Ten grounds Vs Eighteen grounds of a schism

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
D1W1
Posts: 440
Joined: Sat May 30, 2015 5:52 am

Ten grounds Vs Eighteen grounds of a schism

Post by D1W1 » Sat Jun 16, 2018 5:09 pm

Hi guys,

I find there are different basis of what is considered a schism in the Sangha.

First one is based on Eighteen grounds:

There is the case where they explain not-Dhamma as ‘Dhamma’ … Dhamma as ‘not-Dhamma’ … not-Vinaya as ‘Vinaya’ … Vinaya as ‘not-Vinaya’ … what was not spoken, not mentioned by the Tathāgata as ‘spoken, mentioned by the Tathāgata’ … what was spoken, mentioned by the Tathāgata as ‘not spoken, not mentioned by the Tathāgata’ … what was not regularly practiced by the Tathāgata as ‘regularly practiced by the Tathāgata’ … what was regularly practiced by the Tathāgata as ‘not regularly practiced by the Tathāgata’ … what was not formulated by the Tathāgata as ‘formulated by the Tathāgata’ … what was formulated by the Tathāgata as ‘not formulated by the Tathāgata’ … a non-offense as ‘an offense’ … an offense as ‘a non-offense’ … a light offense as ‘a heavy offense’ … a heavy offense as ‘a light offense’ … an offense leaving a remainder as ‘an offense leaving no remainder’ … an offense leaving no remainder as ‘an offense leaving a remainder’ … a serious offense as ‘a not-serious offense’ … a not-serious offense as ‘a serious offense.’

On the basis of these eighteen grounds they pull away, pull apart, they perform a separate uposatha, perform a separate Invitation, perform a separate Community transaction. To this extent the Community is split.” — Cv.VII.5.2
(https://info-buddhism.com/sangha_schism.html)


The second is based on Ten grounds:

“Sir, they speak of ‘schism in the Saṅgha’. How is schism in the Saṅgha defined?” “Upāli, it’s when a mendicant explains what is not the teaching as the teaching, and what is the teaching as not the teaching. They explain what is not the training as the training, and what is the training as not the training. They explain what was not spoken and stated by the Realized One as spoken and stated by the Realized One, and what was spoken and stated by the Realized One as not spoken and stated by the Realized One. They explain what was not practiced by the Realized One as practiced by the Realized One, and what was practiced by the Realized One as not practiced by the Realized One. They explain what was not prescribed by the Realized One as prescribed by the Realized One, and what was prescribed by the Realized One as not prescribed by the Realized One.

On these ten grounds they split off and go their own way. They perform legal acts autonomously and recite the monastic code autonomously. That is how schism in the Saṅgha is defined.
(https://suttacentral.net/an10.37/en/sujato)

The question is, why are they different, which one is the correct one? Thanks.

User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 4149
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Ban Sri Pradu Rubber Forest, Phrao, Chiangmai

Re: Ten grounds Vs Eighteen grounds of a schism

Post by Dhammanando » Sat Jun 16, 2018 6:01 pm

D1W1 wrote:
Sat Jun 16, 2018 5:09 pm
The question is, why are they different, which one is the correct one? Thanks.
One is preserved in the the Anguttara Nikāya's Book of the Tens and so perforce must comprise ten items; the other is in the Vinaya Piṭaka, where it is not subject to such a numerical constraint.

Both lists are correct, but in the list of eighteen, items 11 to 18 are to be understood as an expanded enumeration of items 9 and 10 common to both lists.

D1W1
Posts: 440
Joined: Sat May 30, 2015 5:52 am

Re: Ten grounds Vs Eighteen grounds of a schism

Post by D1W1 » Tue Jun 19, 2018 4:38 pm

Thanks Bhante for your prompt reply, sorry for the late reply.

Looking at the translation of the last sentence, there are three different versions of translation.

Bhikkhu Thanissaro:
On the basis of....To this extent the Community is split.
(https://info-buddhism.com/sangha_schism.html)

Bhikkhu Sujato:
On the basis of....That is how schism in the Saṅgha is defined.
(https://suttacentral.net/an10.37/en/sujato)

Bhikkhu Bodhi:
On the basis of....It is in this way, Upali, that there is schism in the Sangha.
(http://lirs.ru/lib/sutra/The_Numerical_ ... i,2012.pdf) - Page 1390.

Can you please share your thought, which one do you think is the most accurate translation? :anjali:

User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 4149
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Ban Sri Pradu Rubber Forest, Phrao, Chiangmai

Re: Ten grounds Vs Eighteen grounds of a schism

Post by Dhammanando » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:23 pm

D1W1 wrote:
Tue Jun 19, 2018 4:38 pm
Can you please share your thought, which one do you think is the most accurate translation? :anjali:
te imehi dasahi vatthūhi

Thanissaro: On the basis of these eighteen grounds...
Bodhi & Sujāto: On these ten grounds...

All three translators have treated the case as ablative in form but locative in meaning. To do that is to favour an exceptional and esoteric possibility over a normal-practice one. I would treat it as a common-or-garden ablative of cause:

"Because of these ten grounds..."

For āveṇi I prefer Thanissaro and Bodhi’s “separately” to Sujāto’s “autonomously”. The latter adds a degree of complexity that is not present in the Pali term.

The other differences seem to be matters of phrasing rather than meaning.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AgarikaJ, Baidu [Spider], bksubhuti, one_awakening, paul, retrofuturist, thang, Yahoo [Bot] and 99 guests