starter wrote:Many thanks for your comments. I understand that all the eight were taught by the Buddha under either ten wholesome conducts or the noble eight-factored path. Sorry I didn't make my point clear. My point is that the Buddha didn't teach them as the eight precepts.
I’m not sure what you mean by didn’t teach them as the eight precepts
. Do you mean that the Buddha didn’t teach the ājīvaṭṭhamakasīla as something to be formally undertaken, as in “Pāṇātipātā veramaṇī sikkhāpadaṃ samādiyāmi, adinnādāna veramaṇī… etc.” ? If so, then you’re quite right, but then neither are the five precepts or the eight uposatha precepts ever taught this way in the Suttas. Indeed the only precepts that are
ever presented in this way are the ten precepts of a sāmaṇera, and these only in the Khuddakapaṭha.
Or did you mean something else?
starter wrote:On one hand, they might confuse with the eight monastic precepts set up by the Buddha, and they should probably not be offered to the lay practitioners as an alternative to the eight monastic precepts.
Why not? The ājīvaṭṭhamakasīla are in fact offered to lay yogis in some meditation centres in Burma (chiefly Ledi Sayadaw-influenced ones). For success during periods of intensive bhāvanā they are arguably a more relevant set of restraints than the uposatha precepts (in the Suttas observance of the latter is taught as a path to heaven and never crops up in discourses dealing with the relationship between sīla and bhāvanā). Such persons may well find abstention from divisive, harsh and frivolous speech both more challenging and more rewarding than abstention from afternoon meals, high beds, etc.
starter wrote:On the other hand, those who can really observe all these 8 "precepts" would have already perfected their sila (right speech, right action, right livelihood).
I don’t understand what you’re saying here.
starter wrote:This is not very practical (and could dilute the lay practitioners effort on the five or eight precepts set up by the Buddha),
I suppose it could
, but so what? I mean by the same token one could argue that since the five precepts and eight uposatha precepts require only abstention from false speech, undertaking either of these instead of the ājīvaṭṭhamakasīla could
dilute one’s efforts to refrain from divisive, harsh or frivolous speech.
starter wrote:since even stream winners could still have "evil conducts" and have not yet perfected their sila (they have just entered the N8P to perfect their speech/action/livelihood), to my understanding:
"Any evil conduct he may still do by deed, word or thought, he is incapable of concealing it; since it has been proclaimed that such concealing is impossible for one who has seen the Path (N8P). This precious jewel is the Sangha. By this truth may there be happiness. ..."
But in the commentary to the Ratana Sutta the said misconduct on the part of a sekha disciple is limited to such transgressions of the monastic rule as would not proceed from unwholesome volitions, or at least not necessarily proceed from such volitions. It wouldn’t include actions such as intentional killing, stealing, etc., which orthodoxy holds to be not possible for sekhas.