Review Article: 2021 Vol: 24 Issue: 1S
Pongtaratid Kongseang, Mahamakut Buddhist University
Vichian Dhammawajiro, Mahamakut Buddhist University
PhraKhruwapeechanthakun, Mahamakut Buddhist University
Phrakhrusutaworathammakit, Mahamakut Buddhist University
Sanya Kenaphoom, Rajabhat Mahasarakham University
Little Discipline, Interpretation, Buddhism, Mh̄ā pa thes̄ 4 (Four Comparison Reference Principles)
The cancellation of Little Discipline is a problem in interpreting Buddha's words to create an understanding of the will of the Buddha. If the Lord Buddha permitted his Nirvana, that Little Discipline could be withdrawn. But in the 1st meeting, Phra Thera passed a resolution not to cancel, so it was a conflict between the two views. Today, amid the changing social context and living conditions of the monks, Theravada priests continue to adhere to the scriptures and resolutions of the 1st rectification. But in practice, monks always have discipline violations. The authors see that the scriptures and the practices of the monks are inconsistent, which may confuse the congregation with their teachings. Therefore, the author takes this issue into account utilizing contextual interpretations as a tool for clarity in practice. Little Discipline refers to the discipline that does not affect oneself, society, and beliefs, which is socially acceptable if abuse occurs. The manner of applying the Buddha's discipline is flexible according to the time. Hence, the Lord Buddha established Mha pa thes 4 (comparison reference principles) so that the monks can be used as a framework for considering the discipline following this framework. Hence, we can see that there is nothing fixed, which in principle requires consideration that the relationship of the discipline is matched or contrary to what should therefore lead to conclusions. There is evidence that the Lord Buddha assures that violating the Little Discipline of the monk is not an obstacle to achieving success. Thus, confirming that by the will, the Lord Buddha permitted to cancel Little Discipline can be because it is not the essence of religion.
From the Buddha's words that “Xānnth̒, when I am gone, the still priest, may revoke the Little Discipline” (Winy piḍk cūḷ wrrkh (Thai version), The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No. 441/page 382) This Little Discipline issue has been discussed several times at monks' meetings, such as: In the 1st and 2nd rectification, which each time has different conclusions and conclusions, even today there is still some skepticism on the Little Discipline's issue of what the Buddha intended. Many scholars and scholars have tried to make conclusions on this issue, but it is not very clear. It is not yet clear what kind of discipline the Little Discipline, according to Buddha's will, and whether it should be canceled. The monks in Thailand are still adhering to the resolution from the 1st rectification. That is, not withdrawn in what the Lord Buddha has commanded, and not more in what the Buddha has not commanded (Winy piḍk cūḷ wrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No.442/page 383). However, as the social context and living conditions of the Thai monks change, the adherence to the scriptures and the conduct of the monks in some respects are reversed. In other words, although the resolution of primary rectification, in practice there is always a violation of discipline.
For this reason, I want to analyze the issue again to make it clearer, and I admit that it is difficult to understand the will of the Buddha. Therefore, it has to be a tool to use in contextual interpretations to find answers to the question of whether the Little Discipline should be abandoned or not. The answers are then analyzed and interpreted according to cause and effect to determine how the Little Discipline should be understood and acted following the will of the Buddha.
What is The Little Discipline?
Since the Little Discipline that the Lord Buddha was referring to did not explain what he meant, it was a problem to interpret. Here, the author interprets Schleimaker's theory, which suggests that to interpret the Scriptures correctly, two principles are required, namely, grammatical interpretations, and psychological interpretations (Schleirmacher, 1998:8); The grammatical interpretation considers the meaning from the language root or etymology. The psychological interpretation covers the intentions of the Buddha through the method of discipline, the social context at the time, as well as from the history of interpreting the issue. It is described as follows;
Interpreted from Etymology
If we interpret it from etymology, Little Discipline is translated from the Pali word that K̄huthˌ thā nu k̄huthˌ thkā ni s̄ikˌ k̄hā p thā ni. We can parse the terminology as follows K̄huthˌth+xnu+k̄huthˌth, stress at K, S̄kạtt̄h̒ k̄huthˌth means little, Xnu means little, following (Panyawashiro, 2010), when combined and connected with the word S̄ikˌ k̄hā p thā ni or discipline, meaning it is a provision to be studied (Phra Brahmagunabhorn (Payutto, 2009) Therefore referring to the provisions that must be studied on a little issue, thus, in which the author interprets the word Little Discipline that is a provision that does not cause much impact on other things, and that this etymological interpretation is merely a means of giving the word meaning, it has not been a clear indication of the Buddhist intent, so we need to consider other interpretations.
