236 LESSON 23 04 2011 Thana Sutta Traits Free ONLINE eNΔlandΔ Research
and Practice UNIVERSITY and BUDDHIST GOOD NEWS letter to VOTE for BSP ELEPHANT for Social Transformation and
Economic Emancipation to attain Ultimate Bliss-Through http://sarvajan.ambedkar.org
THE 
BUDDHIST
ONLINE GOOD NEWS LETTER
LESSON 236
Thana Sutta: Traits
“Monks,
these four traits may be known by means of four [other] traits. Which four?
“It’s
through living together that a person’s virtue may be known, and then only
after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one
who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.
“It’s
through dealing with a person that his purity may be known, and then only after
a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is
inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.
“It’s
through adversity that a person’s endurance may be known, and then only after a
long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is
inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.
“It’s
through discussion that a person’s discernment may be known, and then only
after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one
who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.
[1] “‘It’s through living together that a
person’s virtue may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short
period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is
discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus was it said. And in
reference to what was it said?
“There
is the case where one individual, through living with another, knows this: ‘For
a long time this person has been torn, broken, spotted, splattered in his
actions. He hasn’t been consistent in his actions. He hasn’t practiced
consistently with regard to the precepts. He is an unprincipled person, not a
virtuous, principled one.’ And then there is the case where one individual,
through living with another, knows this: ‘For a long time this person has been
untorn, unbroken, unspotted, unsplattered in his actions. He has been
consistent in his actions. He has practiced consistently with regard to the
precepts. He is a virtuous, principled person, not an unprincipled one.’
“‘It’s
through living together that a person’s virtue may be known, and then only
after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one
who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not
discerning’: Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.
[2] “‘It’s through dealing with a person
that his purity may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short
period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is
discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus was it said. And in
reference to what was it said?
“There
is the case where one individual, through dealing with another, knows this:
‘This person deals one way when one-on-one, another way when with two, another
way when with three, another way when with many. His earlier dealings do not
jibe with his later dealings. He is impure in his dealings, not pure.’ And then
there is the case where one individual, through dealing with another, knows
this: ‘The way this person deals when one-on-one, is the same way he deals when
with two, when with three, when with many. His earlier dealings jibe with his
later dealings. He is pure in his dealings, not impure.’
“‘It’s
through dealing with a person that his purity may be known, and then only after
a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is
inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus
was it said. And in reference to this was it said.
[3] “‘It’s through adversity that a
person’s endurance may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short
period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is
discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus was it said. And in
reference to what was it said?
“There
is the case where a person, suffering loss of relatives, loss of wealth, or
loss through disease, does not reflect: ‘That’s how it is when living together
in the world. That’s how it is when gaining a personal identity.[1]
When there is living in the world, when there is the gaining of a personal
identity, these eight worldly conditions spin after the world, and the world
spins after these eight worldly conditions: gain, loss, status, disgrace,
censure, praise, pleasure, & pain.’ Suffering loss of relatives, loss of
wealth, or loss through disease, he sorrows, grieves, & laments, beats his
breast, becomes distraught. And then there is the case where a person,
suffering loss of relatives, loss of wealth, or loss through disease, reflects:
‘That’s how it is when living together in the world. That’s how it is when
gaining a personal identity. When there is living in the world, when there is
the gaining of a personal identity, these eight worldly conditions spin after
the world, and the world spins after these eight worldly conditions: gain,
loss, status, disgrace, censure, praise, pleasure, & pain.’ Suffering loss
of relatives, loss of wealth, or loss through disease, he does not sorrow,
grieve, or lament, does not beat his breast or become distraught.
“‘It’s
through adversity that a person’s endurance may be known, and then only after a
long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is
inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus
was it said. And in reference to this was it said.
[4] “‘It’s through discussion that a
person’s discernment may be known, and then only after a long period, not a
short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one
who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning’: Thus was it said. And in
reference to what was it said?
“There
is the case where one individual, through discussion with another, knows this:
‘From the way this person rises to an issue, from the way he applies [his
reasoning], from the way he addresses a question, he is dull, not discerning.
Why is that? He does not make statements that are deep, tranquil, refined,
beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. He
cannot declare the meaning, teach it, describe it, set it forth, reveal it,
explain it, or make it plain. He is dull, not discerning.’ Just as
if a man with good eyesight standing on the shore of a body of water were to
see a small fish rise. The thought would occur to him, ‘From the rise of this
fish, from the break of its ripples, from its speed, it is a small fish, not a
large one.’ In the same way, one individual, in discussion with another, knows
this: ‘From the way this person rises to an issue, from the way he applies [his
reasoning], from the way he addresses a question… he is dull, not
discerning.’
“And
then there is the case where one individual, through discussion with another,
knows this: ‘From the way this person rises to an issue, from the way he
applies [his reasoning], from the way he addresses a question, he is discerning,
not dull. Why is that? He makes statements that are deep, tranquil, refined,
beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. He can
declare the meaning, teach it, describe it, set it forth, reveal it, explain
it, & make it plain. He is discerning, not dull.’ Just as if a man with
good eyesight standing on the shore of a body of water were to see a large fish
rise. The thought would occur to him, ‘From the rise of this fish, from the
break of its ripples, from its speed, it is a large fish, not a small one.’ In
the same way, one individual, in discussion with another, knows this: ‘From the
way this person rises to an issue, from the way he applies [his reasoning],
from the way he addresses a question… he is discerning, not dull.’
“‘It’s
through discussion that a person’s discernment may be known, and then only
after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one
who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not
discerning’: Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.
“These,
monks, are the four traits that may be known by means of these four [other]
traits.”
POLITICS
is SACRED with GOOD GOVERNANCE
Mayawati: why no Scheduled
Caste on Lokpal panel?
Uttar
Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati on Friday criticised the Centre, the Congress
and civil society for not including any SC member in the Jan Lokpal Bill
drafting committee.
At
a press conference here, Ms. Mayawati invoked Dr. Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar
and his contribution to the socio-economic uplift of the downtrodden sections
to drive home her point. Even after 63 years of independence, was not a single
SC member found suitable to be on the drafting panel?
The
panel comprises Anna Hazare, Santosh Hegde, Arvind Kejriwal, Shanti Bhushan,
Prashant Bhushan (civil society members) and Union Ministers Pranab Mukherjee,
P. Chidambaram, Kapil Sibal, M. Veerappa Moily and Salman Khursheed (from the
government side).
In
a pointed reference to Gandhian Anna Hazare, Ms. Mayawati said he came from a
State, which has had a history of struggle for the socio-economic development
of the SCs and the STs. Dr. Ambedkar was also from Maharashtra. βMr. Hazare
should have considered these aspects before naming the civil society members.β
The
βmistakeβ should be rectified by including an SC member from a non-political
background.
Referring
to the controversy surrounding the Bhushans but without naming them, Ms.
Mayawati suggested that the panel distance itself from members whose integrity
was in doubt.