laymen and monks think that it was done by me. In every work, great and small, let them follow me" — such is the ambition of the fool; thus his desire and pride increase.

75. One is the quest for worldly gain, and quite another is the path to Nibbana. Clearly understanding this, let not the monk, the disciple of the Buddha, be carried away by worldly acclaim, but develop detachment instead.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.05.budd.html


Thank you, VisuddhiRaptor for the dhamma service here. May all minds realise the emptiness (sunnata) & drop the burden of all things, both internal & external.  :namaste:

Quote
A burden indeed
are the five aggregates,
and the carrier of the burden
is the 'person' (of such clan-name)
.
Taking up the burden in the world
   is stressful.
Casting off the burden
   is bliss.
Having cast off the heavy burden
and not taking on another,
pulling up craving,
along with its root,
   one is free from hunger,
      totally unbound.

Bhara Sutta




« Last Edit: June 21, 2017, 07:24:04 pm by VisuddhiRaptor »

Offline VisuddhiRaptor

  • Member
  • Posts: 319
    • View Profile
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #5 on: June 21, 2017, 07:27:44 pm »
A wise person is grateful to see suffering as well as the origin, the cessation and the way to cessation. What even if all four noble truth manifesting in the Tathagate, the Dhamma?
What is grateful & wise is the mind (citta). In reality, there is no "person". This is why the Lord Buddha admonished Samana Vakkali. The Samana believed the Tathagata was a "person".  :dharma:

Offline Samana Johann

  • Not a member, just an endured/enduring guest.
  • Member
  • Posts: 507
  • Doing forest monk in Cambodia
    • View Profile
    • sangham.net
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #6 on: June 21, 2017, 07:38:14 pm »
VisuddhiRaptor, you are a fool, in that how you act. Whether you might now remember you foolish way or not.

Its pointless to argue with a recogniced fool and the intention he acts.

There is an Austrian saying: "Who ever digges a bit-fall for others will fall into it by him self."
[ sangham.net Online monastery ✦ accesstoinsight.eu ✦ old use account Hanzze ]

Offline VisuddhiRaptor

  • Member
  • Posts: 319
    • View Profile
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #7 on: June 21, 2017, 07:54:10 pm »
VisuddhiRaptor, you are a fool, in that how you act. Whether you might now remember you foolish way or not.

Its pointless to argue with a recogniced fool and the intention he acts.

There is an Austrian saying: "Who ever digges a bit-fall for others will fall into it by him self."

There is no "you".

Another relevant sutta is SN 12.19 Bala-pandita Sutta: The Fool & the Wise Person (which is generally mistranslated). SN 12.19 states:
Quote
Dwelling at Savatthi. "When a fool is obstructed by ignorance and conjoined with craving, this group (of aggregates) thus results. Now there is both this group (internal five aggregates) and external minds-&-forms (nama-rupa). Here, in dependence on this duality, there is contact at the six senses. Touched by these, or one or another of them, the fool is sensitive to pleasure & pain. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.019.than.html

This explains how the fool ignorantly mentally concocts/constructs delusions of 'self' or 'persons' from what are only & merely external nama-rupa (external minds & bodies).

This is the true dhamma, to be honored & practised.   :dharma:

Offline Rahul

  • Member
  • Posts: 135
    • View Profile
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #8 on: June 21, 2017, 08:05:15 pm »
VisuddhiRaptor, you are a fool, in that how you act. Whether you might now remember you foolish way or not.

Its pointless to argue with a recogniced fool and the intention he acts.

There is an Austrian saying: "Who ever digges a bit-fall for others will fall into it by him self."

What purpose does this language serve? If you think someone has wrong ideas, better find a way to educate the person to right ideas. If that's not possible, better let it be that way. What do you think this harsh language achieves here? Does that make the person think again and change his views, or does that makes the person reconsider his opinion? Or rather does it make the person feel angry? Be mindful of your purpose when speaking.

Offline VisuddhiRaptor

  • Member
  • Posts: 319
    • View Profile
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #9 on: June 21, 2017, 08:14:22 pm »
What purpose does this language serve? 

SN 11.5 Subhasita-jaya Sutta: Victory Through What is Well Spoken is debate between the devas (benevolent gods) & the asuras (violent gods) about how to disciple or correct the behaviour of a fool. The asuras believe harsh punishment is the method.

Quote
Vepacitti recited this verse:

'Fools would flare up even more
if there were no constraints.
Thus an enlightened one
should restrain the fool
with a heavy stick.'

"When Vepacitti had said this verse, the asuras applauded but the devas were silent. So Vepacitti said to Sakka, 'Say a verse, deva-king!'

"When this was said, Sakka recited this verse:

   'This, I think,
is the only constraint for a fool:
When, knowing the other's provoked,
   you mindfully grow calm.'