Psychological Interpretation (Purpose, Method of Discipline, and Social Context)
At this point, we will interpret history, methods, discipline, to understand the will of the Buddha. Judging from the Buddha's discipline method, it is found that discipline is mandated only when an incident has occurred, someone sued or made a complaint through the inquisition process at the monastic meeting, and identifying penalties then constituting a discipline (Scholars of Liang Chiang Publishing, 2009), which has the following aims or objectives; for the neatness of the monks, for the welfare of the monks, to vanquish the stubborn, for the welfare of monk with good practice, to block the desires that accumulate in the present, to block the desires that accumulate in the future, for the devotion of the unfaithful community, for the greater devotion of the already devoted community, for the determination of the truth, and to help discipline (Phra Dhammapitaka (Payutto, 2002). Considering the purpose and method of discipline, it makes us see the spirit of discipline in a social aspect. From a method of consensus based on social acceptance, that is, not precedent discipline. When there is an injury caused by the society, criticism or criticism by society, it is proceeded to investigate an offense and enact the offense. In terms of purpose too, if we look at the ten objectives, all of them are intended to serve society as a whole. So, in this respect, Little Discipline refers to a discipline that does not affect society or is socially acceptable.
Phra Thera's View of Little Discipline in the 1st Rectification
In doing the 1st rectification, when the meeting asked for their opinion on what is Little Discipline, Phra Thera is offering various comments such as Some of the Thera monks saw that besides Pārāchik 4 [Pārāchik means who have lost themselves who are unable to practice in the Dharma of Discipline that the Lord Buddha has given], the other is Little Discipline. Some groups agree that besides Pārāchik 4, S̄ạngḳh'āthis̄es̄ 13 [S̄ạngḳh'āthis̄es̄ means the penalty for relying on priests to perform preliminary activities, prisoners subject to detention for strenuous activity] the other is Little Discipline. Some groups agree that besides Pārāchik 4, S̄ạngḳh'āthis̄es̄ 13, Xa ni ya ta 2 [Xa ni ya ta means penalty that is not certain whether a fine is a heavy or light penalty] the other is Little Discipline. Thus, in the end, it still cannot be concluded (P̣hikk̄hu, 2005). Therefore, it is necessary to use psychological interpretation, which, on this point, the author thinks that Phra Thera interprets Little Discipline by subcontracting the entire category as incorrect. Because if you consider the impact of abuse and social acceptance, you will see that some discipline in the lightly punishing category, when the violation is more impactful than the discipline in the severe punishment category such as discipline in the Pācittīy̒ group: alcohol is prohibited (Suchip Punyanuphap, 1996: 172), Although this is a light punishment, when it is violated by the power of alcohol there is a chance of another violation of the discipline. It also affects oneself, others, society, and believers' faith. The same is true for discipline, which is S̄ek̄hi y wạtr, a tradition of etiquette (Phra Brahmagunabhorn (Prayut Payutto), 2009:461), though not a discipline master, but it is necessary to have regard also to the peace and order of monks. Therefore, considering what Little Discipline is, it should be considered one by one, not including the category. The results of the Little Discipline interpretation are based on Schleimaker's theory above. The authors conclude that Little Discipline refers to any discipline that is not a master of discipline, when not following it has little or no effect on the self, others, society, and the faith of the believer, which is acceptable in society. Hence, the discipline is called Little Discipline.
