Quarrels and Disputes

by | Jul 8, 2025 | Uncategorized

Quarrels and Disputes

Online programs offered July 8-10, 2025

Image by ANDRI TEGAR MAHARDIKA from Pixabay

Link to all Zoom programs from Passaddhi Vihara’s Events Page

Sutta Study – PV*
(Tuesday July 8th, 8am Pacific Time) 

  • Honeyball (MN 18)
  • Flowers (SN 22.94)
  • Is this what you think of me? (MN 103)

Embodiment Exploration 
(Thursday, July 10th, 9 am Pacific Time)

  • Centering
  • Against and With
  • No Target

Reflection and Meditation – PV*
(Thursday, July 10th, 7 pm Pacific Time) 

  • Spacious Receptivity

* PV denotes that this is a regular Passaddhi Vihara program that continues all year on Tuesdays and Thursdays.

Suttas

Honeyball (MN 18)

Translation: by Bhikkhu Sujato

Summary: Challenged by a brahmin, the Buddha gives an enigmatic response on how conflict arises due to proliferation based on perceptions.

Text excerpts:

Daṇḍapāṇi the Sakyan, while going for a walk, plunged deep into the Great Wood. He approached the Buddha and exchanged greetings with him. When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he stood to one side leaning on his staff, and said to the Buddha, “What is the ascetic’s doctrine? What does he assert?” 

COMMENT*: The manner of approach was rather rude and that might be because of a grudge that stems from how Daṇḍapāṇi was related to the Buddha:

  1. Daṇḍapāṇi was said to be the brother of the Buddha’s birth mother Māyā and foster mother Mahāpajāpatī (Mahāvaṁsa 2.19), 
  2. or else the father of the Buddha’s former wife Yasodharā (or Gopā, Lalitavistara 12.15). 

Both could be true. Reading between the lines, it seems Daṇḍapāṇi nursed a grudge against the Buddha. This would be understandable if Siddhattha’s birth resulted in the death of one of Daṇḍapāṇi’s sisters, while the other sister was left distraught when he went forth; and even more so if he abandoned Daṇḍapāṇi’s daughter with their newborn son.

COMMENT* = adapted from Ven Sujato’s comments on Sutta Central

Text excerpts:

Venerable friend, my doctrine is such that, in this world with its Devas, Māras, and Gods, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its gods and humans, one does not dispute with anyone. And it is such that perceptions do not underlie the one< who lives detached from sensual pleasures, without indecision, stripped of worry, and rid of craving for rebirth in this or that state.

That is my doctrine, and that is what I assert.” 

COMMENTS*:  In the face of Daṇḍapāṇi’s evidently hostile attitude, the Buddha addresses his uncle with the respectful āvuso (“sir” or “venerable friend”), and emphasizes non-conflict in line with his claim that, “I do not argue with the world; it is the world that argues with me” (SN 22.94. 

The expression “perceptions do not underlie” (saññā nānusenti) is unique to this context and must pertain to the highly-charged relation between the Buddha and Daṇḍapāṇi.

“Perception” is that mode of knowing that interprets the present in terms of the past, and hence it might sometimes be translated as “recognition”.

The Buddha, by asserting he is no longer bound by past perceptions, is hinting that this is how Daṇḍapāṇi can get over his grudge.

COMMENTS* = adapted from Ven Sujato’s comments on Sutta Central

Pali definitions: viggayha

viggayha ger. quarrelling (with); contending (with); arguing (with); lit. grasping differently ►

viggayhati pr. is in dispute (with); diverges (from); is in disagreement (with); lit. is grasped differently ►

Flowers (SN 22.94)

Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato,  Bhikkhu Bodhi

Summary:

Text exerpts:

“Mendicants, I do not >arguewith the world; it is the world that argues with me.

When your speech is in line with the teaching you do not argue with anyone in the world.

Pali definitions: vivadati pr. disagrees (with); disputes (with); argues (with); quarrels (with); conflicts (with); lit. speaks apart ►

…

Suppose there was a blue water lily, or a pink or white lotus. Though it sprouted and grew in the water, it would rise up above the water and stand with no water clinging to it.

In the same way, though I was born and grew up in the world, I live having mastered the world, unsullied by the world.”

Now back to the Honeyball Sutta:

“Venerable friend, my doctrine is such that, in this world with its Devas, Māras, and Gods, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its gods and humans, one does not dispute with anyone. And it is such that perceptions do not underlie the one who lives detached from sensual pleasures, without indecision, stripped of worry, and rid of craving for rebirth in this or that state.

COMMENT: Said in a non-conflictual way. Does not call out Daṇḍapāṇi’s hostility directly and responds with a more passive form of speech.

When he had spoken, Daṇḍapāṇi shook his head, waggled his tongue, raised his eyebrows until his brow puckered in three furrows, and departed leaning on his staff.

Comment*:  Daṇḍapāṇi is stopped in his tracks and has no reply that could move the argument forward. Unfortunately rather than asking a question that would lead him to understanding, he shakes off the opportunity and departs.  So, while the Buddha succeeded in deescalating possible conflict, clearly the teaching did not have the desired effect, at least right away. | Māra responds in the same way at SN 4.21:1.12.
Then in the late afternoon, the Buddha came out of retreat and went to the Banyan Tree Monastery, sat down on the seat spread out, and told the mendicants what had happened.

