Some speak with malicious intent,
while others speak set on truth.
When disputes come up a sage does not get involved,
which is why they’ve no barrenness at all.

How can you transcend your own view
when you’re led by preference, dogmatic in belief?
Inventing your own undertakings,
you’d speak according to your notion.

Some, unasked, tell others
of their own precepts and vows.
They have an ignoble nature, say those who are skilled,
since they speak on themselves of their own accord.

A mendicant, peaceful, quenched,
never boasts “thus am I” of their precepts.
They have a noble nature, say those who are skilled,
who have no pretensions about anything in the world.

For one who formulates and creates teachings,
and promotes them despite their defects,
if they see an advantage for themselves,
they become dependent on that, relying on unstable peace.

It’s not easy to get over dogmatic views
adopted after judging among the teachings.
That’s why, among all these dogmas, a person
rejects one teaching and takes up another.

The cleansed one has no formulated view
at all in the world about the different realms.
Having given up illusion and conceit,
by what path would they go? They are not involved.

For one who is involved gets embroiled in disputes about teachings—
but how to dispute with the uninvolved? About what?
For picking up and putting down is not what they do;
they have shaken off all views in this very life.

The Minor Discourses

|_【5】 Anthology of Discourses

|__IV. The Chapter of Eights

Snp4.3 Eight on Malice

Translations [3]

English

Việt Ngữ

पाळिभासा (Pāli)

Reference

Translations [3]

English

Việt Ngữ

पाळिभासा (Pāli)

Reference

Commentaries [0]