The Little Discipline Issue with Social Monks Today
The spread of Buddhism to parts of the world with different topography, politics, values, and art and culture from the origin of the original religion, as well as thousands of years of transitions, some of the traditional disciplines have become obstacles or limitations in the spread of Buddhism to exist. Monks today are spreading in a more social dimension, as society changes rapidly, forcing monks to act to survive and to the effectiveness of proactive Buddhist propagation goals such as the use of technology, facilities and other means of living occurs in the modern age, both in everyday life and in the evangelization of society. For this reason, the monks behave differently from the monks in the Buddha's era, there will be a constant violation of the Little Discipline that makes laymen view it as an improper thing, causing a loss of Buddhism to those with conservative attitudes. The authors view this problem as a result of incomplete interpretations of the scriptures, leading to misunderstandings of monks and laymen that are not following the will of religion. Therefore, to end this problem, monks and laymen should have a common point of acceptance and understanding of the spirit of a common discipline. That is to say, the monks behave to the extent that the laymen are acceptable, and the laymen have a proper understanding of the spirit of the discipline. Hence, there is a need for a clear interpretation of the Little Discipline.
The 1st rectification, resolve that not to withdraw what the Buddha commanded and not to add to what the Buddha did not command
In the 1st rectification, the Little Discipline has raised the issue that came up for consideration. Although it cannot be concluded by monks, it is solely judged by Phra Maha Kaspa, who is the monks' president in rectification, but it is enough to be a guide to be reinterpreted for more clarity, which can be determined from the judgment of Phra Maha Kassapa. The argument against the Maha Kassapa's judgment, and interpretation of Buddha's words that were once permitted and unauthorized;
Interpretation of the Judgment of the PhraMaha Kassapa
In the 1st rectification when the little discipline conclusions could not be reached. Phra Maha Kassapa declared a motion that monks should not command what the Buddha did not command, should not remove the commandments that have already been commanded, should be determined to follow the discipline as already commanded (Winy piḍk ūḷ wrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No.442/page 383), and gave two reasons that (1) discipline, something related to villagers, villagers know what should or should not be for the monks. 2. If remove some of the disciplines, the villagers would blame us for studying and the following discipline only while the Buddha was alive, but when the Buddha got it, Nirvana was not bothered to practice (Winy piḍk ūḷ wrrkh (Thai version), The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No.442/page 383).
From Phra Maha Kassapa's reasoning, it can be seen that Phra Maha Kassapa's judgment is based on society, based on the villagers, or if it is interpreted that he values the discipline that is the blame world. From Phra Maha Kassapa's plea to raise the concerns of the villagers, if some discipline is dismissed, in this period, the Buddha was alive, he had to cancel discipline as well. There are examples as follows: initially, it was permitted, but later prohibited such use of umbrellas (Winy piḍk ūḷ wrrkh (Thai version) The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No.270/page 55), it was forbidden, but later allowed such as eating garlic (Winy piḍk ūḷ wrrkh (Thai version) The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No.289/page 74). Hence, this excuse is unlikely to match the wishes of the Buddha, observing that Phra Maha Kassapa's judgment at that time, did not interpret the Buddha's words to truly understand the will of the Buddha, just relying on the Buddha's familiarity with the method of judging the absolute power of the Buddha, it is considered a judgment criterion that does not allow interpretation on such issues (Boonsriton, 2007). It made it impossible to answer the question of the Buddha's wishes that the Little Discipline was allowed to be withdrawn, what purpose did you have? and causing controversial issues to the Phra Maha Kassapa decision that follows.
The Arguments against the Judgment of the Phra Maha Kassapa
Phra Purana traveled from Thakkhina Khiri Rural and did not participate in rectification, upon hearing the resolution of the meeting, there were eight teachings that he had heard from the Buddha's mouth that did not match the meeting's resolutions which is a minor disciplinary command that He has permitted to withdraw, there are 8, this is called discipline, 8 items, including; monks eat food within the address, monk eats food that has been cooked inside the residence, monks eat food that has been cooked by themselves, monks eat food that has not been given, monks ate food taken from the place of invitation, monks ate the food that was delivered in time before meals, monks eat food in the forest, and monks eat food in the pond (Winạy piḍk mh̄āwrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 5/Article No.81/page 85-86). As follows, he did not accept the resolution of the meeting at that time and said that Monk Thera has rectification of Dharma and Discipline well, but I will remember what I heard before the Lord Buddha, as it was received in front of the Lord Buddha (Winy piḍk cūḷ wrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No.444/page 386). Therefore, In the case of Phra Purana, it can be seen that his stance is based on the words of the Lord Buddha as he heard in front of him. Although this is not a direct interpretation, it does point to adherence to the Buddha-centered interpretation, it can be considered as an idea that will be taken into consideration to understand the intent of the Buddha to draw a clear conclusion as possible.
