“Foolish man, who do you think I’ve taught like this? Haven’t I given many discourses about the obstacles being obstructive and how they obstruct one who indulges in them? I’ve said that the enjoyment provided by worldly pleasures is small, whereas the suffering and trouble with them are huge, and so their drawbacks are greater. I’ve said that worldly pleasures are similar to a skeleton, similar to a piece of meat, similar to a grass torch, similar to a pit of coals, similar to a dream, similar to borrowed goods, similar to fruits on a tree, similar to a knife and chopping block, similar to swords and stakes, and similar to a snake’s head. The suffering and trouble with them are huge, and so their drawbacks are greater. And yet by misunderstanding, you have misrepresented me, hurt yourself, and made much demerit. This will be for your long-lasting harm and suffering. And this will affect people’s confidence …” After rebuking him … he gave a teaching and addressed the monks: “Well then, the Sangha should do a legal procedure of ejection against Ariṭṭha for not giving up that bad view, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha.

And this is how it should be done. First you should accuse the monk Ariṭṭha. He should then be reminded of what he has done, before he’s charged with an offense. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The monk Ariṭṭha, the ex-vulture-hunter, has the following bad and erroneous view: “As I understand the Teaching of the Buddha, the things he calls obstacles are not able to obstruct one who indulges in them.” He’s not giving up that view. If the Sangha is ready, it should do a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Ariṭṭha for not giving up that bad view, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. This is the motion.