The Simile of the Quail · Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato, SuttaCentral
Parallels & more translations on SuttaCentral
⚠ Glossing did not finish. The original text is shown below.
‘yehi so puriso bandhanehi baddho na sakkoti ekaṁ agārakaṁ oluggaviluggaṁ kākātidāyiṁ naparamarūpaṁ pahāya, ekaṁ khaṭopikaṁ oluggaviluggaṁ naparamarūpaṁ pahāya, ekissā kumbhiyā dhaññasamavāpakaṁ naparamarūpaṁ pahāya, ekaṁ jāyikaṁ naparamarūpaṁ pahāya kesamassuṁ ohāretvā kāsāyāni vatthāni acchādetvā agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajituṁ; tañhi tassa abalaṁ bandhanaṁ, dubbalaṁ bandhanaṁ, pūtikaṁ bandhanaṁ, asārakaṁ bandhanan’ti; sammā nu kho so, udāyi, vadamāno vadeyyā”ti? “No hetaṁ, bhante. Yehi so, bhante, puriso bandhanehi baddho, na sakkoti ekaṁ agārakaṁ oluggaviluggaṁ kākātidāyiṁ naparamarūpaṁ pahāya, ekaṁ khaṭopikaṁ oluggaviluggaṁ naparamarūpaṁ pahāya, ekissā kumbhiyā dhaññasamavāpakaṁ naparamarūpaṁ pahāya, ekaṁ jāyikaṁ naparamarūpaṁ pahāya kesamassuṁ ohāretvā kāsāyāni vatthāni acchādetvā agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajituṁ;
for that man, those bonds are weak, feeble, rotten, and insubstantial?” “No, sir. For that man,
tañhi tassa balavaṁ bandhanaṁ, daḷhaṁ bandhanaṁ, thiraṁ bandhanaṁ, apūtikaṁ bandhanaṁ, thūlo, kaliṅgaro”ti. “Evameva kho, udāyi, idhekacce moghapurisā ‘idaṁ pajahathā’ti mayā vuccamānā te evamāhaṁsu: ‘kiṁ panimassa appamattakassa oramattakassa adhisallikhatevāyaṁ samaṇo’ti? Te tañceva nappajahanti, mayi ca appaccayaṁ upaṭṭhāpenti. Ye ca bhikkhū sikkhākāmā tesaṁ taṁ, udāyi, hoti balavaṁ bandhanaṁ, daḷhaṁ bandhanaṁ, thiraṁ bandhanaṁ, apūtikaṁ bandhanaṁ, thūlo, kaliṅgaro.
they are a strong, firm, stout bond, a tie that has not rotted, and a heavy yoke.” “In the same way, when some futile people are told by me to give something up, they say, ‘What, such a trivial, trifling thing as this? This ascetic is much too strict!’ They don’t give it up, and they nurse bitterness toward me; and for the mendicants who want to train, that becomes a strong, firm, stout bond, a tie that has not rotted, and a heavy yoke.
Seyyathāpi, udāyi, gahapati vā gahapatiputto vā aḍḍho mahaddhano mahābhogo, nekānaṁ nikkhagaṇānaṁ cayo, nekānaṁ dhaññagaṇānaṁ cayo, nekānaṁ khettagaṇānaṁ cayo, nekānaṁ vatthugaṇānaṁ cayo, nekānaṁ bhariyagaṇānaṁ cayo, nekānaṁ dāsagaṇānaṁ cayo, nekānaṁ dāsigaṇānaṁ cayo; so ārāmagataṁ bhikkhuṁ passeyya sudhotahatthapādaṁ manuññaṁ bhojanaṁ bhuttāviṁ sītāya chāyāya nisinnaṁ adhicitte yuttaṁ. Tassa evamassa: ‘sukhaṁ vata bho sāmaññaṁ, ārogyaṁ vata bho sāmaññaṁ. So vatassaṁ yohaṁ kesamassuṁ ohāretvā kāsāyāni vatthāni acchādetvā agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajeyyan’ti. So sakkuṇeyya nekāni nikkhagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni dhaññagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni khettagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni vatthugaṇāni pahāya, nekāni bhariyagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni dāsagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni dāsigaṇāni pahāya kesamassuṁ ohāretvā kāsāyāni vatthāni acchādetvā agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajituṁ.
Suppose there was a rich householder or householder’s child, affluent, and wealthy. He had a vast amount of gold ingots, grain, fields, lands, wives, and male and female bondservants. He’d see a mendicant sitting in meditation in the cool shade, their hands and feet well washed after eating a satisfying meal. He’d think, ‘The ascetic life is so very pleasant! The ascetic life is so very healthy! If only I could shave off my hair and beard, dress in ocher robes, and go forth from the lay life to homelessness.’ And he is able to give up his vast amount of gold ingots, grain, fields, lands, wives, and male and female bondservants in order to go forth.
Yo nu kho, udāyi, evaṁ vadeyya: ‘yehi so gahapati vā gahapatiputto vā bandhanehi baddho, sakkoti nekāni nikkhagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni dhaññagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni khettagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni vatthugaṇāni pahāya, nekāni bhariyagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni dāsagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni dāsigaṇāni pahāya kesamassuṁ ohāretvā kāsāyāni vatthāni acchādetvā agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajituṁ, tañhi tassa balavaṁ bandhanaṁ, daḷhaṁ bandhanaṁ, thiraṁ bandhanaṁ, apūtikaṁ bandhanaṁ, thūlo, kaliṅgaro’ti; sammā nu kho so, udāyi, vadamāno vadeyyā”ti? “No hetaṁ, bhante.
Would it be right to say that, for that householder, they are a strong, firm, stout bond, a tie that has not rotted, and a heavy yoke?” “No, sir.
Yehi so, bhante, gahapati vā gahapatiputto vā bandhanehi baddho, sakkoti nekāni nikkhagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni dhaññagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni khettagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni vatthugaṇāni pahāya, nekāni bhariyagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni dāsagaṇāni pahāya, nekāni dāsigaṇāni pahāya kesamassuṁ ohāretvā kāsāyāni vatthāni acchādetvā agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajituṁ; tañhi tassa abalaṁ bandhanaṁ, dubbalaṁ bandhanaṁ, pūtikaṁ bandhanaṁ, asārakaṁ bandhanan”ti. “Evameva kho, udāyi, idhekacce kulaputtā ‘idaṁ pajahathā’ti mayā vuccamānā te evamāhaṁsu: ‘kiṁ panimassa appamattakassa oramattakassa pahātabbassa yassa no bhagavā pahānamāha, yassa no sugato paṭinissaggamāhā’ti? Te tañceva pajahanti, mayi ca na appaccayaṁ upaṭṭhāpenti. Ye ca bhikkhū sikkhākāmā te taṁ pahāya appossukkā pannalomā paradattavuttā migabhūtena cetasā viharanti.
For that householder, those bonds are weak, feeble, rotten, and insubstantial.” “In the same way, when some gentlemen are told by me to give something up, they say, ‘What, we just have to give up such a trivial, trifling thing as this, when the Blessed One tells us to give it up, the Holy One tells us to let it go?’ They give it up, and they don’t nurse bitterness toward me; and when the mendicants who want to train have given that up, they live relaxed, unruffled, surviving on charity, their hearts free as a wild deer.
‹ Previous · Page 3 of 5 · Next ›
Lite mode — plain HTML for e-readers and old browsers. Full version