Interpretation from Buddha's Words those were Permitted and not Permitted
The conditions for determining the Little Discipline in the 1st rectification are mainly derived from the Maha Nirvana Formula, which criteria to be judged are taken from the Xpri h̄ā niy ṭhrrm principle that monk desires to find prosperity only as long as the monk has not commanded what the Buddha did not command, do not overthrow what the Buddha has commanded, adhere to discipline already prescribed. (S̄utˌ tnˌt piḍk thīḳhnikāy mh̄āwrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 10/Article No.136/page 82). Considering this, the Lord Buddha did not permit the commandment or removal of the existing Buddha's commandments, making it appear that there was a contradiction of the Buddha's words. Because before Nirvana, he said to Ananda that “Ananda when I passed away if monks wish to withdraw Little Discipline some can withdraw” (S̄utˌ tnˌt piḍk thīḳhnikāy mh̄āwrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 10/Article No.216/page 165). It is a problem that he actually wants to withdraw or not to withdraw. Considering the two words, the difference is clear: monk is not permitted, which means a form of the monk as an individual. While His Majesty's Authorized Word used the word monks to refer to groups of monks, that is monks of four or more. When the two words are interpreted, it is found that Buddhajao's words do not conflict in any way, so they can be interpreted as He did not allow any monk to remove the discipline, but he empowered monks or monk committee to consider removing it. It goes back to Phra Maha Kassapa's judgment on the use of individual power as the monks' chairman. Even if it was done at the monks meeting and there was no objection, the author considers that it is inconsistent with the will of the Lord Buddha in the issue of taking the Buddha's remarks as an excuse by using monks committee instead of monk, as the Lord Buddha used, it was considered a distortion of the word to have a different meaning. In other words, the authors see that the Buddha's discipline is flexible according to the timing. This can be seen from the special permission in many cases as requested by the priest or the householder, such as some practices in rural areas out of prosperity, etc., (Winạy piḍk mh̄āwrrkh (Thai version) The Tipitaka Book No. 5/Article No.258/page 36-42).
Should Little Discipline be Cancelled?
After we have considered what is Little Discipline? the intention of discipline, conclusions, and arguments against this problem already. From now on we will consider whether Little Discipline should be canceled or not by considering Mh̄ā pa thes̄ 4 (comparison reference principles), interpretation from the social context with the current Thai monks, and the interpretation of their respective impacts.
1) Interpreted according to the principle of Mh̄ā pa thes̄ 4 (comparison reference principles)
Mh̄ā pa thes̄ 4 (comparison reference principles) (Phra Dhammapitaka (Prayut Payutto), 2002:130), It is a principle that the Lord Buddha has put forth in the form of disciplinary decisions that are not clearly explained on this topic, it is an obstacle to the implementation of the Dhamma. Here will introduce the topic of Dharma according to the principle of Mh̄ā pa thes̄ 4 (comparison reference principles) to interpret and explain the problem of Little Discipline whether to cancel or not as follows.
i) Anything is not forbidden to do, but to fit in with what not to do, against the do, that is what not to do.
ii) Anything that is not forbidden to do, but fits in with the do's, against the don'ts, that is the dos.
iii) Anything is not permitted to do, but is incompatible with what should not be done, contrary to the one that should be done, it means what should not be done.
iv) Anything is not permitted to do, but goes with what should be done, contrary to what is not, it means what should be done.
