________________
VII, 5, 5.
DISSENSIONS IN THE ORDER.
269
• Who then, Lord, [comes under the first head ?)'
'In case, Upali, a Bhikkhu gives out what is not Dhamma as Dhamma, directing his opinion and his approval and his pleasure and his intention? (to what he says and does); and in belief that the doctrine (he propounds) is against the Dhamma, and that the schism resulting therefrom would be against the Dhamma?; and makes publication thereofs, giving out tickets, and saying, “Take this (voting-ticket): approve this (opinion)". This is Dhamma; this is Vinaya; this is the teaching of the Master,"-a'man, Upâli, who thus divides the Samgha, is irretrievably doomed to remain for a Kalpa in states of suffering and woe.'
[The above paragraph is then repeated in full, reading successively for 'in belief that the doctrine (he propounds) is against the Dhamma, and the schism resulting therefrom would be against the Dhamma,' each of the following clauses :
()... in belief that the doctrine is against the Dhamma, but that the schism resulting therefrom would be in accordance with the Dhamma ...
1 Vinidhaya ditthim, vinidhaya khantim, vinidhaya rukim, vinidhaya bhavam. These expressions all recur in the Sutta-vibhanga, Pakittiya I, 2, and following sections, where the question at issue is whether an erroneous statement is, or is not, a conscious lie. The meaning of the whole is clear, though each of the words is used in a rather uncommon sense. On khanti, compare ditthe sute khantim a kubbamâno (of the Arahat) at Sutta Nipâta IV, 13, 3, and the standing use of the verb khamati, at the end of the Kammavâ kâs.
Bhede adhamma-ditthi; literally, 'in the schism (there will be) doctrine that is against the Dhamma.'
? Anussaveti, which is here equivalent to the technical 'publication required in the English law of libel and slander.
• See the note above on VII, 4, 1.
Digitized by
Digitized by Google
