PRESENTED TO THE BUDDHA CENTER, ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2015, AND AGAIN TO THE NEW BUDDHA CENTRE ON SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2024 (REVISED).

Final Teachings of the Buddha: 34 Spiritual Principles of the Great Discourse on the Final Emancipation

Countries: Magadha, Vajji, Malla
Locales: Rajagaha; Ambalatthika; Nalanda; Pataligama; Kotigama; Nadika; Vesali; Beluva; Bhandagama; Hatthigama; Ambigama; Jambigama; Bhogganagama; Pava; Kusinara
Speakers: Ananda, the Buddha, Sariputta
Date of Composition: 400-250 BCE

The Mahaparinibbana Sutta is interesting because it is the oldest and longest biographical account of the Buddha, located in the Digha Nikaya, including his final teachings. Thus, the Mahaparinibbana Sutta constitutes one of the most important foundational documents of historical Buddhism. Forty-seven pages in length in Walshe’s translation, this may be the longest discourse in the Sutta Pitaka. Walshe calls this discourse “The Great Passing.” In a biographical context, it refers to the final emancipation of the Buddha.

This discourse gives a meticulous account of the last year of the Buddha’s life. Two things about this discourse are of special interest—the biographical details of the Buddha’s life, of which this is the longest and most coherent account in the Pali Canon, and the doctrinal details to which the discourse refers. I have identified thirty-four such teachings, ranging from the statement that “tathagatas never lie” to the circumstances of the First Buddhist Council, held during the first rainy season after the Buddha’s passing about 400 BCE.

In the first part, we provide context by summarizing the events described in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta. In the second part, we identify and discuss the thirty-four doctrines, one by one and in some detail.

PART I

The discourse begins with the Buddha at Vulture’s Peak, near Rajagaha. Literally, ‘the hill of vultures,’ Walshe describes it as “a pleasant elevation above the stifling heat of Rajagaha.” Rajagaha (modern Rajgir), the first capital of the kingdom of Magadha, appears in the second discourse, in which the Buddha is asked to explain the fruits of the homeless life. Vulture’s Peak became famous in the Mahayana discourses.

The king of Magadha at that time was Ajatasattu (Skt. Ajatasatru), famous for murdering his father, Bimbisara, and expanding the Magadha kingdom by conquest, so that it became the most powerful kingdom in northern India. At this time, Ajatasattu wants to attack the Vajjians. Ajatasattu respects the Buddha, so he sends his minister, Vassakara, to consult the Buddha.

The Buddha, speaking to Ananda, presents a list of “seven principles for preventing decline” based on the Law of Moral Causality. Since the Vajjians follow them, their society is healthy, strong, and able to repel any attack. Vassakara decides that to conquer the Vajjians by force is impossible, but that a war of propaganda might set them against each other. Because of this dialogue, the Buddha teaches the “seven things that are conducive to welfare” to the order. This is the beginning of the Buddha’s final instructions to the order. The Buddha also gives a comprehensive discourse at Vulture’s Peak, before he moves on to Ambalatthika. In each subsequent place, he repeats the same comprehensive discourse on the mutual interdependence of morality, meditation, and wisdom.

Ambalatthika appears in the first discourse, where Suppiya and Brahmadatta are debating the merit of the Buddha within earshot of the order, while they are travelling together.

Afterward the Buddha travels on to Nalanda, a minor village at the Buddha’s time. Here Sariputta, the disciple renowned for his wisdom, declares that there will never be anyone greater or more enlightened than the Buddha. However, the Buddha criticizes Sariputta, asking him how he could know that his statement is true.

You have spoken boldly with a bull’s voice, Sariputta, you have roared the lion’s roar of certainty. How is this? Have all the arahant Buddhas of the past appeared to you, and were the minds of all those Lords open to you, so as to say, ‘These Lords were of such virtue, such is his teaching, such his wisdom, such his way, such his liberation’? … And have you perceived all the arahant Buddhas who will appear in the future … So, Sariputta, you do not have knowledge of the minds of the Buddhas of the past, the future or the present. Thus, Sariputra, have you not spoken boldly with a bull’s voice and roared the lion’s roar of certainty with your declaration? (1.16)

The Buddha’s segue from praise to irony and his love of discourse and dialectic is a characteristic idiosyncrasy of the Buddha’s speech in the Pali Canon. I would like to think that it reflects a similar quirk in the syntax of the historical Buddha. Sariputta, however, does not accept the Buddha’s critique, saying, “Lord, the minds of the arahant Buddhas of the past, future and present are not open to me. But I know the drift of the Dhamma.” PED has ‘main drift of the faith, general conclusions of the [Teaching].’ The conversation ends here. Perhaps the Buddha assents to Sariputta’s explanation by silence, or perhaps the conclusion of the discussion is lost.

The Buddha then goes to Pataligama (Skt. Pataliputra). This was a small “water fort” where the Ganges, Gandhaka, and Son rivers converge. The Buddha predicts that Pataligama, then a minor administrative centre, will become the capital (c. 395–380 BCE). The archaeological record shows significant urban development beginning in the fourth century BCE, so that by the time of Ashoka Pataliputra was one of the world’s largest cities. It was a centre of trade and commerce where merchants and intellectuals converged from all across India.

The Buddha and Ananda go to Kotigama. Here the Buddha gives a talk on the Four Noble Truths. Thence they go to Nadika, where the Buddha describes the future rebirths of twelve deceased monastics and lay followers, both female and male, in terms of the grades of the path that leads to arhantship. The Buddha does not like doing this, however, and he is tired, so he teaches Ananda a special meditation called the Mirror of the Teaching, by which one may attain the rank of a stream enterer at will. Perhaps the Buddha’s fatigue is the first indication that he is unwell.

Next, the Buddha travels to Vesali, the capital city of the Licchavi, the dominant tribe of the Vajjian Confederation, and the birthplace of Mahavira, the great Jain reformer who lived about the same time as the Buddha. The city is large, crowded, rich, and prosperous, with abundant food and numerous pleasure gardens and lotus ponds. This is the residence of the royal courtesan, Ambapali, who entertains the Buddha and his entourage. Here he gives a talk on radical presence and meditation.

Next, they visit Beluva, described as a “little village” just outside Vesali. Here the Buddha stops for the rainy season, June or July to September or October, extending sometimes into November, sending the rest of the monastics back to Vesali. The Buddha wishes to be alone. It seems that the decision to stay in Beluva is something of a surprise, since it is clear from the discourse that the Buddha actually sends the monastics back to Vesali, rather than simply leaving them behind. Ananda alone stays with the Buddha.

