Kalama Sutta only about Kilesas?
0
votes
1
answer
50
views
I found an explanation of Kalama Sutta in a website which is said to be from a Tipitaka teacher in Sri Lanka. Is Kalama Sutta only about Kilesas?
> Kālāma sutta is only to be applied for Lobha-dosa-moha?
>
> The famous Sri Lankan lay Dhamma-preacher Saminda Ranasingha
> (aathaapi.org ) insists on two points when he is explaining Kālāma
> sutta.
>
> 1. Kālāma sutta is only to be applied for **Non-Buddhists**
> 3. Kālāma sutta is only to be applied for **Lobha-dosa-moha** (and
> Alobha-adosa-amoha)
>
> I’m here going to introduce the 2nd point of him, for seeing your
> comments.
>
>
>
> Rest part of the sutta is also evaluated in the same way by him.
>
> So he insists that Kālāmā Sutta can not be applied for evaluating
> other things mentioned in the Tipitaka.
>
> **If we consider the phrasing-style of the last paragraph in the above**
>
> ***“Iti kho, kālāmā, yaṃ taṃ avocumhā – … iti yaṃ taṃ vuttaṃ, idametaṃ
> paṭicca vuttaṃ.***
>
> ***So, as I said, kalamas – … Thus was it said. And in
> reference to this was it said.***
>
> This style can be seen in many Suttas in Anguttara nikaya and Majjima
> nikaya where,
>
> 1. An “Uddesa (recitation passage)” is introduced first.
> 2. Then it is questioned why was it mentioned. (in most cases)
> 3. Then the Niddesa (explanation of the Uddesa) is menioned.
> 4. At the end, it is concluded that the above Uddesa was mentioned for
> Niddesa.
>
>Eg: Sakkapañhasutta, Araṇavibhaṅgasutta, Saḷāyatanavibhaṅgasutta, Dutiyasaññāsutta, Paṭhamamahāpañhāsutta, Titthāyatanādisutta … etc.
>
> ***Saḷāyatanavibhaṅgasutta:***
>
>“‘Cha ajjhattikāni āyatanāni veditabbāni,
> …’ti **– ayamuddeso saḷāyatanavibhaṅgassa.** “‘Cha ajjhattikāni āyatanāni
> veditabbānī’ti **– iti kho panetaṃ vuttaṃ. Kiñcetaṃ paṭicca vuttaṃ?**
> ‘Cakkhāyatanaṃ sotāyatanaṃ ghānāyatanaṃ jivhāyatanaṃ kāyāyatanaṃ
> manāyatanaṃ. Cha ajjhattikāni āyatanāni veditabbānī’ti **– iti yaṃ taṃ
> vuttaṃ idametaṃ paṭicca vuttaṃ.**
>
> “‘The six interior sense fields should be understood. …’ **This is the
> recitation passage for the analysis of the six sense fields.** ‘The six
> interior sense fields should be understood.’ **– That’s what I said, but
> why did I say it?** There are the sense fields of the eye, ear, nose,
> tongue, body, and mind. ‘The six interior sense fields should be
> understood.’ **– That’s what I said, and this is why I said it.**
>
> Rest part of the sutta is also evaluated in the same way by him.
>
> So he insists that Kālāmā Sutta can not be applied for evaluating
> other things mentioned in the Tipitaka.
>
> **If we consider the phrasing-style of the last paragraph in the above**
>
> ***“Iti kho, kālāmā, yaṃ taṃ avocumhā – … iti yaṃ taṃ vuttaṃ, idametaṃ
> paṭicca vuttaṃ.***
>
> ***So, as I said, kalamas – … Thus was it said. And in
> reference to this was it said.***
>
> This style can be seen in many Suttas in Anguttara nikaya and Majjima
> nikaya where,
>
> 1. An “Uddesa (recitation passage)” is introduced first.
> 2. Then it is questioned why was it mentioned. (in most cases)
> 3. Then the Niddesa (explanation of the Uddesa) is menioned.
> 4. At the end, it is concluded that the above Uddesa was mentioned for
> Niddesa.
>
>Eg: Sakkapañhasutta, Araṇavibhaṅgasutta, Saḷāyatanavibhaṅgasutta, Dutiyasaññāsutta, Paṭhamamahāpañhāsutta, Titthāyatanādisutta … etc.
>
> ***Saḷāyatanavibhaṅgasutta:***
>
>“‘Cha ajjhattikāni āyatanāni veditabbāni,
> …’ti **– ayamuddeso saḷāyatanavibhaṅgassa.** “‘Cha ajjhattikāni āyatanāni
> veditabbānī’ti **– iti kho panetaṃ vuttaṃ. Kiñcetaṃ paṭicca vuttaṃ?**
> ‘Cakkhāyatanaṃ sotāyatanaṃ ghānāyatanaṃ jivhāyatanaṃ kāyāyatanaṃ
> manāyatanaṃ. Cha ajjhattikāni āyatanāni veditabbānī’ti **– iti yaṃ taṃ
> vuttaṃ idametaṃ paṭicca vuttaṃ.**
>
> “‘The six interior sense fields should be understood. …’ **This is the
> recitation passage for the analysis of the six sense fields.** ‘The six
> interior sense fields should be understood.’ **– That’s what I said, but
> why did I say it?** There are the sense fields of the eye, ear, nose,
> tongue, body, and mind. ‘The six interior sense fields should be
> understood.’ **– That’s what I said, and this is why I said it.**
Asked by Blake
(390 rep)
Oct 5, 2022, 10:19 PM
Last activity: Oct 6, 2022, 07:36 AM
Last activity: Oct 6, 2022, 07:36 AM