This principle shows the significance that the Lord Buddha has opened the way for the consideration of adjusting the behavior according to the Discipline according to the reality. Because he knows and always teaches that all the laws are impermanent, inconstant, not lasting according to the natural law or the principle of vanity (Phra Dhammapitaka, Prayut, 1999), which has always changed according to the variable factors. Discipline, as well, when one variable affects it, it can have the same effect or be different, it can have both negative and positive effects. Therefore, he commanded Mh̄ā pa thes̄ 4 (comparison reference principles) so that the monks consider the Discipline case by case. On the issue of Little Discipline, should it be canceled or not? If taken into account following the framework of Mh̄ā pa thes̄ 4 (comparison reference principles), it can be seen that there is nothing fixed, will have to be considered and judged on an individual basis. Considering that the discipline relationship matches or contrasts with what it should be, we will understand that the discipline should be canceled or not. Considering this perspective, it is Mh̄ā pa thes̄ 4 (comparison reference principles) as the tool to filter the suitability of a discipline by considering its effect.
Social Context with Thai Monks Today
The context in each society is different according to the terms of the era and the terrain, it is impossible to put the provisions in detail as a stereotype and apply to every age and every environment (Phra Dhammapitaka & Prayut, 1999). Due to the limitations of time and social conditions change, it is difficult for Thai monks to maintain the Buddhist way of modern times during a modern society which is a new society that has changed greatly with the environment, technology, thus making some minor discipline barriers to the existence of monks. Nowadays, it can be seen that, although Thai monks adhere to the teachings of Theravada Buddhism, in practice they are unable to maintain a certain discipline. As modern monks need to adapt to social contexts, according to Mh̄ā pa thes̄ 4 above, the Lord Buddha has suggested a method of consideration so that it can be taken into account. Therefore, if you look at it in this light, the Lord Buddha allows the Little Discipline to be flexible according to the time.
Effect of Cancellation or not Canceling Little Discipline
However, to cancel one thing as with the cancellation of this Little Discipline, there must be an impact, whether it be more or less, either positive or negative. So before concluding whether Little Discipline should cancel or not, the authors are therefore able to take into account several aspects of the impact that will occur as follows:
In the propagation of Buddhism, the maintenance of the discipline will be of great benefit to the propagation of Buddhism according to the purpose of the Lord Buddha, Discipline in one section that Discipline is for the devotion of the unfaithful community such as for the greater devotion of the already devoted community, For the determination of the Truth. Therefore, in this respect, the abolition of discipline is a hindrance to the spread of Buddhism because it undermines devotion. On the other hand, in today's society, some discipline hinders the existence of monks, causing the number of monks to gradually diminish, or in today's society, for monks to introduce principles to spread and reach people in modern times, it requires both science and art as well as technology which in some areas there are limitations to the Discipline, which is the Little Discipline limiting the framework from which it is possible, so when the community is inaccessible, or there are no monks who are the successors of Buddhism, how does the propagation of Buddhism be achieved? That should be taken into account as well.
In the acceptance of Buddhists in today's society, monks exist as good practitioners, practical, role models, as teachers, which are expected of society. Therefore, the rigorous monks on Discipline are socially devoted to society, at the same time, today's society requires monks to take on a role as a leader, a supporter, something that is at odds with Little Discipline, hence, the Little Discipline is both socially acceptable and unacceptable. This problem is therefore unequal, indecisive, and infinite in criticism of society, it is necessary to find a suitable common ground by building mutual understanding and have a clear and unified practice.