Mortal pains begin to afflict the Buddha. The Buddha manages to overcome these feelings and for a time seems to have recovered. Ananda comes to him and entreats the Buddha to give a final statement about the order to the monastics before he passes. Ananda’s request and the Buddha’s reply suggest there were some successional issues already developing within the order that Ananda suspects might develop into a crisis after the Buddha’s passing. The Buddha seems cross:

But, Ananda, what does the order of monks expect of me? I have taught the Dhamma, Ananda, making no ‘inner’ and ‘outer’: the Tathagata has no ‘teacher’s fist’ in respect of doctrines. If there is anyone who thinks, ‘I shall take charge of the order,’ or ‘The order should refer to me,’ let him make some statement about the order but the Tathagata does not think in such terms. So why should the Tathagata make a statement about the order? Ananda, I am now old, worn out, venerable, one who has traversed life’s path. I have reached the term of life, which is 80. Just as an old cart is made to go by being held together with straps, so the Tathagata’s body is kept going by being strapped up. It is only when the Tathagata withdraws his attention from outward signs, and by the cessation of certain feelings, enters into the signless concentration of mind, that his body knows comfort. Therefore, Ananda, you should live as islands unto yourselves, being your own refuge, with no one else as your refuge, with the Dhamma as an island, with the Dhamma as your refuge, with no other refuge. (2.25f.)

The Buddha takes Ananda to the Capala Shrine in Vesali, where he prepares Ananda for his passing in three months. Since the rainy season retreat ends in October or November, this implies that the Buddha died in mid-February, in late winter. Parinirvana Day is still celebrated in east Asia on February 15. Afterward, they travel to the Gabled Hall in the Great Forest, where the Buddha convenes an assembly of the monastics and delivers his final statement to the order.

After the rainy season, Ananda and the Buddha travel to Bhandagama, where he speaks on the world and non-rebirth. The Buddha and Ananda then travel to a series of places, including Hatthigama, Ambagama, Jambugama, and Bhogganagara, in the last of which he teaches the Four Criteria.

After this the Buddha and Ananda go to Pava (now Fazilnagar), located in the republic of Malla, north of Magadha. The Mallas are a brave and warlike people. Here the Buddha stays at the mango grove of Cunda the blacksmith. Cunda comes to hear the Buddha and invites him to take his morning meal with him. This meal includes a dish called ‘pig’s delight’. The food does not agree with the Buddha, who experiences diarrhea and mortal pains.

The Buddha declares his intention to travel to Kusinara (Kushinagar), a celebrated centre of the Malla kingdom. On the road, fatigue overcomes him and the Buddha rests under a tree. Overcome by thirst, he asks Ananda to bring him some water from the nearby stream. Ananda tells him that a large number of wagons or carts recently disturbed it and urges the Buddha to wait until they reach the river Kakuttha. However, the Buddha insists that Ananda bring him the tainted water from the stream, potentially poisoning him with a toxic infection as well. The discourse naively informs us that the water became pure as Ananda approached it.

After refreshing himself, the Buddha and Ananda go on to the river Kakuttha, where the Buddha bathes, drinks, and goes to the mango grove. There he lies down on his right side.

Again, the Buddha moves on, this time to the Mallas’ sal-grove near Kusinara, across the Hirannavati River, on the bank of which he lies down on his right side, his head pointing north. This is a sacred yoga posture in which pious Hindus still prefer to die if they can arrange it. The sal trees are barren (the discourse naively states that they burst into blossom. The sal tree blossoms naturally in March and April). The Buddha gives final instructions regarding his funeral, the disposition of his remains and other things to Ananda, and he praises him to the monastics. As Ananda summons the Mallas to witness the passing on of the Buddha, the Buddha teaches Subhadda and ordains him, which at that time was a simple verbal formula. The Buddha then gives his final instructions to the order. His last words are, “Now, monks, I declare to you: all conditioned things are of a nature to decay—strive on untiringly.”

The Buddha falls into a coma and in the third watch of the night (roughly 2 to 6 am), he passes.

The Mallas honour the body of the Buddha with dance, song, music, garlands, and perfume for a whole week. Then they take the body out the east gate to the Mallas’ shrine at Makuta-Bandhana, possibly a hall. Meanwhile, Mahakassapa, the Buddha’s foremost living disciple, is travelling when he hears of the Buddha’s passing and makes his way to Kusinara, arriving just in time to witness the cremation. They cremate the Buddha’s body and, amidst some bickering, divide the relics into ten parts, which they distribute to various groups who support the Buddha and his teaching. These sites of great stupas continue to receive veneration and pilgrimage today. In the late 19th century, Wiliam Peppé discovered one of these relic depositories, which many believe to have contained at least a part of the mortal remains of the Buddha.

PART II

First Recitation Section

Principle #1: Tathagatas Cannot Lie (1.2)

King Ajatasattu of Magadha uses the Buddha as an oracle because Tathagatas, having achieved self-perfection, are both internally and externally completely self-consistent, as reality must be. This passage highlights the paradox of the coexistence of the corrupt nature of northeast India during the 5th century BCE and a deep belief in spirituality.

Principle #2: Political Philosophy of the Buddha (1.4)

The Buddha sets out a comprehensive political philosophy, thus showing that even a transcendent being continues to care for the inhabitants of the world. Indeed, the proper political organization of society is a recurring theme of the Pali Canon. These principles include holding assemblies, peace, following the ancient tradition, seniority, women’s rights, national spiritual practice, and a national spiritual organization. These precepts follow the organizational principles of the quasi-democratic Vajjian republic, which were also like the principles of the Shakyan republic of the Buddha’s family.

Principle #3: Precepts for the Sangha (1.6)

The precepts for the monastics also parallel those of the Vajjians, and includes holding assemblies, peace, rules of training (replacing an ancient tradition), respect for seniority, detachment (replacing women’s rights), forest dwelling (replacing a national spiritual practice), and mindfulness (replacing a national spiritual organization).

Principle #4: Property (1.11)

The order is to be organized based on commonality of property, but does not supersede civil society, which supports the order so that the order benefits from civil acceptance. Interestingly, the fourth continent of Sumeru, Uttarakuru, which is the home of the longest-lived and most advanced race of human beings, is communistic. Presumably, this will be the social system of Shambhala when, according to the Kalachakra, it manifests in the 24^th-25th century of the Common Era.

Principle #5: Wisdom is the Salvific Principle (1.12)

A recurring theme that runs through the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, like a refrain, is the mutual relationship between morality, ethics, or virtue; one-pointedness, concentration, or meditation; and wisdom. This is called the threefold training or the threefold partition, and is not attributed to the Buddha, but to the nun Dhammadinna (in the Culavedalla Sutta), who the Buddha declared to be the nun foremost in wisdom. In many sects of religious Buddhism today this threefold division of the Noble Eightfold Path has virtually replaced the Noble Eightfold Path. The path is presented as beginning with the cultivation of virtue, followed by meditation. Because of these two things, wisdom, identified with enlightenment, dawns. The Buddha states that meditation, imbued with morality, brings great fruit and profit, and that wisdom, imbued with meditation, brings great fruit and profit, but that it is the mind imbued with wisdom that brings about emancipation. Thus, the sequence is morality (since meditation cannot be imbued with something that it does not have), meditation, and wisdom. Note, however, the subtle distinction made here between morality and meditation on the one hand and wisdom on the other. Morality and meditation are skilful means, but it is the mind-imbued wisdom that brings about emancipation. From this, we conclude that it is wisdom that is the essential salvific principle, which brings the threefold partition into conformity with the Noble Eightfold Path, the first limb of which is Right View (or Perfect Wisdom) that leads the aspirant to the attainment of the first crucial stage of the stream enterer. It seems, then, that the true sequence of the path is wisdom, morality, and meditation. Moreover, wisdom is not just attained. It is also cultivated. This view is confirmed in the doctrine of interconnectedness, the radical or first principle of which, ignorance, is overcome by wisdom. Wisdom is also the essential attainment of a buddha, whereas ethics and meditation, leading to the state of desirelessness or non-attachment, is the essential attainment of an arhant. If one reads the Pali Canon in its entirety, it becomes clear that it is the realization of wisdom that brings about emancipation, while ethics is deemphasized. There are stories of aspirants attaining emancipation simply by listening to the Buddha (or a disciple of the Buddha) talk, followed by a period of meditation as short a week or less.