When he had spoken, one of the mendicants said to him, “But sir, asserting what doctrine does the Buddha not conflict with anyone >in this world with its gods, Māras, and Divinities, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its gods and humans? 

Comment*:  The “Buddha” (>bhagavā) is the subject and object respectively of this sentence and the next, a detail not always captured in translations.

And how is it that perceptions do not underlie the Buddha, the brahmin who lives detached from sensual pleasures, without indecision, stripped of worry, and rid of craving for rebirth in this or that state?” 

“Mendicant, judgments driven by proliferating perceptions beset a person. 

Pāḷi: “Yatonidānaṁ, bhikkhu, purisaṁ papañcasaññāsaṅkhā samudācaranti.

Judgment” (saṅkhā) is the way we “appraise” or “assess” ourselves, especially in relation to others (cf. MN 1:3.3, DN 1:1.3.2). | 

“Proliferation” (papañca) is the compulsion of the mind to spread out in endless inner commentary that hides reality. | 

Beset” (samudācaranti) conveys the sense that the person is overwhelmed and swamped, no longer the agent of their existence. | 

A “person” (purisa) is the conventional sense of self that arises from desire and identification.

If they don’t find anything worth approving, welcoming, or getting attached to in the source from which these arise, 

just this is the end of the underlying tendencies to desire, repulsion, views, doubt, conceit, the desire to be reborn, and ignorance. This is the end of taking up the rod and the sword, the end of quarrels, arguments, and disputes, of accusations, divisive speech, and lies. 

Comment*:  Here the Buddha uses “underlying tendencies” (anusaya), implying that these are meant by “perceptions” in the phrase “perceptions do not underlie the brahmin”

He identifies the doctrine that leads to peace as the ending of these tendencies that create proliferation and judgment about the supposed “person”.

This is where these bad, unskillful qualities cease without anything left over.”
Comment*: By this the Buddha indicates arahantship.

Is this what you think of me? (MN 103)

Translations: by Bhikkhu Sujato, Bhikkhu Bodhi

Summary: The Buddha teaches the monks to not dispute about the fundamental teachings nor things that are trivial, but to always strive for harmony.

Text Extracts:  

Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was living at Kusinārā, in the Grove of Offerings. There he addressed the bhikkhus thus: “Bhikkhus.”—“Venerable sir,” they replied. The Blessed One said this:

“What do you think about me, bhikkhus? That the recluse Gotama teaches the Dhamma for the sake of robes? Or that the recluse Gotama teaches the Dhamma for the sake of almsfood? Or that the recluse Gotama teaches the Dhamma for the sake of a resting place? Or that the recluse Gotama teaches the Dhamma for the sake of some better state of being?”

“We do not think thus about the Blessed One: ‘The recluse Gotama teaches the Dhamma for the sake of robes, or for the sake of almsfood, or for the sake of a resting place, or for the sake of some better state of being.’”

“So, bhikkhus, you do not think thus about me: ‘The recluse Gotama teaches the Dhamma for the sake of robes…or for the sake of some better state of being.’ Then what do you think about me?”

“Venerable sir, we think thus about the Blessed One: ‘The Blessed One is compassionate and seeks our welfare; he teaches the Dhamma out of compassion.’”

Comment:

Here the Buddha is assessing if the listeners are likely to relate to him with openness and be receptive to his teaching.

“So, bhikkhus, you think thus about me: ‘The Blessed One is compassionate and seeks our welfare; he teaches the Dhamma out of compassion.’

“So, bhikkhus, these things that I have taught you after directly knowing them—that is, the four foundations of mindfulness, the four right kinds of striving, the four bases for spiritual power, the five faculties, the five powers, the seven enlightenment factors, the Noble Eightfold Path—in these things you should all train in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing.

Comment: The Buddha used reflective listening, then advised them what he thinks is most important.
“While you are training in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, two bhikkhus might make different assertions about the higher Dhamma.
Comment: Disagreements happen even when we set up for and generally abide in harmony.

“Now if you should think thus: ‘These venerable ones differ about both the meaning and the phrasing,’ then whichever bhikkhu you think is the more reasonable should be approached and addressed thus: ‘The venerable ones differ about both the meaning and the phrasing. The venerable ones should know that it is for this reason that there is difference about the meaning and difference about the phrasing; let them not fall into a dispute.’ Then whichever bhikkhu you think is the most reasonable of those who side together on the opposite part should be approached and addressed thus: ‘The venerable ones differ about the meaning and the phrasing. The venerable ones should know that it is for this reason that there is difference about the meaning and difference about the phrasing; let them not fall into a dispute.’ So what has been wrongly grasped should be borne in mind as wrongly grasped. Bearing in mind what has been wrongly grasped as wrongly grasped, what is Dhamma and what is Discipline should be expounded.