Self-benefit (Goal of ordination) The precepts or discipline are the foundation of monk's conduct, so it is interesting that if the Little Discipline is abolished, it will inadequate the monk's precepts, which will it be a hindrance to the achievement ultimate goal? In this point, the author will consider the following words of the Lord Buddha:
“The monk in this discipline normally completes the precepts, normally meditate in moderation, do normally moderate wisdom, that monk offended Little Discipline some, out of some punishment, because in the punishment and exemption from this small punishment, I do not say that the person is not suitable. However, any discipline is the preliminary of celibacy, it deserves to be considered celibacy, the monk has the precepts and the precepts in those disciplines who intend to study in discipline, all of you bring liberation through the power of mental training (Ce to wimutti), liberation by the power of wisdom (Pạỵỵā wimutti) without the desires that are fermented in the mind (Xā s̄wa). Therefore, because the Xā s̄wa is gone by the great wisdom that is in reach today” (S̄utˌ tnˌt piḍk xạng khut rni kāy tik nibāt (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 20/Article No.87/page 314)
Judging from this statement, the Lord Buddha assures that monk's breach of Little Discipline is not a hindrance to achieving success. Because discipline can get out of punishment but have to keep the master precepts firmly (Refers to Pārāchik 4 that is a heavy punishment, no way out of punishment, when the punishment is deprived of being a monk), in parallel with the study of Dhamma, it will achieve its objectives.
Social benefits (Aim of helping the world), On this issue, it is a social dimension of Buddhism, which is linked to the spread of Buddhism and the social needs of society. In the Buddhist era, the Lord Buddha sent the monks to proclaim religion by saying that “Monk, you must go out for the benefit of many people” (Winạy piḍk mh̄āwrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 4/Article No.32/page 40), and identified a way to help the people of the world that “Preach the Dharma with preliminary Aesthetic, middle Aesthetic and most Aesthetic, do proclaim the chastity” (Winạy piḍk mh̄āwrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 4/Article No.32/page 40). From this word we can see that in his contribution to the world, He emphasizes the spread of the dharma as a practice to bring peace to society as a whole. Thus, the existence of monks to preach religion in the present situation, with restrictions on the Little Discipline as a hindrance, would not be able to fulfill the spirit of evangelism for the benefit of the public.
Little Discipline refers to any discipline that is not the precedent of a discipline, when it is not followed it has little or no effect on self, others, society, the faith of the believer, and that it is acceptable in society. To be used as a framework for determining what the Little Discipline is, we will have to look at the effects of several aspects which must be considered one on top, should not be divided by subcontracting entire categories that have the same punishment, because some discipline is the same punishment, but giving results when there are different violations must be considered one by one.
The issue of the Little Discipline removal has been raised several times and has raised controversy. In the view of Phra Maha Kassapa, there is a resolution not to remove the things that the Buddha commanded or add the things that are not. While the Purana refers to Buddha's words that he allowed withdrawal 8 disciplines. Having considered this issue that appeared in the Tripitaka, it was seen that the Buddha did not allow any monk to remove the discipline, but he empowers the monks' committee to jointly consider removing it. The authors see that the Buddha's nature of the application of the Discipline is flexible with time, so it is possible to allow the removal of the Little Discipline contrary to the existence of monks in different places, societies, and eras. Thus, the Lord Buddha gave Mh̄ā pa thes̄ 4 for monks to be used as a case-by-case consideration of the Discipline in this framework. As you can see, nothing is fixed, it has to be considered that the discipline relationship is compatible or contrary to what it is supposed to do, then, we can understand whether the discipline should be canceled or not. Therefore, in this sense, it means that the principle of Mh̄ā pa thes̄ 4 is a tool to refine the suitability of the discipline based on its impact and consistency with the social context.
Thus, when this problem is interpreted from the Buddha's doctrine, past judgments, and arguments, as well as the social context with the present Thai monks, it can be seen that acting in the social dimension of monks contradicts the behavior of the Discipline framework.
Therefore, monks with the violation of the Little Discipline for the mission of spreading Buddhism following the will of the prophet, for the sake of society, are always happening. And the Lord Buddha assures that the omission of monk's Little Discipline does not hinder the attainment of any kind, it is, therefore, a testament to the fact that the Lord Buddha allowed the Little Discipline to be canceled because it was not the essence of religion, he allowed the monks' committee to consider, which is a significant imperative that the Buddha opened the way for the consideration of adjusting his behavior according to the Discipline following the realities in today's society. For monks to introduce principles to spread and reach people in the modern era, it requires both science and art, as well as technology, some of which have limitations on Discipline, a Little Discipline that limits the framework from being able to do so. When the community is inaccessible or there are no monks, the successor of Buddhism, how will the propagation of Buddhism be achieved? Considering this goal of spreading Buddhism, it is appropriate to cancel the Little Discipline.
There are policy recommendations for further implementation and research as follows:
1) Policy Recommendations: The issue of Little Discipline should be canceled or not? The Thai Sangha Association or related organizations should be considered to clear the common understanding of Buddhist society. By reforming or rectification methods according to the form of existing monks, the results of the rectification were then announced, and then led to further action to prevent the laymen's humiliating or disrespectful monks, and prevent the monks from deviating from the discipline until the laymen disbelief.
2) Research Suggestion: According to the Little Discipline interpretation study, should this be canceled? The authors see that there are still some interesting issues that should be further studied, especially those that are currently being monks' social issues. For Buddhists to have a common understanding of Buddhism, there is the practice of following the Buddha's will and achieving the stability of Buddhism in the following topics; (1) Study on the reform of the monks of the national government. (2) Study on the role of Thai monks at present. And (3) Study of rectification monks in Thailand
The author of this paper consist of Pongtaratid Kongseang, Vichian Dhammawajiro, PhraKhruwapeechanthakun, and Phrakhrusutaworathammakit, they are lectuer at Mahamakut Buddhist University, E-mail: E-mail: [email protected] Pharamaha Chotniphitphon Phoncharoen, he is lecturer at Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University, Surin Campus. Riangdow Tavachalee, Lecturer at Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University, Khon Kaen Campus. Patchlada Suwannual, lecturer at Suratthani Buddhist College, Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University. And *Sanya Kenaphoom, lecturer at Rajabhat Mahasarakham University, he is corresponding author, his E-mail: [email protected]
Boonsriton, P. (2007). A hermeneutical pattern of texts in theravada buddhism. Doctor of Philosophy (Buddhist Studies): Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University
Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya. (1996). The Thai version of the Tipitaka. 4,5,7,10,20. Bangkok: Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya Printing House.
P kk , (2005). The incident occurred in the Buddhist era I. Bangkok: Printing plans.
Payutto, P. (2009). Buddhist dictionary, Glossary of vocabulary: Commemorating 100 years on the birthday of Mr. Sawat Dan Kiatkong. Bangkok: Chan Phen Publishing House.
Payutto, P. (1999). Education and research for the future of Thailand. Bangkok: Phutthatham Foundation
Payutto, P. (2002). Buddhism. Bangkok: Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya Printing House
Panyawashiro, P.M.P. (2010). Pali - Thai dictionary: Nouns, verb and sub verb. Bangkok: Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya Printing House.
Schleirmacher. (1998). Hermeneutics & criticism. Edited by Andrew Bowie. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Scholars of Liang Chiang Publishing. (2009). Nwkowāth (Question). Bangkok: Liang Chiang Printing House.
Suchip Punyanuphap. (1996). The Tipitaka of the people. Bangkok: Mahamakut Buddhist College
S̄utˌ tnˌt piḍk thīḳhnikāy mh̄āwrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 10/Article No.136/page 82
S̄utˌ tnˌt piḍk thīḳhnikāy mh̄āwrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 10/Article No.216/page 165
S̄utˌ tnˌt piḍk xạng khut rni kāy tik nibāt (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 20/Article No.87/page 314)
Winạy piḍk mh̄āwrrkh (Thai version) The Tipitaka Book No. 5/Article No.258/page 36-42)
Winạy piḍk mh̄āwrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 4/Article No.32/page 40)
Winạy piḍk mh̄āwrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 4/Article No.32/page 40
Winạy piḍk mh̄āwrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 5/Article No.81/page 85-86
Winy piḍk cūḷ wrrkh (Thai version) The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No.270/page 55
Winy piḍk cūḷ wrrkh (Thai version) The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No.289/page 74
Winy piḍk cūḷ wrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No.444/page 386)
Winy piḍk cūḷ wrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No. 441/page 382
Winy piḍk cūḷ wrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No.442/page 383
Winy piḍk cūḷ wrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No.442/page 383
Winy piḍk cūḷ wrrkh (Thai version). The Tipitaka Book No. 7/Article No.442/page 383