Principle #6: Sariputta and the Buddha Debate the Greatness of the Buddha (1.16)

Sariputta, renowned among the foremost disciples of the Buddha for his wisdom, affirms to the Buddha that the Buddha is the best and most enlightened ascetic or brahman, past, present, or future. Rather than accept this praise, the Buddha turns it against the Sariputta, first chidingly affirming him – “You have spoken with a bull’s voice, Sariputta, you have roared the lion’s roar of certainty” – and then questioning him – “Have all the Arhant Buddhas of the past appeared to you, and were the minds of all those Lords open to you? Have you perceived all the Arhant Buddhas who will appear in the future? Do you even know me as the Arhant Buddha?” Sariputta was forced to acknowledge that he did not know the answers to these questions. Thus, the Buddha ironically concludes, “You have spoken with a bull’s voice, Sariputta; you have roared the lion’s roar of certainty.” Such is my reading of this text, which might be read by a religious as an affirmation of Sariputta’s faith, were it not for the emphasis the Buddha placed on questioning and Sariputta’s defensive reply. Rather, the Buddha challenges Sariputta to justify his claim. Sariputta’s reputation for wisdom was not misplaced, for he turned the tables on the Buddha, and proved to the Buddha that his respect for the Buddha was not based on faith or clairvoyance, but on his knowledge of the “drift of the dharma” (dhammavaya, better translated as “the passing on of the teaching”). This recurs to the Buddha’s statement that, although we may not know the teaching, we can judge the teaching by its effect – true teaching always yields positive karma; something that has negative karma cannot be true teaching, reminiscent of the statement by Jesus that one can judge a tree by its fruits. The Buddha has no response, thus acceding to the wisdom of Sariputta’s reply.

Principle #7: Comprehensive Dharma versus Dharma in Brief (1.18)

The Pali Canon often contrasts comprehensive teaching with teaching in brief or “in short.” As Peter Masefield, author of Divine Revelation in the Pali Canon, points out, the distinction is obscure since the content of comprehensive teaching and teaching in brief often appears to be similar. Teaching in brief is frequently requested before an aspirant goes into the forest for a period of intensive meditation, often culminating in arhantship. It seems like it might be similar to oral transmission or empowerment.

Principle #8: The Motif of the Pillar or Pole (1.22)

The Pali Canon frequently presents the Buddha as sitting with his back against a pole or pillar. The monastics sit behind the Buddha, facing the lay followers, who sit in the east facing the Buddha. Thus, to the order the Buddha appears in the place of the rising sun, and to the lay followers in the place of the setting sun, foremost of the order, with the order as support. The motif of the pole or pillar is of course an allusion to the tree of awakening (the Bodhi tree, ficus religiosa), sitting under which the Buddha attained enlightenment. The Buddha also experienced his first meditative state while sitting as a child under a rose apple tree and passed between two sal trees (shorea robusta), while lying on the ground in accordance with Indian custom. He was also born under a sal tree. Similarly, the Buddha enjoined his disciples to live in the forest as a place of refuge. India has a long history of sacred trees and forests, along with many other societies. When the Buddha broke his vow of abstinence when he was on the verge of dying, he was seated under a tree, and Sujata, who offered him a bowl of rice gruel, believed he was the spirit of the tree to which she had come to make a food offering. The sacred tree is representative of the polar axis, like Mount Sumeru, through which communication with the divine worlds becomes possible. The pillars of Ashoka recur to this symbolism also, all of which represent the axis mundi – the cosmic axis, world axis, world pillar, columna cerului, centre of the world, or world tree, the omphalos (navel) of the world, and is a universal motif of the philosophia perennis with its origins in prehistoric shamanism.

Principle #9: The Path of the Householder (1.24)

Buddhism is not merely a spirituality of monastics, ascetics, and recluses. The Buddha had many disciples who were householders, and some of these disciples attained arhantship, including married, non-celibate householders (see Peter Masefield, Divine Revelation in Pali Buddhism [London: Allen & Unwin, 1986], p. 11). Thus, the Buddhist science of spirituality also includes the path of the householder and does not demand celibacy. The path of the householder is based primarily, but not exclusively, on the path of karma, i.e., removing negative karma through self-purification and acquiring merit through the cultivation of positive karma. Thus, Buddhism is not divorced from ordinary life and reveals itself as a pragmatic spiritual philosophy. This is shown by the Buddha’s summary of the perils and advantages of good and bad morality, which he designates failure and success in morality. The advantages of success in good morality, i.e., good karma, include wealth, reputation, confidence and assurance, dying unconfused, and rebirth in a spiritual world. It is clear from this and other passages that although the order organized itself in a communitarian way, the Buddha did not necessarily advocate the extension of that system of social organization to civil society. The Buddha did not oppose property and wealth in civil society, for example, although it is clear from other passages that he saw wealth as imposing special social obligations on the wealthy, and that he advocated social redistribution of property and wealth for the general good as well as personal financial responsibility. In fact, taking the Pali Canon as a whole, his view is remarkably modern.

Principle #10: Interaction Between Devas and People (1.26, 3.50, 6.11)

The word “deva” is usually translated as “god” or “deity,” but this is really a very unsatisfactory translation. The English word means “that which is called or invoked,” whereas the Sanskrit/Pali word means “shining,” referring to a celestial being of light, rather like Plato’s flying spheres. According to the PED, divine beings are splendid, mobile, beautiful, good, and luminous, as well as continuous with the life of humanity and all beings. They are beings who occupy higher worlds in the system of vertical extension, but it is clear from this passage that divine beings also coexist with humanity. Interestingly, Patna or Pataligama is one of the oldest continuously inhabited places on earth and the largest city in the world between 300 and 195 BCE. About 300 BCE, a hundred years after the death of the Buddha, its population was about 400,000. The text says thousands of divine beings invisibly inhabited this city, influencing the minds of people telepathically. This is the only place I know of that documents this aspect of the life of divine beings and people. This passage is interesting because it implies that the Buddha does not direct his teaching to humans only, but he also teaches spiritual beings.

The Buddha himself claimed to be aware of such divine beings and to have received teachings from them. We know from the thirty-one planes of existence that at least three spiritual realms have intercourse with human beings, including the Four Great Kings, Thirty-Three Gods, and Brahma realms, and that the ‘anti-gods’ appear to occupy the same plane as humans, viz., the one world ocean. Here we encounter another interesting bit of lore regarding the divine beings, for Ananda asks Anuruddha, a cousin of the Buddha and one of the five principal disciples, which divine beings he is aware of. Anuruddha was ranked as one of the foremost in the attainment of the divine eye. Anuruddha refers to sky devas and earth devas whose minds are earthbound in contrast to divine beings who are free from desirous attachment. The last category implies that divine beings can practise the teaching and attain realization, something that the Pali Canon implies throughout despite the dogma that one often hears that only human beings are capable of emancipation. The anti-gods of course are another example of earthbound devas, cast down from the realm of the Thirty-Three Gods due probably to their association with nature. The earth devas may refer to the Four Great Kings, the realm of what we refer to when we refer to the sprites, tree spirits, elves, fairies, pixies, gnomes, Japanese yokai, the Spanish and Latin-American duende, and various Slavic fairies, and other similar beings of all times and climes.

Principle #11: The Divine Eye (1.27)

The Pali Canon refers to the “divine eye” frequently. In the Pali Canon, this is one of the six gnoses. In this context, it refers to knowing the karmic destinations of others. However, it has a larger meaning as well. It is one of the three wisdoms, along with remembering past lives and the extinction of mental intoxicants. In the Maha Saccaka Sutta, the Buddha says he obtained the divine eye during the second watch of the night of his enlightenment. In the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, it is by means of the divine eye that the Buddha sees divine beings. The divine eye is also a universal symbolic motif or archetype.

Principle #12: The Buddha Was Not an Extreme Ascetic (1.30)

Although it is well-known that the Buddha rejected the extreme asceticism of the proto-Shaivite ascetics with whom he associated prior to his enlightenment, the Buddha is still regarded as a moderate ascetic, illustrated for example by the rigid rules of the Vinaya. Nevertheless, it is clear from the Pali Canon that the Buddha’s life, while simple, was not entirely deprived. There are numerous examples in the Pali Canon in which the Buddha and his entourage are invited to the home of a wealthy local person, usually either political figures or celebrities, to be entertained with a fine meal of choice hard and soft food, which they invariably ate to their satisfaction. Since the Buddha travelled extensively, this must have occurred fairly frequently. This fact stands as a useful corrective to the extreme view that the Buddha was severely ascetic, which the Buddha himself pointed out.

Principle #13: Evidence of Proto-tantra (1.33)

Although the Pali Canon is naturalistic, it does attest to the reality of psychic powers, and sometimes these appear as full-blown miracles, as in the story of the Buddha and his entourage teleporting themselves from one side of the Ganges to the other. This is especially ironic in view of the disparagement of miracles by the Buddha in the Patikaputta Sutta (1.4). Similarly, Jesus disparages those who seek for a sign, declaring that no sign will be given to them, yet the Gospels and the Church ascribe miracles to him as the proof of his divinity. The Buddha clearly saw that the belief in miracles leads to a superstitious reverence for the person rather than the one true miracle, the miracle of the teaching itself, which alone leads to emancipation. Nevertheless, the presence of miracles of this type in the Pali Canon is another indication of the development of proto-tantric literary motifs even in the early developmental period of Buddhism, much as Gnosticism appeared early in the development of the Christian tradition. One can, of course, derive valid teachings from such stories even if they are not literally or historically true.

Second Recitation Section

 Principle #14: The Mirror of Dharma (2.8)

The Mirror of the Teaching gives a method whereby the aspirant can realize for themselves the state of stream entry. The method is to cultivate absolute confidence in the Buddha, the Teaching, and the Order. This method must be differentiated from Christian faith, however, which is virtually defined as belief not based on proof, whereas the Buddha states that the “unwavering confidence” to which he refers is based on “inspection, leading onward, to be comprehended by the wise each one for himself.” Moreover, the morality of such an aspirant must be integral. By this method, one can know by oneself as a matter of certainty that one has achieved stream-entry.

Principle #15: Sati (2.12, 2.13)

The Pali word usually translated as “mindfulness” is sati. According to the PED, the etymological meaning of this word is “memory, to remember,” also: “recognition, consciousness, intentness of mind, wakefulness of mind, mindfulness, alertness, lucidity of mind, self-possession, conscience, self-consciousness.” The latter is disconcerting, given the Buddha’s apparent rejection of the self doctrine. Mindfulness is also associated with the recollection of past lives, which the Pali Canon strongly emphasizes throughout. Mindfulness begins with mindfulness of the body, then extended to feelings, mind, and mind-objects.

 Principle #16: A Prostitute Entertains the Buddha (2.14)

As we have seen, although the Buddha clearly lived a very modest and simple life, it was not without its luxuries, in the form of the choicest hard and soft food when prominent people in various communities entertained him and his monastics. It is also clear that the Buddha interacted with and taught women without distinction. A striking confirmation of both observations is the Buddha’s interaction with Ambapali, a wealthy courtesan who lived in the Licchavi city of Vesali, part of the Vajjian confederacy. The PED simply renders the word as “harlot.” Nonetheless, Ambapali was a wealthy and beautiful woman who was a royal courtesan and a prominent citizen of the town. The Buddha stayed in her mango grove, taught her, and went to her home for his morning meal, accompanied by his monastics. So much for the Vinaya rule against consorting with women, and a prostitute at that! The Buddha was neither a fundamentalist nor a prude. He consorted with women, taught them the teaching on an equal basis with men, and was not above enjoying a fine meal or the company of a beautiful prostitute. Ambapali made a gift of her mango grove to the order, which the Buddha gratefully accepted. Later she became an arhant.

Principle #17: Energy, the Life Force, Health, and Longevity (2.23, 3.40)

Here we encounter the first indication of the Buddha’s impending illness, characterized by diarrhea and sharp pains so severe as to suggest dying, some months before his death. The monastics remained at Ambapali’s park in Vesali, whereas the Buddha spent his last rainy season (July–October/November) in Beluva, a small town outside the southern gate of Vesali. What is most interesting about this passage, however, is the reference to energy and a “force of life” by which the Buddha was able to overcome his illness and postpone its effects so that he could take his leave of the order of monastics. The Buddha recommends the cultivation of energy throughout the Pali Canon, but only in a few places is it clear that this energy is a psychic power that has intrinsically healing and vital effects, comparable in fact to kundalini, which the Buddha may have experienced during his ascetic period. This aligns the Buddha’s teachings with kundalini yoga, the Tibetan concept of tumo, the Chinese concept of qi, etc.

Principle #18: Inner and Outer Dharma (2.25)

Here and elsewhere the Buddha indicates that his teaching has no “inner” and “outer,” that he has no “teacher’s fist” in respect of doctrines. This is widely interpreted to mean that Buddhism is exoteric, and that there is no esoteric teaching, no “secret wisdom,” such as Vajrayana, Tantra, Theosophy, etc. imply. However, this is not necessarily what the Buddha says. The Buddha says that he makes no distinction between inner and outer, teaching everything to everyone openly and without secrecy. Walshe himself recognizes this when he states that there is no contradiction here between this passage and the Simsapa Sutta. In the latter, the Buddha distinguishes between knowledge that leads to liberation and other forms of knowledge, “vast as the leaves in the simsapa forest,” that he does not teach. The latter is of the same order as the former. “Even so, bhikshus, much more is the direct knowledge that I have known, but that has not been taught. Few is that which has been taught.” The distinction that the Buddha is making appears to be between praxis and gnosis, the latter the goal of the former. Thus, the latter does in effect constitute secret wisdom, an untaught knowledge that is nonetheless the object of realization. What the Buddha is saying here is that he openly teaches the entirety of wisdom, but that he emphasizes the praxis first, because it is through the latter that one realizes the former. In the Simsapa Sutta, the praxis referred to is the Four Noble Truths. Clearly, the Buddha taught a great deal more than the Four Noble Truths. This is the only interpretation that reconciles and harmonizes all relevant passages and shows the importance of not selecting the passages based on sectarian or ideological prejudice but rather referring to and collating all relevant passages to arrive at a synthetic interpretation.

Principle #19: The Sangha Has No Leader (2.25)

In this significant passage, the Buddha makes it clear that he does not want to be succeeded as head of the order. In other passages the Buddha disdains being thought of as a “leader,” referring to himself as a friend amongst friends. Later in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, the Buddha states that the monastics should take the teaching as their head. Nevertheless, after the Buddha’s death the order appointed Mahakassapa as its leader at the First Buddhist Council, followed by Ananda. Since the appointment of a leader violated the Buddha’s dictum with respect to the organization of the order, one may question the legitimacy of the early Buddhist councils; in fact, their legitimacy did become an issue when the majority Mahasamghikas and the Sthaviras split following the Second Buddhist Council over questions concerning the rules of the Vinaya and the infallibility of the arhants.

Principle #20: The Dharma Is the Only Refuge (2.26)

The monastics are to live freely as individuals, within a cooperative order, with themselves and the teaching as their only retreat. Again, the reliance on the self is paradoxical considering the non-self doctrine. Some scholars believe that the formula of the Triple Jewel, i.e., taking refuge in the Buddha, the Teaching, and the Order is a later innovation that arose about the time of Ashoka (3rd cent. BCE), and that the original refuge formula referred to the Teaching only. The kind of order described by the Buddha is quite different from the hierarchical, authoritarian orders that we often see today. Although the Buddha did substitute respect for seniority for egalitarianism after his death, the order is still supposed to emphasize independent self-inquiry and free thought and consensus (failing which, majority rule), without excessive attachment to rules, rituals, or beliefs and without a singular leader. In this regard, Buddhism is exceptionally modern.

Third Recitation Section

Principle #21: The Four Roads to Power (3.3)

The Four Roads to Power are another example of magical or proto-tantric thinking in the Pali Canon. This practice is not aimed only at awakening or enlightenment but also the development of psychic powers, in this context, longevity. In Walshe’s translation, success in this practice would enable the practitioner to extend their life. Specifically, had Ananda taken the hint, he might have asked the Buddha to extend his life by this means and live another 20-40 years. However, Ananda – who is sometimes represented in the discourses as a bit dull – did not take the hint.

The Mahāparinibbāna Sutta does not explain the four roads to power in detail, but we can infer what they involve from the Viraddha Sutta. In that sutta, the Buddha describes the practice as the cultivation of four qualities: aspiration (chanda), right effort (viriya), right intention (citta), and discernment (vimamsa). These qualities are rooted in the development of concentration (samādhi) and effort-driven mental formations (padhana-sankhāra).

Principle #22: The Dharma, the Power of Truth, and Merit (3.7)

We see again a reference in the “dhamma of wondrous effect” to the universal idea that pervades the Pali Canon, especially the Jatakas, of the power of truth or the act of truth. This is a pan-Indian idea that we have discussed before, in which the ultimate truth of things itself exercises an influence that is beneficial and powerful. Mahatma Gandhi utilized the power of truth as a political principle, which he called satyagraha. This is also the principle by which one may acquire merit. The study, teaching, or recitation of teaching is itself held to be intrinsically efficacious and beneficial.

Principle #23: Conscious Dying (3.10)

According to this passage, the Buddha did not die as a matter of accident or involuntarily, he deliberately renounced the life principle, mindfully and with full awareness. This principle of conscious dying is also found amongst the Tibetan Buddhists, some of whose high lamas are reputedly able to intentionally will themselves to death. This is widely attested. Tibetan Buddhism calls this practice phowa. It is the highest of the Six Yogas of Naropa. Dzogchen meditation is the highest and greatest phowa practice.

Principle #24: Two Nirvanas: With and Without Remainder (3.20)

There is not one but two types of emancipation, the final “blowing out” or extinction of desirous attachment: one with and one without “remainder.” The arhant who attains emancipation ceases to produce new karma due to the absence of desirous attachment, but existing karma still needs to work itself out. This suggests that not all karma is destroyed by emancipation. If emancipation destroyed all karma, then one would die immediately. The Buddha appears to teach that emancipation destroys much karma, but not all. This view of emancipation also corresponds to the Buddha’s life. After he attained enlightenment, the Buddha remained in an altered state of consciousness for a week, after which he returned to normal consciousness. He continued to live, and the evidence of the Pali Canon is that he continued to engage in spiritual practice, including mindfulness of the breathing – this behaviour makes no sense if the Buddha were a perfected being. Rather, it implies a being who still needs and benefits from spiritual practice. Finally, the Buddha exhausted his remaining karma and renounced the last vestige of attachment to life. He passed, attaining the state of perfection called “final emancipation,” characterized by absolute transcendence.

Principle #25: The Eight Jhanas (3.33)

The meditative attainments described by the Buddha correspond to the eight form and formless realms in Buddhist cosmology:

1. Rapture and happiness born of seclusion.
2. Delight and happiness born of concentration, without applied or sustained thought.
3. Quiet, subtle, and pervasive happiness, a subtle enjoyment of a mindful and equanimous mind, without rapture.
4. Stability, stillness, and equanimity, without happiness.
5. Infinite space.
6. Infinite consciousness.
7. Nothingness.
8. Neither perception nor non-perception – opening to the non-dual.

Cessation of Feeling and Perception – This level is not attested in all sources and does not appear to correspond to complete transcendence.

Principle #26: The Buddha’s Enlightenment Experience (3.34)

This is a succinct statement of the Buddha’s monumental enlightenment experience, the reference to having just attained supreme enlightenment. This may be an early statement, there being no reference to the three watches of the night, consisting of the recollection of past lives, moral causality, and interconnectedness, respectively. Then at sunrise, he attained full enlightenment, characterized by the encounter with Mara and the cessation of desirous attachment. Here, however, the Buddha simply attains supreme enlightenment in a moment, suggesting the instantaneous theory of liberation. The place is Uruvela, located in the state of Bihar; the river – Neranjara –and the tree – the Goatherd’s Banyan tree. Goat herders, having gone to the shade of the Banyan tree, would sit there, hence the name.

Fourth Recitation Section

Principle #27: Continuity of Authentic Dharma (4.8)

After the death of the Buddha, the Buddha’s dialogues were remembered and recited by the order, especially by Ananda, who had been the Buddha’s personal attendant for the last 25 years of his life. Since only Buddhist arhants were permitted to participate in the First Buddhist Council, we are fortunate that Ananda, rather conveniently it seems, attained arhantship on the night before the council met, since without his participation many of the Buddha’s teachings would have been lost (one wonders if there were others not so fortunate who were not included). Thenceforth, the order would convene to rehearse the teachings of the Buddha based on the memories of the participants. Of course, as the participants passed on, the nature of this transmission changed. From being memories of the actual hearers, the recollections increasingly focused on questions of doctrine and codification. These traditions were handed down in this way for about 350 years. With the passage of time, it became increasingly important to verify the validity of these teachings.

It is therefore of interest to read in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta the criteria that were applied to verify the validity of the teachings that were passed down. The discourse identifies four primary sources of such teachings: the Buddha himself, but also the community of elders and teachers, a group of elders, and a single elder. The difference between the community of elders and a group of many elders is not clear to me, but the sources of authority are clearly the Buddha himself and the senior monastics, both as individuals and as a group.

So much for the admissible sources of teachings. The Buddha then cautions that any such claim is neither to be approved nor disapproved. Rather, “his words and expressions should be carefully noted and compared with the Suttas and reviewed in the light of the discipline [Vinaya].” If the teaching conforms to the doctrine or the discipline, it is to be accepted. If it does not conform, it is to be rejected. Thus, a continuous preservation of established tradition is guaranteed. The Buddha does not say who is sanctioned to verify the teachings. However, elsewhere he says that decisions are to be made by consensus of the order, or, failing consensus, by a majority.

A key point to note in this validation structure is that it is ideological, not historical. The primary criterion is not whether the words and circumstances of the teaching are historically accurate or not, but whether they conform to the established truth of the teaching based on previously accepted teachings. In other words, is there a reasonable continuity of teaching? Receiving a teaching from the Lord’s own lips is the first criterion, but not the only one. Thus, the accusation that is frequently made against the Mahayana sutras that they are false because they are ahistorical is irrelevant. The truth or falsity of the Mahayana sutras is based on the same criteria as the Pali suttas themselves, i.e., do they carry on the established teachings of the Buddha as handed down by tradition? In this context, therefore, do they conform to the Pali discourses, which are doubtless older than all but the oldest Mahayana sutras (ca. 1st century BCE). In the same way, the conformity of the Pali texts with each other must also be subject to the same scrutiny.

Principle #28: The Buddha’s Last Meal (4.18)

Maurice Walshe translates the Buddha’s final meal as “pig’s delight,” thus glossing over the obscurity of the Pali phrase, sukara-maddava, which may refer to pork or a kind of truffle. This story has led to the speculation that the Buddha died of food poisoning. However, Dr. Mettanando Bhikkhu, in his article, “How the Buddha Died,” suggests that food poisoning is an unlikely explanation of the Buddha’s sickness: first, because the Buddha felt the onset of the sickness very quickly, whereas food poisoning takes several hours to incubate, and second, because food poisoning does not cause the bloody diarrhea described in the discourse. He also rejects chemical poisoning, peptic ulcer, and haemorrhoids. Dr. Mettanando’s conclusion, based on the medical information in the discourse, is that the Buddha died of mesenteric infarction, a medical condition in which inflammation and injury of the small intestine result from inadequate blood supply – a common disease of the elderly that is lethal after 10 to 20 hours. Thus, it was not the final meal that killed the Buddha, but old age, although the size of the meal that the Buddha consumed may have been the trigger that brought about the second and final episode of the disease that we know from previous passages had begun to afflict the Buddha some months before. The cogency of Dr. Mettanando’s analysis also gives us confidence in the historical accuracy of the Mahaparinibbana Sutta.

Fifth Recitation Section

Principle #29: Women (5.9)

In “The Status of Women in Ancient India and the Pali Tradition” I discuss two distinct attitudes towards women in the Pali Canon. One attitude disparages women, grudgingly admits that women are capable of enlightenment, and admits women to the order on that basis, whereas the other makes no distinction of any kind between men and women, and admits women to the order, on an equal basis with men. As we have seen in our discussion of the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, the Buddha was not above enjoying a fine meal with a high-class prostitute. Here, however, we see another, quite incompatible attitude towards women: we should not look at them, we should not speak to them, and if they speak to us, we should be incredibly careful. The Buddha, of course, did speak to Ambapali. He delivered a talk on the teaching to her, which (the text states) instructed, inspired, fired, and delighted her. Of course, it is possible that the rest of his entourage remained discreetly silent throughout the meal. Perhaps. On the other hand, perhaps what we are seeing here is two opposed views of women that are mutually incompatible, as Bhikkhu Bodhi has suggested in his introduction to the Anguttara Nikaya. If we accept Bodhi’s view, then we must either believe that the Buddha held two incompatible views simultaneously; that he abandoned one view in favour of the other at some point in his career – perhaps when Ananda “convinced” him to allow women to be admitted to the order; or that one of these views is an imposition by anonymous misogynistic male monastic redactors of the Pali Canon. My view, which I consider the common sense one, is the last, since the first two views imply that the Buddha was unenlightened.

Principle #30: Who Was Ananda? (5.13)

It is ironic that Ananda, called the Guardian of the Teaching due to his photographic memory, was both the Buddha’s closest disciple and the least accomplished. In many ways, the discourses portray him as being a bit thick. Nevertheless, he served the Buddha faithfully as his personal attendant during the final 25 years of the Buddha’s mission, when the Buddha was 55 to 80 years old, and became the source of many discourses in the Pali Canon. Ananda and the Buddha were first cousins through their father, King Suddhodhana. The Buddha described him as kind, unselfish, popular, and thoughtful, as well as chief in conduct, service, and memory. Nevertheless, Ananda’s participation in the First Buddhist Council, convened by Mahakassapa, the Buddha’s disciple who was foremost in asceticism, was contested because he was only a stream enterer. The Pali Canon portrays Ananda as an imperfect, albeit sympathetic, figure, lonely and isolated following the death of the Buddha. Nevertheless, he rather conveniently attains emancipation on the eve of the convening of the First Buddhist Council, during which he was heavily criticized by the arhants for persuading the Buddha to ordain women, as well as his failure to ascertain from the Buddha which were the major and which were the minor rules of the Vinaya.

Principle #31: The Gradual versus the Instantaneous Path (5.27)

The reference to four grades of attainment recalls the discussion that one finds in various places between advocates of the gradual path and advocates of the non-gradual path. That is, is enlightenment a process of gradual development over time or is enlightenment attained instantaneously? The four grades are of course the attainments of stream enterer, once-returner, non-returner, and arhant, corresponding to the first four meditative attainments. It is, however, interesting that this path, the path of the arhant, which the Buddha doubtless taught, is not the path of the bodhisattva, which the Buddha doubtlessly followed, and the Pali Canon makes it clear that the ten powers of an arhant are not the same as the ten powers of a buddha. An essential difference, moreover, is that a bodhisattva/buddha is self-ordained, as in the original ascetic tradition, which appears later in the Brahma Net and Srimala discourses, whereas an arhant always receives the teaching from a buddha. The distinction between an arhant and a buddha became a point of contention following the Second Buddhist Council, which resulted in the great schism between the Mahasamghika majority, which subsequently developed into the Mahayana, and the Sthaviravada minority, which subsequently developed into the Hinayana, including what is now commonly referred to as the Theravada.

Sixth Recitation Section

Principle #32: The Dharma Retreat (6.1)

The imminent death of the Buddha obviously raised the problem of how the order should organize itself after the Buddha’s death. In these passages, the Buddha addresses this issue. Primarily, the Buddha states that the teaching and the training – the Dharma-Vinaya, which is the name the Buddha always gave to his teaching – is to be the teacher after his death. In addition, whereas during the Buddha’s lifetime the order was egalitarian, in which all members of the community addressed each other – even the Buddha – as “friend,” rather like the Quakers, after his death, the Buddha declared that the order should be organized as a decentralized hierarchy based on seniority, in which the junior monastics would address the senior monastics as “Venerable” or “Reverend.” Some scholars also hold that the formula of the Triple Jewel, i.e., the Buddha, the Teaching, and the Order, originated with Ashoka (3rd cent. BCE), whereas the original formula was singular. That is to say, the original Buddhists took their refuge in the Teaching alone.

Principle #33: The Minor Rules of the Vinaya (6.3)

Contrary to the fundamentalism of many followers of the Vinaya today, the Buddha further declared that the “lesser and minor” rules of the Vinaya might be abolished. Unfortunately, when the Buddha said this, it did not occur to Ananda to ask the Buddha which of the rules were major and which were minor, so the First Buddhist Council, led by Mahakassapa, the so-called Father of the Order, took the conservative approach of abolishing none of them. There are six Vinayas known today – that of the Theravada, Mahasamghika, Mahisasaka, Dharmaguptaka, Sarvastivada, and Mulasarvastivada, three of which are still followed by the Theravada, East Asian Buddhists, and Tibetan Buddhists, in addition to the bodhisattva precepts, followed in Japan, but the scholarly consensus seems to be that the Mahasamghika Vinaya is the oldest. The Mahasamghika subsequently developed into the Mahayana. Although many religious Buddhists strongly emphasize the rules of the Vinaya, the original Buddhist order did not follow any fixed set of rules. These developed gradually in response to specific situations. The Buddha was quite flexible about the observance of rules. For example, according to the Vinaya itself the rules may be suspended if required to do so for reasons of health or to prevent a crime. The Buddha frequently warns the monastics against excessive attachment to rules, rituals, and beliefs. A Vajjian monk complained to the Buddha that he could not stand such training with so many rules and regulations. Far from reprimanding him, the Buddha then asked him whether he could stand the threefold training in higher morality, higher thought, and higher insight. In Mahayana, these became the three higher trainings. Once proficient in this, lust, malice, and delusion would be abandoned, and no wrong deed would be performed without needing to follow the rules to the letter. The implication, then, is that slavish adherence to the letter of the rules is not required to attain emancipation. Mahakassapa himself regretted the increase in the number of rules. Interestingly, the Vajjians also brought about the great schism in the Buddhist order during the Second Buddhist Council on this question of rules. The core of the Vinaya is the pattimokkha. When one analyzes these rules, one finds about ten essential rules, similar in fact to the bodhisattva precepts. You can find them in various places online grouped into rules that entail automatic expulsion from the order for life (parajikas), rules requiring an initial and subsequent meeting of the order (disesa) that result in a period of probation, indefinite rules (aniyata) based on acknowledgement of the offence, rules entailing confession with forfeiture (nissagiyya), rules entailing confession (paccitiyya), violations that must be verbally acknowledged (patidesaniya), and training rules (sekhiyavatta). The Brahma Net Sutra (mid-5th century) is one of the oldest summaries of the bodhisattva precepts. The ten major bodhisattva precepts are:

1. Not to kill or encourage others to kill.
2. Not to steal or encourage others to steal.
3. Not to engage in licentious acts or encourage others to do so.
4. Not to use false words and speech, or encourage others to do so.
5. Not to trade or sell alcoholic beverages or encourage others to do so.
6. Not to broadcast the misdeeds or faults of the Buddhist assembly, nor encourage others to do so.
7. Not to praise oneself and denigrate others, or encourage others to do so.
8. Not to be stingy, or encourage others to be so.
9. Not to harbor anger or encourage others to be angry.
10. Not to speak ill of the Buddha, the Teaching or the Order (lit. the Triple Jewel) or encourage others to do so.

In addition, there are forty-eight minor rules, which are not always regarded as mandatory. Note that the rules do not expressly forbid the consumption of alcohol, only trade. Mrs. Rhys Davids argues in the introduction to her translation of the Khuddaka-Patha that it is not the “sensible use” of liquors, but rather the habit, frequency, and occasions for indulging in them, that was originally prohibited. In any case, it is clear that the Vinaya regards it as a relatively minor offence, being the 51st of the ninety-two pacittiyas, requiring confession only, preceded by “not to witness military activities” and followed by “not to tickle.”  We know of course from the first sutta of the Digha Nikaya, the Supreme Net (Brahmajala Sutta), that the Buddha regarded ethical and moral rules to be “merely profane (mundane), merely ethical (practices),” a statement that may surprise some religious.

Principle #34: Subhadda and the First Buddhist Council (6.20)

Subhadda was the last monastic ordained by the Buddha. We know that the First Buddhist Council was contentious, and that this contentiousness persisted in later councils too. In any case, Subhadda’s suggestion that the rules might be relaxed is what precipitated the First Buddhist Council.

Mahakassapa, regarded as foremost in asceticism, convened the First Buddhist Council after the Buddha’s death, even though Buddha said that the order should have no leader other than the teaching. Presumably, Mahakassapa also brought an ascetic orientation to the council and, as with all organizations, had both supporters and detractors. Indeed, it is clear from the Cullavagga that the council was sponsored by Mahakassapa’s group, and that others were excluded.

I already talked about how the “arhants” at this council castigated Ananda for convincing the Buddha to ordain women and for failing to clarify which were the major and minor rules of the Vinaya. Indeed, so deep was the misogyny of these men that they castigated Ananda for allowing women to view the Buddha’s body after his passing on, which (they declared) their tears defiled. Presumably, Ananda too had his supporters and detractors, so we see here how the politics of the First Buddhist Council may have played out. It is an open question whether all of the monastics present at the First Council were men. Dr. Chatsumarn Kabilsingh, in her article, “The History of the Bhikkuni Sangha,” argues that female monastics were also present.

Revised May 25, 2025

Reference

Nakamura, Hajime (2005). Gotama Buddha: A Biography Based on the Most Reliable Texts. Trans. Gaynor Sekimori. Vol. 2.  Tokyo: Kosei. http://www.scribd.com/doc/105684143/Gotama-Buddha-Vol-2-Nakamura-Haijime-Trs-Sekimori-Gaynor-2005#scribd.

Notes

If you are interested in learning more about the First Buddhist Council in the primary sources, you can read the 11th chapter of the Cullavagga in the Vinaya section of the Pali Canon here: https://archive.org/stream/p3sacredbooksofb20londuoft#page/392/mode/2up.

1. deleted

2. “Subhadda’s questions seem almost malicious. Later, after the Buddha’s death, it was Subhadda’s indiscreet words that led to the decision to hold the First Council” (trans. Gaynor Sekimiri, Gotama Buddha: A Biography Based on the Most Reliable Texts, Vol. 2 (Tokyo: Kosei, 2005), p. 150).

Notes

1. According to the Jataka, Queen Maya travelled from King Suddhodana’s estate in Kapilavastu to her parent’s place in Devadaha “when she was far gone in pregnancy.” The distance from Kapilavastu to Devadaha is approximately 145 km. Assuming she travelled with an entourage, some of whom were on foot, it is unlikely that the queen travelled much faster than about 5km/hour. Assuming she travelled 7 hours per day, she would have covered no more than 35 km per day, making this a 4 day trip or, in round numbers, the better part of a week. It seems unlikely that she would have waited much longer than eight or eight and a half months into her pregnancy to return to her family for the birth (this is still the custom in Nepal – personal communication). The texts report that when she reached Lumbini at the heat of the day, about 35 km west of Devadaha (a day’s journey), the Sal trees were in full blossom. It appears that she was overcome by the exertion of the trip, and merely a day away from her family’s home, gave birth to the Buddha in Lumbini Grove. The Jatakas also state that the Buddha was conceived during the Full Moon of the eighth lunar month (June-July), under the constellation of uttarasalha. Thus, the “due date” of the Buddha’s birth was March-April. The detail that the sal trees were in full blossom implies a later rather than an earlier date. According to Omesh Bajpai et al. (Omesh Bajpai, Anoop Kumar, Ashish K. Mishra, Nayan Sahu , Soumit K. Behera and Lal Babu Chaudhary , 2012. Phenological Study of Two Dominant Tree Species in Tropical Moist Deciduous Forest from the Northern India. International Journal of Botany, 8: 66-72), “The formation of flower buds starts in the month of March which converted into matured flowers in April.” However, it is quite certain from the foregoing that the Buddha was not born on the Full Moon day of May.

2. Ajahn Brahm suggests that “concentration” is a bad translation of samadhi, for which he prefers the English word “stillness” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-QlSW5KwxI). According to Brahm, samadhi should never be translated by the word “concentration.” Samadhi is both a Sanskrit and a Pali word. According to the Spoken Sanskrit dictionary (http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?page=1), “samadhi” has no less than 30 meanings, including: justification of a statement, aggregate, putting together, intense application or fixing the mind on, set, bringing into harmony, joint or a particular position of the neck, settlement, adjustment, joining with, intense absorption or a kind of trance, sanctuary or tomb of a saint, attention, joining or combining with, whole, accomplishment, trance, conclusion, proof, assent, concentration of mind, intentness, union, concentration of the thoughts, profound or abstract meditation, agreement, intense contemplation of any particular object, setting to rights, completion, deep concentration, meditation. Can it be that a word that is as rich as to have 30 different meanings can never be translated by any word other than “stillness”? The Indo-European root of stillness is *stel, meaning “to put” or “stand” (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=still&allowed_in_frame=0). If one looks at the different translations of the Sanskrit word, one can pick out several threads of meaning, including ideas of putting together, intense application, and the mind. Interestingly, these three threads of meaning correspond exactly to the three elements of which the word “samadhi” is etymologically constructed: sam + a + dhi. The word prefix sam, root of the English word “sum,” means “with, together, completely, absolutely.” The central A means “near, toward, up to” (http://www.learnsanskrit.org/start/words/prefixes), implying the vector. Finally, the Sanskrit root dhi is a fundamental Sanskrit root the meanings of which include “understanding, reflection, religious thought, mind, design, intelligence, opinion, meditation, imagination, notion, intellect, speech, thought,” and “intellect” as well as “put” or “place” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhi_(Hindu_thought)). Going on to Pali, the Pali-English Dictionary has “concentration; a concentrated, self-collected, intent state of mind and meditation.” Tamilcube (http://dictionary.tamilcube.com/pali-dictionary.aspx), an online Pali-English dictionary, has “composure, concentration, trance, meditation, one-pointedness, agreement, peace, reconciliation, tranquility, self-concentration, calm.” If we look again at the etymology, we can see that the essential idea is that of the will putting the whole mind into a state of complete, harmonious, balanced self-awareness by means of intense concentration. We can see here why Brahm thinks that “stillness” is a good translation of samadhi. The technical term for this is hypomotility, as I have discussed in my paper on shamanic techniques for the induction of ecstasy (see https://palisuttas.com/2013/04/18/deconstructing-tantra/). This is one of the primary techniques of all yogic and shamanic practice. Unfortunately, as a universal translation for samadhi, “stillness” does not quite cut it, however, for samadhi is not merely a noun, it is, primarily, a verb. Thus, it is the eighth and highest “limb” of the Noble Eightfold Path, generally translated as Right Concentration. What is the action of “stillness”? The verb “to still” is certainly valid, but what is it that stills? It is the mind, and, in particular, the will, which is the force, power, energy of concentrated intention or attention, the kinetic power of awareness that is the source of enlightenment and illusion, whereby the state of stillness is attained, and this is the primary meaning of samadhi. Stillness is not passive. “Stillness” is altogether too Chinese to stand as a universal translation of the Indian Buddhist concept of samadhi, but is certainly included in its range of meanings as one essential implication.

3. All of the patimokkha (pratimoksha) rules may be reduced to eight essential principles, as follows:

1. Not to indulge in lust or the appearance of lust (par 1, sam 1-5, ani 1-2, pac 6-7, 21-30, 43-45, 67, pat 1-2)

2. Not to take what is not given (par 2, nis 1-30, pac 14-15, 19, 31, 46-47, 58-60, 82-92, pat 3)

3. Not to kill or cause harm or hurt to beings (par 3, sam 6-7, pac 10-11, pac 16-18, 20, 48-50, 56-57, 61-62, 74-75)

4. Not to lie or gossip or use speech to cause harm or hurt to beings (par 4, 8, sam 8-13, pac 1-4, pac 8-9, 12-13, 63-64, 66, 68, 71-73, 76-81, pat 4)

5. Not to eat except when and as necessary to maintain health (pac 31-42)

6. Not to frequent drinking places or indulge in drunkenness (pac 51)

7. Not to elevate or indulge oneself (pac 52-55, 87)

8. Not to be a cause of any of these things.

These eight principles constitute the so-called “higher morality” or “higher training,” sans the lesser and minor rules that the Buddha said could be abolished. They are not “lesser” than the Vinaya, but identical with its essence. Consequently, anyone who follows these rules with bodhicitta is no different than an ordained person. Therefore, one who takes the bodhisattva vows is ordained.