Approach:  

  1. Assess where the disagreement lies
    1. in the underlying meaning
    2. or in just how it is said
  2. Assess who is most receptive to your intervention
  3. Explain why the disagreement occurred And focus on re-establishing harmony
  4. Go to the most receptive of those on the other side of the disagreement and repeat (3)
  5. Expound the Dhamma so mutual understanding emerges.

…

“Now if you think thus: ‘These venerable ones agree about the meaning but differ about the phrasing,’ then whichever bhikkhu you think is the more reasonable should be approached and addressed thus: ‘The venerable ones agree about the meaning but differ about the phrasing. The venerable ones should know that it is for this reason that there is agreement about the meaning but difference about the phrasing. But the phrasing is a mere trifle. Let the venerable ones not fall into a dispute over a mere trifle.’ 

…

Differ Response
about meaniing Establish what is Dhamma
about phrasing Remind that this is trivia.
“While you are training in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, some bhikkhu might commit an offence or a transgression.

“Now, bhikkhus, you should not hurry to reprove him; rather, the person should be examined thus: ‘I shall not be troubled and the other person will not be hurt; for the other person is not given to anger and resentment, he is not firmly attached to his view and he relinquishes easily, and I can make that person emerge from the unwholesome and establish him in the wholesome. ’ If such occurs to you, bhikkhus, it is proper to speak.

“Then it may occur to you, bhikkhus: ‘I shall not be troubled, but the other person will be hurt, for the other person is given to anger and resentment. However, he is not firmly attached to his view and he relinquishes easily, and I can make that person emerge from the unwholesome and establish him in the wholesome. It is a mere trifle that the other person will be hurt, but it is a much greater thing that I can make that person emerge from the unwholesome and establish him in the wholesome. ’ If such occurs to you, bhikkhus, it is proper to speak.

…

I shall be troubled NO NO YES YES >YES
The other person will be hurt and is given to anger and resentment NO YES NO YES YES
The other person is firmly attached to views and relinquishes with difficulty NO NO YES YES YES
I can make the other person emerge from unwholesome and establish wholesome YES YES YES YES NO
Then -> Speak Speak Speak Speak One should not underrate equanimity towards such a person
It is a mere trifle that the other person will be hurt, but it is a much greater thing that I can make that person emerge from the unwholesome and establish him in the wholesome. ’

…

“While you are training in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, there might arise mutual verbal friction, insolence in views, mental annoyance, bitterness, and dejection. Then whichever bhikkhu you think is the most reasonable of those who side together on the one part should be approached and addressed thus: ‘While we were training in concord, friend, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, there arose mutual verbal friction, insolence in views, mental annoyance, bitterness, and dejection. If the Recluse knew, would he censure that?’ Answering rightly, the bhikkhu would answer thus: ‘While we were training…If the Recluse knew, he would censure that.’ “‘But, friend, without abandoning that thing, can one realise Nibbāna?’ Answering rightly, the bhikkhu would answer thus: ‘Friend, without abandoning that thing, one cannot realise Nibbāna.’

“Then whichever bhikkhu you think is the most reasonable of those who side together on the opposite part should be approached …

Approach:  

  • If the Buddha knew what was going on, would he censure it? 
  • Without abandoning that thing, can one realise Nibbāna?
“If others should ask that bhikkhu thus: ‘Was it the venerable one who made those bhikkhus emerge from the unwholesome and established them in the wholesome?’ answering rightly, the bhikkhu would answer thus: ‘Here, friends, I went to the Blessed One. The Blessed One taught me the Dhamma. Having heard that Dhamma, I spoke to those bhikkhus. The bhikkhus heard that Dhamma, and they emerged from the unwholesome and became established in the wholesome.’ Answering thus, the bhikkhu neither exalts himself nor disparages others; he answers in accordance with the Dhamma in such a way that nothing which provides a ground for censure can be legitimately deduced from his assertion.”

That is what the Blessed One said. The bhikkhus were satisfied and delighted in the Blessed One’s words.

Embodiment Exploration

Image ref: Chris Sabor/Unsplash.

This week’s topic: Against, With, No-self

Ever been bowled over by what someone said?

Flattened by their words?

Caught off-balance?

Thrown yourself into a fight?

Gotten caught up in the argument?

We’ll explore together what these responses feel like in the body and what possible responses we could employ when disagreements arise.

Patterns we might play with include:

  • Against or With?
  • No or Yes?
  • Solid or Not there?

Reflection and Meditation

Dhamma reflection and lightly guided meditation.

Topic: Spacious Receptivity

References

Embodiment

Lisa Fisher’s Everyday Blackbelt (Mind-body training for more peaceful relationships)

Nkem Ndefo’s Lumos Transforms (Embody change, unlock potential, transform our world.)

Paul Linden’s Being in Movement (mindbody education, stress reduction, compassionate power, peacemaking)

Suttas

Honeyball (MN 18)

Translation: by Bhikkhu Sujato, Bhikkhu Suddhāso, Nyanamoli Thera, I.B. Horner

Flowers (SN 22.94)

Translation: by Bhikkhu Sujato, Bhikkhu Bodhi

Is this what you Think of me? (MN 103)

Translations: by Bhikkhu Sujato, Bhikkhu Bodhi