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn11/sn11.005.than.html

Naturally, the Buddha declared the patient devas were right & the violent asuras were wrong.  :namaste:

Quote
133. Speak not harshly to anyone, for those thus spoken to might retort. Indeed, angry speech hurts, and retaliation may overtake you.

134. If, like a broken gong, you silence yourself, you have approached Nibbana, for vindictiveness is no longer in you.

136. When the fool commits evil deeds, he does not realize (their evil nature). The witless man is tormented by his own deeds, like one burnt by fire.

Dhammapada


 :namaste:

Offline Rahul

  • Member
  • Posts: 135
    • View Profile
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #10 on: June 21, 2017, 08:52:39 pm »
What purpose does this language serve? 
SN 11.5 Subhasita-jaya Sutta: Victory Through What is Well Spoken is debate between the devas (benevolent gods) & the asuras (violent gods) about how to disciple or correct the behaviour of a fool. The asuras believe harsh punishment is the method.

Quote
Vepacitti recited this verse:

'Fools would flare up even more
if there were no constraints.
Thus an enlightened one
should restrain the fool
with a heavy stick.'

"When Vepacitti had said this verse, the asuras applauded but the devas were silent. So Vepacitti said to Sakka, 'Say a verse, deva-king!'

"When this was said, Sakka recited this verse:

   'This, I think,
is the only constraint for a fool:
When, knowing the other's provoked,
   you mindfully grow calm.'

...

 :namaste:

Let us stick to polite ways of discussion, and indulge in self-restraint. Let us inspire others to abandon their rough language. Amitabha!

Offline Solodris

  • Member
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #11 on: June 21, 2017, 09:03:15 pm »
Vakkali, you can only be scolded for not seeing the Dhamma, for being scolded is not seeing the Dhamma. As such the Tathagata exposed the Tathagata.

Offline Samana Johann

  • Not a member, just an endured/enduring guest.
  • Member
  • Posts: 507
  • Doing forest monk in Cambodia
    • View Profile
    • sangham.net
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #12 on: June 21, 2017, 09:31:30 pm »
VisuddhiRaptor, you are a fool, in that how you act. Whether you might now remember you foolish way or not.

Its pointless to argue with a recogniced fool and the intention he acts.

There is an Austrian saying: "Who ever digges a bit-fall for others will fall into it by him self."

What purpose does this language serve? If you think someone has wrong ideas, better find a way to educate the person to right ideas. If that's not possible, better let it be that way. What do you think this harsh language achieves here? Does that make the person think again and change his views, or does that makes the person reconsider his opinion? Or rather does it make the person feel angry? Be mindful of your purpose when speaking.

Atma did not say something in regard of ideas. The point is intention. While you might not see it, Visuddhiraptor knows well, that he act to simply gain and destruct.
Do you think that for example the Buddha was angry about Devadatta? Do you think that he ever liked to harm him?
Maybe Rahul knows how the Buddha answered being accused that he uses to use harsh speech. If know, ask Viuddhiraptor or better Ground, since he would not like to harm answering it.

As in regard of a worthless person, if really not possible to help, even with harsh words, it's for the purpose that those with less dust in the eyes, could have a fearful sample of how fast end easy one is lost, being shown such.

If prevering to be attached by the lost and by searching enemies an tended to cry for justice, do so, go on and become another of the "Bodhisattas" here, singing their gospels.

Its upanissaya, that people gather together, its common tendency, that equal meet each other, again and again. Stay intended.

"Let us... " is the call of those seeking refuge in methuna, and calls out for the benefit espected by unity. Yet it is not harmony, but the truth and seeing it, of all compounded things.

Of what value would be desire after unity with the unwise and fools?

You see that they are bound together and love the world they live in, so you let them their world and walk on. Beings are heirs of there actions.

That is way it was said here: Buddhist ever worship Mara, telling them Sangha (boundage) is free.

This should call out Meez as well to be most protected against possible lose of Buddhanatur:

The empty Bodhisatvas hymn of the untouched and free postmodern inspired:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TxmEd9lcn0k

How are you today, Solodris?
[ sangham.net Online monastery ✦ accesstoinsight.eu ✦ old use account Hanzze ]

Offline Samana Johann

  • Not a member, just an endured/enduring guest.
  • Member
  • Posts: 507
  • Doing forest monk in Cambodia
    • View Profile
    • sangham.net
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #13 on: June 21, 2017, 09:45:03 pm »
What purpose does this language serve? 

SN 11.5 Subhasita-jaya Sutta: Victory Through What is Well Spoken is debate between the devas (benevolent gods) & the asuras (violent gods) about how to disciple or correct the behaviour of a fool. The asuras believe harsh punishment is the method.

Quote
Vepacitti recited this verse:

'Fools would flare up even more
if there were no constraints.
Thus an enlightened one
should restrain the fool
with a heavy stick.'

"When Vepacitti had said this verse, the asuras applauded but the devas were silent. So Vepacitti said to Sakka, 'Say a verse, deva-king!'

"When this was said, Sakka recited this verse:

   'This, I think,
is the only constraint for a fool:
When, knowing the other's provoked,
   you mindfully grow calm.'

...

 :namaste:


Let us stick to polite ways of discussion, and indulge in self-restraint. Let us inspire others to abandon their rough language. Amitabha!


Quote
The Wily Tiger
Here is a story from Hitopadesa - to illustrate my point - a wily tiger was too old to
catch his prey. One day he kept calling loudly, "Oh travelers! Come and take this gold
bangle." A traveler heard this call, so he approached the tiger and asked, "Where is the
gold bangle?"
The old wily tiger showed the gold bangle in his paws. The traveler said he dared
not come near him who used to be a man-eater.. Then the wily old tiger preached him
a sermon as follows, "In my younger days I kill and eat human beings because I was
not fortunate enough to listen to the Dhamma. As I grow older and lost my wife and
children. I really felt samvega. At the time I happened to meet with a noble person
who taught me to live a virtuous life making deeds of Dana. Since then I have been
living a strictly righteous life. You have nothing to be afraid of. I am harmless. See, I
don't even have claws and fangs. I have resolved to give this gold bangle to someone
as charity, and you are the lucky one. Go bathe in the lake and come accept my gift.
Believing these persuasive words, the traveler did what he was told. When he
stepped into the lake he sank into the swamp. Saying that he would help him, the
tiger came and devoured the traveler.
This story from Hitopadesa gives us a moral lesson that mere knowledge is
useless without morality. Educated and intelligent persons without morality endowed
with cunning, charm and cleverness at deceiving can be more dangerous than the ig￾norant, because they possess the knowledge to succumb wicked deeds. I would like to
advise the readers not to be contended with mere knowledge, but to practice what
they have digested so that they may become really virtuous persons. Here I conclude
wishing you all again a long life.
Versified epilogue rendered in simple prose:
To bring this treatise to a close, here are some pertinent remarks in brief: In this
modern age, although there are Bhikkhus as well as laity with resolution to strive for
attainment of Nibbāna, unless the mind is intrinsically pure, they will still be far away
from the Sublime State they long for.
Therefore, beginning with myself, all my companions, close associates and gener￾ations to come, who wish to reach the blissful peace of Nibbāna realized by our Noble
Predecessors, should study this treatise of Abhidhamma In Daily Life carefully, pre￾cisely, meticulously, and strive with full diligence accordingly so as to attain the su￾preme height, to become the great conqueror, the glorious victor.

Ashin Janakanbhivamsa,
Abhidhamma in Daily Life


Very good book for Beginners and Laypeople, interested in practice and grateful in good advices: eg. metting the Tathagata.
[ sangham.net Online monastery ✦ accesstoinsight.eu ✦ old use account Hanzze ]

Offline VisuddhiRaptor

  • Member
  • Posts: 319
    • View Profile
Re: Why did the Lord Buddha admonish Samana Vakkali?
« Reply #14 on: June 21, 2017, 10:23:36 pm »
The empty Bodhisatvas hymn of the untouched and free postmodern inspired:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TxmEd9lcn0k

Let us try to stay on topic, please:  :focus:

The discourse below shows how to discuss Dhamma with a void mind, free from creating hallucinations of 'selves'.  :namaste:

Quote
And how, bhikkhus, does there come to be neither extolling nor disparaging but teaching only the Dhamma?

When one does not say: ‘All those engaged in the pursuit of the enjoyment of one whose pleasure is linked to sensual desires … have entered upon the wrong way,’ but says instead: ‘The pursuit is a state beset by suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the wrong way,’ then one teaches only the Dhamma.

When one does not say: I All those disengaged from the pursuit of the enjoyment of one whose pleasure is linked to sensual desires … have entered upon the right way,’ but says instead: ‘The disengagement is a state without suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the right way,’ then one teaches only the Dhamma.

“When one does not say: ‘All those engaged in the pursuit of self-mortification … have entered upon the wrong way,’ but says instead: ‘The pursuit is a state beset by suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the wrong way,’ then one teaches only the Dhamma.

When one does not say: ‘All those disengaged from the pursuit of self-mortification … have entered upon the right way,’ but says instead: ‘The disengagement is a state without suffering, vexation, despair, and fever, and it is the right way,’ then one teaches only the Dhamma.

“When one does not say: ‘All those who have not abandoned the fetter of being … have entered upon the wrong way,’ 233 but says instead: ‘As long as the fetter of being is unabandoned, being too is unabandoned,’ then one teaches only the Dhamma.

When one does not say: ‘All those who have abandoned the fetter of being … have entered upon the right way,’ but says instead: ‘When the fetter of being is abandoned, being also is abandoned,’ then one teaches only the Dhamma.

139. The Exposition of Non-Conflict https://suttacentral.net/en/mn139

 :buddha:

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal