Quiz designed By Phramaha Suraphet

ข้อสอบออนไลน์ วิชาภาษาอังกฤษเพื่อพระพุทธศาสนา : English For Buddhism

วิชาภาษาอังกฤษเพื่อพระพุทธศาสนา : English For Buddhism

ข้อสอบมี 135 ข้อ แบบปรนัย : เวลาในการสอบ 3 ชั่วโมง : พระมหาสุรเพชร วชิรญาโณ อาจารย์สอน

    Multiple-Choice Questions and Passage-Based Questions : คำถามแบบปรนัย หลายตัวเลือก และคำถามมีฐานมาจากข้อความ

    Students are allowed to use laptop (notebook), mobile phone and taplet in the exams room.
    : อนุญาตให้นิสิตใช้คอมพิวเตอร์โน็ตบุค มือถือและแท็บเล็ตในห้องสอบได้

    The Buddha
    The Buddha, whose personal name was Siddhattha (Siddhartha in Sanskrit), and family name Gotama (Skt. Gautama), lived in North India in the 6th century B.C. His father, Suddhodana, was the ruler of the kingdom of the Sakyas (in modern Nepal). His mother was queen Maya. According to the custom of the time, he was married quite young, at the age of sixteen, to a beautiful and devoted young princess named Yasodhara. The young prince lived in his palace with every luxury at his command. But all of a sudden, confronted with the reality of life and the suffering of mankind, he decided to find the solution—the way out of this universal suffering. At the age of 29, soon after the birth of his only child, Rahula, he left his kingdom and became an ascetic in search of this solution.
    Based on the provided text, answer the following questions:

  1. What was the Buddha's family name?

  2. Where did the Buddha live?

  3. Who was the Buddha's father?

  4. Why did the Buddha leave his kingdom?

  5. How old was the Buddha when he left his kingdom?




    6. For six years the ascetic Gotama wandered about the valley of the Ganges, meeting famous religious teachers, studying and following their systems and methods, and submitting himself to rigorous ascetic practices. They did not satisfy him. So he abandoned all traditional religions and their methods and went his own way. It was thus that one evening, seated under a tree (since then known as the Bodhi- or Bo-tree, 'the Tree of Wisdom'), on the bank of the river Neranjara at Buddha-Gaya (near Gaya in modern Bihar), at the age of 35, Gotama attained Enlightenment, after which he was known as the Buddha, 'The Enlightened One'. After his Enlightenment, Gotama the Buddha delivered his first sermon to a group of five ascetics, his old colleagues, in the Deer Park at Isipatana (modern Sarnath) near Benares. From that day, for 45 years, he taught all classes of men and women—kings and peasants, Brahmins and outcasts, bankers and beggars, holy men and robbers—without making the slightest distinction between them. He recognized no differences of caste or social groupings, and the Way he preached was open to all men and women who were ready to understand and to follow it.
    Based on the provided text, answer the following questions:

  6. How long did Gotama wander about the valley of the Ganges?

  7. Where did Gotama attain Enlightenment?

  8. What is the Bodhi-tree?

  9. Who did the Buddha deliver his first sermon to?

  10. How long did the Buddha teach?



    11. At the age of 80, the Buddha passed away at Kusinara (in modern Uttar Pradesh in India). Today Buddhism is found in Ceylon, Burma, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Tibet, China, Japan, Mongolia, Korea, Formosa, in some parts of India, Pakistan and Nepal, and also in the Soviet Union. The Buddhist population of the world is over 500 million.
    Based on the provided text, answer the following questions:

  11. Where did the Buddha pass away?


  12. In which modern country is Kusinara located?

  13. Which of the following countries is NOT mentioned as having a significant Buddhist population?

  14. Approximately how many people practice Buddhism worldwide?

  15. Based on the passage, which continent has the highest concentration of Buddhist countries?




    16. CHAPTER I
    THE BUDDHIST ATTITUDE OF MIND
    Among the founders of religions the Buddha (if we are permitted to call him the founder of a religion in the popular sense of the term) was the only teacher who did not claim to be other than a human being, pure and simple. Other teachers were either God, or his incarnations in different forms, or inspired by him. The Buddha was not only a human being; he claimed no inspiration from any god or external power either. He attributed all his realization, attainments and achievements to human endeavour and human intelligence. A man and only a man can become a Buddha. Every man has within himself the potentiality of becoming a Buddha, if he so wills it and endeavours. We can call the Buddha a man par excellence. He was so perfect in his 'human-ness' that he came to be regarded later in popular religion almost as 'super-human'. Man's position, according to Buddhism, is supreme. Man is his own master, and there is no higher being or power that sits in judgment over his destiny. 'One is one's own refuge, who else could be the refuge ?' said the Buddha. He admonished his disciples to 'be a refuge to them selves', and never to seek refuge in or help from anybody else.

    He taught, encouraged and stimulated each person to develop himself and to work out his own emancipation, for man has the power to liberate himself from all bondage through his own personal effort and intelligence. The Buddha says: 'You should do your work, for the Tathagatas3 only teach the way.'4 If the Buddha is to be called a 'saviour' at all, it is only in the sense that he discovered and showed the Path to Liberation, Nirvana. But we must tread the Path ourselves. It is on this principle of individual responsibility that the Buddha allows freedom to his disciples. In the Mahaparinibbana sutta the Buddha says that he never thought of controlling the Sangha (Order of Monks)1, nor did he want the Sangha to depend on him. He said that there was no esoteric doctrine in his teaching, nothing hidden in the 'closed-fist of the teacher' (acarija-mutthi), or to put it in other words, there never was anything 'up his sleeve'.
    The freedom of thought allowed by the Buddha is unheard of elsewhere in the history of religions. This freedom is necessary because, according to the Buddha, man's emancipation depends on his own realization of Truth, and not on the benevolent grace of a god or any external power as a reward for his obedient good behaviour.

    Based on the provided text, answer the following questions:

  16. According to the text, the Buddha was unique among religious founders because:

  17. The Buddha believed that:

  18. The Buddha taught that:

  19. The Buddha's attitude towards his disciples can be described as:

  20. The freedom of thought allowed by the Buddha is important because:


    21.                             

    The Buddha once visited a small town called Kesaputta in the kingdom of Kosala. The inhabitants of this town were known by the common name Kalama. When they heard that the Buddha was in their town, the Kalamas paid him a visit, and told him: 'Sir, there are some recluses and brahmanas who visit Kesaputta. They explain and illumine only their own doctrines, and despise, condemn and spurn others' doctrines. Then come other recluses and brahmanas, and they, too, in their turn, explain and illumine only their own doctrines, and despise, condemn and spurn others' doctrines. But, for us, Sir, we have always doubt and perplexity as to who among these venerable recluses and brahmanas spoke the truth, and who spoke falsehood.' Then the Buddha gave them this advice, unique in the history of religions: 'Yes, Kalamas, it is proper that you have doubt, that you have perplexity, for a doubt has arisen in a matter which is doubtful. Now, look you Kalamas, do not be led by reports, or radition, or hearsay. Be not led by the authority of religious texts, nor by mere logic or inference, nor by considering appearances, nor by the delight in speculative opinions, nor by seeming possibilities, nor by the idea: 'this is our teacher'.

    But, O Kalamas, when, you know for yourselves that certain things are unwholesome (akusala), and wrong, and bad, then give them up . . . And when you know for yourselves that certain things are wholesome (kusala) and good, then accept them and follow them. The Buddha went even further. He told the bhikkhus that a disciple should examine even the Tathagata (Buddha) himself, so that he (the disciple) might be fully convinced of the true value of the teacher whom he followed. According to the Buddha's teaching, doubt (vicikiccha) is one of the five Hindrances (nivarana) to the clear understanding of Truth and to spiritual progress (or for that matter to any progress). Doubt, however, is not a 'sin', because there are no articles of faith in Buddhism. In fact there is no 'sin' in Buddhism, as sin is understood in some religions. The root of all evil is ignorance (avijja) and false views (micchd ditthi). It is an undeniable fact that as long as there is doubt, perplexity, wavering, no progress is possible. It is also equally undeniable that there must be doubt as long as one does not understand or see clearly. But in order to progress further it is absolutely necessary to get rid of doubt. To get rid of doubt one has to see clearly.

    Based on the provided text, answer the following questions:

  21. What was the main concern of the Kalamas when they visited the Buddha?

  22. What advice did the Buddha give to the Kalamas regarding doubt and belief?

  23. According to the Buddha, what is the root of all evil?

  24. What is the significance of doubt in Buddhist philosophy?

    25. General Buddhist Concepts

  25. What is the ultimate goal of Buddhism?


  26. What is the Eightfold Path in Buddhism?


  27. What is the concept of karma in Buddhism?

  28. What is the Four Noble Truths in Buddhism?

  29. What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana schools of Buddhism?

  30. What is the role of the Bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism?




    31. There is no point in saying that one should not doubt or one should believe. Just to say 'I believe' does not mean that you understand and see. When a student works on a mathematical problem, he comes to a stage beyond which he does not know how to proceed, and where he is in doubt and perplexity. As long as he has this doubt, he cannot proceed. If he wants to proceed, he must resolve this doubt. And there are ways of resolving that doubt. Just to say 'I believe', or 'I do not doubt' will certainly not solve the problem. To force oneself to believe and to accept a thing without understanding is political, and not spiritual or intellectual.
    Based on the provided text, answer the following questions:

  31. What is the main point the author is trying to convey about belief?

  32. Which of the following best illustrates the author's point about doubt?

  33. According to the author, what is the relationship between belief and understanding?



    34. The Buddha was always eager to dispel doubt. Even just a few minutes before his death, he requested his disciples several times to ask him if they had any doubts about his teaching, and not to feel sorry later that they could not clear those doubts. But the disciples were silent. What he said then was touching: 'If it is through respect for the Teacher that you do not ask anything, let even one of you inform his friend' (i.e., let one tell his friend so that the latter may ask the question on the other's behalf). Not only the freedom of thought, but also the tolerance allowed by the Buddha is astonishing to the student of the history of religions. Once in Nalanda a prominent and wealthy householder named Upali, a well-known lay disciple of Nigantha Nataputta (Jaina Mahavira), was expressly sent by Mahavira himself to meet the Buddha and defeat him in argument on certain points in the theory of Karma, because the Buddha's views on the subject were different from those of Mahavira.2 Quite contrary to expectations, Upali, at the end of the discussion, was convinced that the views of the Buddha were right and those of his master were wrong.
    Based on the provided text, answer the following questions:

  34. The Buddha's main concern regarding his disciples' doubts was:

  35. The Buddha's request to his disciples to ask questions demonstrates his:


  36. The story of Upali and Mahavira illustrates the Buddha's:

  37. The primary difference between the Buddha's and Mahavira's views was on:

  38. The outcome of the discussion between Upali and the Buddha suggests that:


    39.                             

    So he begged the Buddha to accept him as one of his lay disciples (Vpasaka). But the Buddha asked him to reconsider it, and not to be in a hurry, for 'considering carefully is good for well-known men like you'. When Upali expressed his desire again, the Buddha requested him to continue to respect and support his old religious teachers as he used to. In the third century B.C., the great Buddhist Emperor Asoka of India, following this noble example of tolerance and understanding, honoured and supported all other religions in his vast empire. In one of his Edicts carved on rock, the original of which one may read even today, the Emperor declared: 'One should not honour only one's own religion and condemn the religions of others, but one should honour others' religions for this or that reason. So doing, one helps one's own religion to grow and renders service to the religions of others too. In acting otherwise one digs the grave of one's own religion and also does harm to other religions. Whosoever honours his own religion and condemns other religions, does so indeed through devotion to his own religion, thinking that I will glorify my own religion. But on the contrary, in so doing he injures his own religion more gravely.
    Based on the provided text, answer the following questions:

  39. The Buddha's initial response to Upali's request to become his disciple was:

  40. The Buddha emphasized the importance of:


  41. Emperor Asoka's edicts promoted:

  42. Emperor Asoka believed that:

  43. The overall message of both the Buddha and Emperor Asoka is:



    44. So concord is good: Let all listen, and be willing to listen to the doctrines professed by others'. We should add here that this spirit of sympathetic understanding should be applied today not only in the matter of religious doctrine, but elsewhere as well. This spirit of tolerance and understanding has been from the beginning one of the most cherished ideals of Buddhist culture and civilization. That is why there is not a single example of persecution or the shedding of a drop of blood in converting people to Buddhism, or in its propagation during its long history of 2500 years. It spread peacefully all over the continent of Asia, having more than 500 million adherents today. Violence in any form, under any pretext whatsoever, is absolutely against the teaching of the Buddha. The question has often been asked: Is Buddhism a religion or a philosophy? It does not matter what you call it. Buddhism remains what it is whatever label you may put on it. The label is immaterial. Even the label 'Buddhism' which we give to the teaching of the Buddha is of little importance. The name one gives it is inessential. What's in a name ? That which we call a rose, By any other name would smell as sweet. In the same way Truth needs no label: it is neither Buddhist, Christian, Hindu nor Moslem. It is not the monopoly of anybody. Sectarian labels are a hindrance to the independent understanding of Truth, and they produce harmful prejudices in men's minds. This is true not only in intellectual and spiritual matters, but also in human relations. When, for instance, we meet a man, we do not look on him as a human being, but we put a label on him, such as English, French, German, American, or Jew, and regard him with all the prejudices associated with that label in our mind. Yet he may be completely free from those attributes which we have put on him.
    Based on the provided text, answer the following questions:

  44. What does the author emphasize as a core Buddhist principle?

  45. Why does the author argue that the label "Buddhism" is not essential?


  46. What is the author's criticism of sectarian labels?

  47. What is the significance of the quote "What's in a name?" from Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet in the context of the passage?

  48. What is the central message of the passage?



    49. People are so fond of discriminative labels that they even go to the length of putting them on human qualities and emotions common to all. So they talk of different 'brands' of charity, as for example, of Buddhist charity or Christian charity, and look down upon other 'brands' of charity. But charity cannot be sectarian; it is neither Christian, Buddhist, Hindu nor Moslem. The love of a mother for her child is neither Buddhist nor Christian: it is mother love. Human qualities and emotions like love, charity, compassion, tolerance, patience, friendship, desire, hatred, ill-will, ignorance, conceit, etc., need no sectarian labels; they belong to no particular religions. To the seeker after Truth it is immaterial from where an idea comes. The source and development of an idea is a matter for the academic. In fact, in order to understand Truth, it is not necessary even to know whether the teaching comes from the Buddha, or from anyone else. What is essential is seeing the thing, understanding it. There is an important story in the Majjhima-nikaya (sutta no. 140) which illustrates this. The Buddha once spent a night in a potter's shed. In the same shed there was a young recluse who had arrived there earlier.1 They did not know each other.

    The Buddha observed the recluse, and thought to himself: 'Pleasant are the ways of this young man. It would be good if I should ask about him'. So the Buddha asked him: 'O bhikkhu,2 in whose name have you left home ? Or who is your master ? Or whose doctrine do you like ?' 'O friend,' answered the young man, 'there is the recluse Gotama, a Sakyan scion, who left the Sakya-family to become a recluse. There is high repute abroad of him that he is an Arahant, a Fully-Enlightened One. In the name of that Blessed One I have become a recluse. He is my Master, and I like his doctrine'. 'Where does that Blessed One, the Arahant, the Fully-Enlight ened One live at the present time ?' 'In the countries to the north, friend, there is a city called Savatthi. It is there that that Blessed One, the Arahant, the Fully Enlightened One, is now living.' 'Have you ever seen him, that Blessed One ? Would you recog nize him if you saw him ?' 'I have never seen that Blessed One. Nor should I recognize him if I saw him.' The Buddha realized that it was in his name that this unknown young man had left home and become a recluse. But without divulging his own identity, he said: 'O bhikkhu, I will teach you the doctrine. Listen and pay attention. I will speak.' 'Very well, friend,' said the young man in assent.

    Based on the provided text, answer the following questions:

  49. What is the author's main point regarding human qualities and emotions?

  50. Why does the author argue that the source of an idea is not essential for understanding Truth?


  51. What was the significance of the encounter between the Buddha and the young recluse?

  52. What does the story of the young recluse illustrate about the Buddha's approach to teaching?

  53. What is the central message of the passage?



    54. Then the Buddha delivered to this young man a most remark able discourse explaining Truth (the gist of which is given later). It was only at the end of the discourse that this young recluse, whose name was Pukkusati, realized that the person who spoke to him was the Buddha himself. So he got up, went before the Buddha, bowed down at the feet of the Master, and apologized to him for calling him 'friend'2 unknowingly. He then begged the Buddha to ordain him and admit him into the Order of the Sangha. The Buddha asked him whether he had the alms-bowl and the robes ready. (A bhikkhu must have three robes and the alms-bowl for begging food.) When Pukkusati replied in the negative, the Buddha said that the Tathagatas would not ordain a person unless the alms-bowl and the robes were ready. So Pukkusati went out in search of an alms-bowl and robes, but was unfortunately savaged by a cow and died. Later, when this sad news reached the Buddha, he announced that Pukkusati was a wise man, who had already seen Truth, and attained the penultimate stage in the realization of Nirvana, and that he was born in a realm where he would become an Arahant and finally pass away, never to return to this world again. From this story it is quite clear that when Pukkusati listened to the Buddha and understood his teaching, he did not know who was speaking to him, or whose teaching it was.


    He saw Truth. If the medicine is good, the disease will be cured. It is not neces sary to know who prepared it, or where it came from. Almost all religions are built on faith—rather 'blind' faith it would seem. But in Buddhism emphasis is laid on 'seeing', knowing, understanding, and not on faith, or belief. In Buddhist texts there is a word saddha (Skt. sraddha) which is usually translated as 'faith' or 'belief'. But saddha is not 'faith' as such, but rather 'confidence' born out of conviction. In popular Buddhism and also in ordinary usage in the texts the word saddha, it must be admitted, has an element of 'faith' in the sense that it signifies devotion to the Buddha, the Dhamma (Teaching) and the Sangha (The Order). According to Asanga, the great Buddhist philosopher of the 4th century A.C., sraddha has three aspects: (1) full and firm conviction that a thing is, (2) serene joy at good qualities, and (3)aspiration or wish to achieve an object in view. However you put it, faith or belief as understood by most religions has little to do with Buddhism. The question of belief arises when there is no seeing—seeing in every sense of the word. The moment you see, the question of belief disappears. If I tell you that I have a gem hidden in the folded palm of my hand, the question of belief arises because you do not see it yourself. But if I unclench my fist and show you the gem, then you see it for yourself, and the question of belief does not arise. So the phrase in ancient Buddhist texts reads: 'Realiz ing, as one sees a gem (or a myrobalan fruit) in the palm'. A disciple of the Buddha named Musila tells another monk: 'Friend Savittha, without devotion, faith or belief,1 without liking or inclination, without hearsay or tradition, without considering apparent reasons, without delight in the speculations of opinions, I know and see that the cessation of becoming is Nirvana.'

    Based on the provided text, answer the following questions: Multiple-Choice Questions and Answers Passage-Based Questions

  54. What was the significance of the encounter between Pukkusati and the Buddha?

  55. Why did the Buddha refuse to ordain Pukkusati initially?


  56. What was the ultimate fate of Pukkusati?

  57. How does the author define "saddha" in Buddhism?

  58. What is the relationship between "seeing" and "belief" in Buddhism?

  59. What is the concept of karma in Buddhism?

  60. What is the Eightfold Path in Buddhism?


  61. What is the Four Noble Truths in Buddhism?


  62. What is the role of the Bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism?

  63. What is the difference between the Theravada and Mahayana schools of Buddhism?


    64.                             
    And the Buddha says: 'O bhikkhus, I say that the destruction of defilement and impurities is (meant) for a person who knows and who sees, and not for a person who does not know and does not see. It is always a question of knowing and seeing, and not that of believing. The teaching of the Buddha is qualified as ehi-passika, inviting you to 'come and see', but not to come and believe. The expressions used everywhere in Buddhist texts referring to persons who realized Truth are: 'The dustless and stainless Eye of Truth (Dhamma-cakkbu) has arisen.' 'He has seen Truth, has attained Truth, has known Truth, has penetrated into Truth, has crossed over doubt, is without wavering.' 'Thus with right wisdom he sees it as it is { yatha bhutam)'A With reference to his own Enlightenment the Buddha said: 'The eye was born, knowledge was born, wisdom was born, science was born, light was born.'5 It is always seeing through knowledge or wisdom (nana-dassana), and not believing through faith.
    Based on the provided text, answer the following questions: Multiple-Choice Questions and Answers Passage-Based Questions

  64. According to the Buddha, the destruction of defilement and impurities is meant for:

  65. The Buddha's teaching is characterized as "ehi-passika," which means:

  66. The expressions used in Buddhist texts to describe those who have realized Truth emphasize:


  67. The Buddha's own Enlightenment is described as:

  68. The central theme of the Buddha's teaching, as conveyed in the text, is:


    69. This was more and more appreciated at a time when Brahmanic orthodoxy intolerantly insisted on believing and accepting their tradition and authority as the only Truth without question. Once a group of learned and well-known Brahmins went to see the Buddha and had a long discussion with him. One of the group, a Brahmin youth of 16 years of age, named Kapathika, considered by them all to be an exceptionally brilliant mind, put a question to the Buddha 'Venerable Gotama, there are the ancient holy scriptures of the Brahmins handed down along the line by unbroken oral tradition of texts.


    With regard to them, Brahmins come to the absolute conclusion: "This alone is Truth, and everything else is false". Now, what does the Venerable Gotama say about this ?' The Buddha inquired: 'Among Brahmins is there any one single Brahmin who claims that he personally knows and sees that "This alone is Truth, and everything else is false." ?' The young man was frank, and said: 'No'. 'Then, is there any one single teacher, or a teacher of teachers of Brahmins back to the seventh generation, or even any one of those original authors of those scriptures, who claims that he knows and he sees: "This alone is Truth, and everything else is false"?' 'No.' 'Then, it is like a line of blind men, each holding on to the preceding one; the first one does not see, the middle one also does not see, the last one also does not see. Thus, it seems to me that the state of the Brahmins is like that of a line of blind men.' Then the Buddha gave advice of extreme importance to the group of Brahmins: 'It is not proper for a wise man who maintains (lit. protects) truth to come to the conclusion: "This alone is Truth, and everything else is false".

  69. The Buddha's teaching challenged the Brahmanic orthodoxy by:

  70. The young Brahmin, Kapathika, believed that:


  71. The Buddha's response to Kapathika's question emphasized:

  72. The Buddha's analogy of the "line of blind men" illustrates:

  73. The Buddha's advice to the Brahmins was:


    74.                             

    Asked by the young Brahmin to explain the idea of maintaining or protecting truth, the Buddha said: 'A man has a faith. If he says "This is my faith", so far he maintains truth. But by that he cannot proceed to the absolute conclusion: "This alone is Truth, and everything else is false".' In other words, a man may believe what he likes, and he may say 'I believe this'. So far he respects truth. But because of his belief or faith, he should not say that what he believes is alone the Truth, and everything else is false. The Buddha says: 'To be attached to one thing (to a certain view) and to look down upon other things (views) as inferior— this the wise men call a fetter.'Once the Buddha explained1 the doctrine of cause and effect to his disciples, and they said that they saw it and understood it clearly. Then the Buddha said: 'O bhikkhus, even this view, which is so pure and so clear, if you cling to it, if you fondle it, if you treasure it, if you are attached to it, then you do not understand that the teaching is similar to a raft, which is for crossing over, and not for getting hold of.' Elsewhere the Buddha explains this famous simile in which his teaching is compared to a raft for crossing over, and not for getting hold of and carrying on one's back: 'O bhikkhus, a man is on a journey. He comes to a vast stretch of water. On this side the shore is dangerous, but on the other it is safe and without danger. No boat goes to the other shore which is safe and without danger, nor is there any bridge for crossing over. He says to himself: "This sea of water is vast, and the shore on this side is full of danger; but on the other shore it is safe and without danger.

    No boat goes to the other side, nor is there a bridge for crossing over. It would be good therefore if I would gather grass, wood, branches and leaves to make a raft, and with the help of the raft cross over safely to the other side, exerting myself with my hands and feet". Then that man, O bhikkhus, gathers grass, wood, branches and leaves and makes a raft, and with the help of that raft crosses over safely to the other side, exerting himself with his hands and feet. Having crossed over and got to the other side, he thinks: "This raft was of great help to me. With its aid I have crossed safely over to this side, exerting myself with my hands and feet. It would be good if I carry this raft on my head or on my back wherever I go". 'What do you think, O bhikkhus, if he acted in this way would that man be acting properly with regard to the raft ? "No, Sir". In which way then would he be acting properly with regard to the raft ? Having crossed and gone over to the other side, suppose that man should think: "This raft was a great help to me. With its aid I have crossed safely over to this side, exerting myself with my hands and feet. It would be good if I beached this raft on the shore, or moored it and left it afloat, and then went on my way wherever it may be". Acting in this way would that man act properly with regard to that raft.

  74. What is the Buddha's warning against clinging to one's beliefs?

  75. What is the significance of the simile of the raft in the Buddha's teachings?


  76. How does the Buddha advise his disciples to approach their beliefs?

  77. What is the danger of clinging to beliefs, according to the Buddha?

  78. What is the central message of the passage?


    79. Multiple-Choice Questions and Answers Passage-Based Questions

    'In the same manner, O bhikkhus, I have taught a doctrine similar to a raft—it is for crossing over, and not for carrying (lit. getting hold of). You, O bhikkhus, who understand that the teaching is similar to a raft, should give up even good things (dhamma); how much more then should you give up evil things (adhamma).' From this parable it is quite clear that the Buddha's teaching is meant to carry man to safety, peace, happiness, tranquillity, the attainment of Nirvana. The whole doctrine taught by the Buddha leads to this end. He did not say things just to satisfy intellectual curiosity. He was a practical teacher and taught only those things which would bring peace and happiness to man. The Buddha was once staying in a Simsapa forest in Kosambi (near Allahabad). He took a few leaves into his hand, and asked his disciples: 'What do you think, O bhikkhus? Which is more? These few leaves in my hand or the leaves in the forest over here?' 'Sir, very few are the leaves in the hand of the Blessed One, but indeed the leaves in the Simsapa forest over here are very much more abundant.' 'Even so, bhikkhus, of what I have known I have told you only a little, what I have not told you is very much more. And why have I not told you (those things) ? Because that is not useful. . . not leading to Nirvana. That is why I have not told you those things.' It is futile, as some scholars vainly try to do, for us to speculate on what the Buddha knew but did not tell us. The Buddha was not interested in discussing unnecessary metaphysical questions which are purely speculative and which create imaginary problems. He considered them as a 'wilderness of opinions'. It seems that there were some among his own disciples who did not appreciate this attitude of his. For, we have the example of one of them, Malunkyaputta by name, who put to the Buddha ten well-known classical questions on metaphysical problems and demanded answers.


    One day Malunkyaputta got up from his afternoon meditation, went to the Buddha, saluted him, sat on one side and said: 'Sir, when I was all alone meditating, this thought occurred to me: There are these problems unexplained, put aside and rejected by the Blessed One. Namely, (i) is the universe eternal or (2) is it not eternal, (3) is the universe finite or (4) is it infinite, (5) is soul the same as body or (6) is soul one thing and body another thing, (7) does the Tathagata exist after death, or (8) does he not exist after death, or (9) does he both (at the same time) exist and not exist after death, or (10) does he both (at the same time) not exist and not not-exist. These problems the Blessed One does not explain to me. This (attitude) does not please me, I do not appreciate it. I will go to the Blessed One and ask him about this matter. If the Blessed One explains them to me, then I will continue to follow the holy life under him. If he does not explain them, I will leave the Order and go away. If the Blessed One knows that the universe is eternal, let him explain it to me so. If the Blessed One knows that the universe is not eternal, let him say so. If the Blessed One does not know whether the universe is eternal or not, etc., then for a person who does not know, it is straight forward to say I do not know, I do not see

  79. What is the Buddha's teaching primarily intended for?

  80. Why did the Buddha choose not to discuss certain metaphysical questions?


  81. What was Malunkyaputta's attitude towards the Buddha's teachings?

  82. How did the Buddha respond to Malunkyaputta's questions?

  83. What is the central message of the passage?


    84. The Buddha's reply to Malunkyaputta should do good to many millions in the world today who are wasting valuable time on such metaphysical questions and unnecessarily disturbing their peace of mind: 'Did I ever tell you, Malunkyaputta, "Come, Malunkyaputta, lead the holy life under me, I will explain these questions to you ?" ' 'No, Sir.' 'Then, Malunkyaputta, even you, did you tell me: "Sir, I will lead the holy life under the Blessed One, and the Blessed One will explain these questions to me"?' 'No, Sir.' 'Even now, Malunkyaputta, I do not tell you: "Come and lead the holy life under me, I will explain these questions to you". And you do not tell me either: "Sir, I will lead the holy life under the Blessed One, and he will explain these questions to me". Under these circumstances, you foolish one, who refuses whom? 'Malunkyaputta, if anyone says: "I will not lead the holy life under the Blessed One until he explains these questions," he may die with these questions unanswered by the Tathagata. Suppose Malunkyaputta, a man is wounded by a poisoned arrow, and his friends and relatives bring him to a surgeon. Suppose the man should then say: "I will not let this arrow be taken out until I know who shot me; whether he is a Ksatriya (of the warrior caste) or a Brahmana (of the priestly caste) or a Vaisya (of the trading and agricultural caste) or a Sudra (of the low caste); what his name and family may be; whether he is tall, short, or of medium stature; whether his complexion is black, brown, or golden; from which village, town or city he comes. I will not let this arrow be taken out until I know the kind of bow with which I was shot; the kind of bowstring used; the type of arrow; what sort of feather was used on the arrow and with what kind of material the point of the arrow was made." Malunkyaputta, that man would die without knowing any of these things. Even so, Malunkyaputta, if anyone says: "I will not follow the holy life under the Blessed One until he answers these questions such as whether the universe is eternal or not, etc.," he would die with these questions unanswered by the Tathagata.'

    Multiple-Choice Questions and Answers Passage-Based Questions

  84. What is the Buddha's main point in his response to Malunkyaputta?

  85. What is the significance of the simile of the poisoned arrow used by the Buddha?


  86. What is the Buddha's attitude towards those who insist on metaphysical questions before following his teachings?

  87. What is the central message of the passage?

  88. What is the Buddha's advice to those who seek spiritual enlightenment?


    89.                             

    Then the Buddha explains to Malunkyaputta that the holy life does not depend on these views. Whatever opinion one may have about these problems, there is birth, old age, decay, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, distress, "the Cessation of which (i.e. Nirvana) I declare in this very life." 'Therefore, Malunkyaputta, bear in mind what I have explained as explained, and what I have not explained as unexplained. What are the things that I have not explained ? Whether the universe is eternal or not, etc., (those 10 opinions) I have not explained. Why, Malunkyaputta, have I not explained them? Because it is not useful, it is not fundamentally connected with the spiritual holy life, is not conducive to aversion, detachment, cessation, tranquillity, deep penetration, full realization, Nirvana. That is why I have not told you about them. 'Then, what, Malunkyaputta, have I explained ? I have explained dukkha, the arising oi dukkha, the cessation of dukkha, and the way leading to the cessation of dukkha-1 Why, Malunkyaputta, have I explained them ? Because it is useful, is fundamentally connected with the spiritual holy life, is conducive to aversion, detachment, cessation, tranquillity, deep penetration, full realization, Nirvana. Therefore I have explained them.' Let us now examine the Four Noble Truths which the Buddha told Malunkyaputta he had explained.


    Multiple-Choice Questions and Answers Passage-Based Questions

  89. What does the Buddha emphasize as the most important aspect of the spiritual life?

  90. Why did the Buddha choose not to explain metaphysical questions to Malunkyaputta?


  91. What are the Four Noble Truths according to the Buddha?

  92. Why did the Buddha consider it important to explain the Four Noble Truths to Malunkyaputta?

  93. What is the central message of the passage?


    94. The Four Noble Truths
    THE FIRST NOBLE TRUTH : DUKKHA
    The heart of the Buddha's teaching lies in the Four Noble Truths (Cattdri Ariyasaccant) which he expounded in his very first sermon1 to his old colleagues, the five ascetics, at Isipatana (modern Sarnath) near Benares. In this sermon, as we have it in the original texts, these four Truths are given briefly. But there are innumerable places in the early Buddhist scriptures where they are explained again and again, with greater detail and in different ways. If we study the Four Noble Truths with the help of these references and explanations, we get a fairly good and accurate account of the essential teachings of the Buddha according to the original texts.
    The Four Noble Truths are:
    1. Dukkha
    2. Samudaya, the arising or origin of dukkha,
    3. Nirodha, the cessation of dukkha,
    4. Magga, the way leading to the cessation of dukkha.

    THE FIRST NOBLE TRUTH: DUKKHA
    The First Noble Truth (Dukkha-ariyasacca) is generally trans lated by almost all scholars as 'The Noble Truth of uffering', and it is interpreted to mean that life according to Buddhism is nothing but suffering and pain. Both translation and interpretation are highly unsatisfactory and misleading. It is because of this limited, free and easy translation, and its superficial interpretation, that many people have been misled into regarding Buddhism as
    pessimistic.

  94. What is the central theme of the Buddha's first sermon?

  95. What is the significance of the Four Noble Truths in Buddhist philosophy?


  96. How does the author criticize the translation of "Dukkha" as "suffering"?

  97. What is the meaning of "Dukkha" according to the author?

  98. Why is it important to understand the Four Noble Truths according to the author?


    99. First of all, Buddhism is neither pessimistic nor optimistic. If anything at all, it is realistic, for it takes a realistic view of life and of the world. It looks at things objectively (yathabhutam). It does not falsely lull you into living in a fool's paradise, nor does it frighten and agonize you with all kinds of imaginary fears and sins. It tells you exactly and objectively what you are and what the world around you is, and shows you the way to perfect freedom, peace, tranquillity and happiness. One physician may gravely exaggerate an illness and give up hope altogether. Another may ignorantly declare that there is no illness and that no treatment is necessary, thus deceiving the patient with a false consolation. You may call the first one pessimistic and the second optimistic. Both are equally dangerous. But a third physician diagnoses the symptoms correctly, understands the cause and the nature of the illness, sees clearly that it can be cured, and courageously administers a course of treatment, thus saving his patient. The Buddha is like the last physician. He is the wise and scientific doctor for the ills of the world (Bhisakka or Bhaisajya-guru).

    It is true that the Pali word dukkha (or Sanskrit duhkha) in ordinary usage means 'suffering', 'pain', 'sorrow' or 'misery', as opposed to the word sukha meaning 'happiness', 'comfort' or 'ease'. But the term dukkha as the First Noble Truth, which represents the Buddha's view of life and the world, has a deeper philosophical meaning and connotes enormously wider senses. It is admitted that the term dukkha in the First Noble Truth contains, quite obviously, the ordinary meaning of 'suffering', but in addition it also includes deeper ideas such as 'imperfection', 'impermanence', 'emptiness', 'insubstantiality'. It is difficult there fore to find one word to embrace the whole conception of the term dukkha as the First Noble Truth, and so it is better to leave it untranslated, than to give an inadequate and wrong idea of it by conveniently translating it as 'suffering' or 'pain'.

  99. How does the author describe the Buddha's approach to life and the world?


  100. What is the Buddha's role according to the author?

  101. Why does the author argue that translating "Dukkha" as "suffering" is misleading?

  102. What are the deeper meanings of "Dukkha" according to the author?

  103. What is the central message of the passage?


    104. The Buddha does not deny happiness in life when he says there is suffering. On the contrary he admits different forms of happiness, both material and spiritual, for laymen as well as for monks. In the Anguttara-nikaya, one of the five original Collections in Pali containing the Buddha's discourses, there is a list of happinesses (sukhdni), such as the happiness of family life and the happiness of the life of a recluse, the happiness of sense pleasures and the happiness of renunciation, the happiness of attachment and the happiness of detachment, physical happiness and mental happiness etc.1 But all these are included in dukkha. Even the very pure spiritual states of dhyana (recueillement or trance) attained by the practice of higher meditation, free from even a shadow of suffer ing in the accepted sense of the word, states which may be described as unmixed happiness, as well as the state of dhjana which is free from sensations both pleasant (sukha) and unpleasant' (dukkha) and is only pure equanimity and awareness—even these very high spiritual states are included in dukkha. In one of the suttas of the Majjhima-nikdya, (again one of the five original Collections), after praising the spiritual happiness of these dhyanas, the Buddha says that they are 'impermanent, dukkha, and subject to change' (anicca dukkha viparinamadbamma).

    Notice that the word dukkha is explicitly used. It is dukkha, not because there is 'suffering' in the ordinary sense of the word, but because 'whatever is impermanent is dukkha' (yad aniccam tam dukkham). The Buddha was realistic and objective. He says, with regard to life and the enjoyment of sense-pleasures, that one should clearly understand three things: (I) attraction or enjoyment (assada), (2) evil consequence or danger or unsatisfactoriness (adinava), and (3) freedom or liberation (nissarana).3 When you see a pleasant, charming and beautiful person, you like him (or her), you are attracted, you enjoy seeing that person again and again, you derive pleasure and satisfaction from that person.

    This is enjoyment (assada). It is a fact of experience. But this enjoyment is not permanent, just as that person and all his (or her) attractions are not permanent either. When the situation changes, when you cannot see that person, when you are deprived of this enjoyment, you become sad, you may become unreasonable and unbalanced, you may even behave foolishly. This is the evil, unsatis factory and dangerous side of the picture (adinava). This, too, is a fact of experience. Now if you have no attachment to the person, if you are completely detached, that is freedom, liberation (nissarana). These three things are true with regard to all enjoyment in life. From this it is evident that it is no question of pessimism or optimism, but that we must take account of the pleasures of life as well as of its pains and sorrows, and also of freedom from them, in order to understand life completely and objectively. Only then is true liberation possible.


  104. How does the Buddha address the misconception of Buddhism as a pessimistic religion?


  105. What does the Buddha mean when he says that even spiritual happiness is included in Dukkha?

  106. What are the three things one should understand about enjoyment according to the Buddha?

  107. What is the Buddha's advice on how to approach pleasure and enjoyment?

  108. What is the central message of the passage?


    109. Regarding this question the Buddha says: 'O bhikkhus, if any recluses or brahmanas do not understand objectively in this way that the enjoyment of sense-pleasures is enjoyment, that their unsatisfactoriness is unsatisfactoriness, that liberation from them is liberation, then it is not possible that they themselves will certainly understand the desire for sense-pleasures completely, or that they will be able to instruct another person to that end, or that the person following their instruction will completely understand the desire for sense-pleasures. But, O bhikkhus, if any recluses or brahmanas understand objectively in this way that the enjoyment of sense-pleasures is enjoyment, that their unsatis factoriness is unsatisfactoriness, that liberation from them is liberation, then it is possible that they themselves will certainly under stand the desire for sense-pleasures completely, and that they will be able to instruct another person to that end, and that that person following their instruction will completely understand the desire for sense-pleasures.

    The conception of dukkha may be viewed from three aspects: (i) dukkha as ordinary suffering (dukkha-dukkha), (2) dukkha as produced by change (viparinama-dukkha) and (3) dukkha as conditioned states (samkhara-dukkha). All kinds of suffering in life like birth, old age, sickness, death, association with unpleasant persons and conditions, separation from beloved ones and pleasant conditions, not getting what one desires, grief, lamentation, distress—all such forms of physical and mental suffering, which are universally accepted as suffering or pain, are included in dukkha as ordinary suffering (dukkha-dukkha).


  109. What is the Buddha's emphasis on understanding the nature of sense-pleasures?


  110. What are the three aspects of Dukkha according to the Buddha?

  111. How does the Buddha define "ordinary suffering" (dukkha-dukkha)?

  112. What is the significance of understanding the nature of Dukkha?

  113. What is the Buddha's advice on how to approach sense-pleasures?


    114.                             

    A happy feeling, a happy condition in life, is not permanent, not everlasting. It changes sooner or later. When it changes, it produces pain, suffering, unhappiness. This vicissitude is included in dukkha as suffering produced by change (viparinama-dukkha). It is easy to understand the two forms of suffering (dukkha) mentioned above. No one will dispute them. This aspect of the First Noble Truth is more popularly known because it is easy to understand. It is common experience in our daily life. But the third form of dukkha as conditioned states (samkharadukkha) is the most important philosophical aspect of the First Noble Truth, and it requires some analytical explanation of what we consider as a 'being', as an 'individual', or as 'I'. What we call a 'being', or an 'individual', or T, according to Buddhist philosophy, is only a combination of ever-changing physical and mental forces or energies, which may be divided into five groups or aggregates (pancakkhandha).

    The Buddha says: 'In short these five aggregates of attachment are dukkha Elsewhere he distinctly defines dukkha as the five aggregates: 'O bhikkhus, what is dukkha ? It should be said that it is the five aggregates of attachment'.2 Here it should be clearly understood that dukkha and the five aggregates are not two different things; the five aggregates themselves are dukkha. We will understand this point better when we have some notion of the five aggregates which constitute the so-called 'being'. Now, what are these five ?


  114. What is the significance of the concept of "viparinama-dukkha"?


  115. What is the most important philosophical aspect of the First Noble Truth?

  116. What is the Buddhist concept of a "being" or "individual"?

  117. What are the five aggregates that constitute the “being”?

  118. How does the Buddha relate the five aggregates to Dukkha?

  119. What are the five aggregates according to Buddhist philosophy?


  120. How does the Buddha define "mind" in relation to matter?

  121. What is the relationship between mind and physical experiences according to the Buddha?

  122. Why is it important to understand the five aggregates?

  123. What is the Buddha's message regarding the nature of the self or individual?


    124.                             

    The third is the Aggregate of Perceptions (Sannakkhandha). Like sensations, perceptions also are of six kinds, in relation to six internal faculties and the corresponding six external objects. Like sensations, they are produced through the contact of our six faculties with the external world. It is the perceptions that recog nize objects whether physical or mental. The fourth is the Aggregate of Mental Formations2 (Samkharak khandha). In this group are included all volitional activities both good and bad. What is generally known as karma (or kamma) comes under this group. The Buddha's own definition of karma should be remembered here: 'O bhikkhus, it is volition (cetana) that I call karma. Having willed, one acts through body, speech and mind.'3 Volition is 'mental construction, mental activity. Its function is to direct the mind in the sphere of good, bad or neutral activities.'4 Just like sensations and perceptions, volition is of six kinds, connected with the six internal faculties and the corresponding six objects (both physical and mental) in the external world.5 Sensations and perceptions are not volitional actions. They do not produce karmic effects. It is only volitional actions— such as attention (manasikdra), will (chanda), determination (adhimokkha), confidence (saddha), concentration (samadhi), wisdom (pahha), energy (viriya), desire (raga), repugnance or hate (patigha)jDCtncc (avijja), conceit (mana), idea of self (sakkaya-ditthi) etc. tlml can produce karmic effects. There are 52 such mental llviiics which constitute the Aggregate of Mental Formations. The l ifthis the Aggregate of Consciousness (Vinnattakkhandha).

    Eonnciousness is a reaction or response which has one of the six •pultics (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind) as its basis, and One of the six corresponding external phenomena (visible form, (omul, odour, taste, tangible things and mind-objects, i.e., an Idea or thought) as its object. For instance, visual conscious ness (cakkhu-vinnana) has the eye as its basis and a visible form as lis object. Mental consciousness (mano-vihhana) has the mind (manas) as its basis and a mental object, i.e., an idea or thought [dhamma) as its object. So consciousness is connected with other faculties. Thus, like sensation, perception and volition, consciousness also is of six kinds, in relation to six internal faculties and responding six external objects.

    Multiple-Choice Questions and Passage-Based Questions

  124. What is the difference between sensations and perceptions?

  125. What is the role of volitional activities in Buddhism?


  126. How does the Buddha define "karma"?

  127. What is the relationship between consciousness and the other faculties?

  128. Why is it important to understand the five aggregates?


    129. It should be clearly understood that consciousness does not rec ognize an object. It is only a sort of wareness—awareness of the presence of an object. When the eye comes in contact with a colour, for instance blue, visual consciousness arises which simply is awareness of the presence of a colour; but it does not recognize that it is blue. There is no recognition at this stage. It is percepdon (the third Aggregate discussed above) that recognizes that it is blue. The term 'visual consciousness' is a philosophical expression denoting the same idea as is conveyed by the ordinary word 'seeing'. Seeing does not mean recognizing. So are the other forms of consciousness. It must be repeated here that according to Buddhist philosophy there is no permanent, unchanging spirit which can be considered 'Self', or 'Soul', or 'Ego', as opposed to matter, and that consciousness (vinnana) should not be taken as 'spirit' in opposition to matter.

    This point has to be particularly emphasized, because a wrong notion that consciousness is a sort of Self or Soul that continues as a permanent substance through life, has persisted from the earliest time to the present day. One of the Buddha's own disciples, Sati by name, held that the Master taught: 'It is the same consciousness that transmigrates and wanders about.' The Buddha asked him what he meant by 'consciousness'. Sati's reply is classical: 'It is that which expresses, which feels, which experiences the results of good and bad deeds here and there'. 'To whomever, you stupid one', remonstrated the Master, 'have you heard me expounding the doctrine in this manner ? Haven't I in many ways explained consciousness as arising out of conditions: that there is no arising of consciousness without conditions.'
    on..

    Then the Buddha went on to explain consciousness in detail: 'Conciousness is named according to whatever condition through which it arises: on account of the eye and visible forms arises a consciousness, and it is called visual consciousness; on account of the ear and sounds arises a consciousness, and it is called auditory consciousness; on account of the nose and odours arises a consciousness, and it is called olfactory consciousness ; on account of the tongue and tastes arises a consciousness, and it is called gustatory consciousness; on account of the body and tangible objects arises a consciousness, and it is called tactile consciousness; on account of the mind and mind-objects (ideas and thoughts) arises a consciousness, and it is called mental consciousness.' Then the Buddha explained it further by an illustration: A fire is named according to the material on account of which it burns. A fire may burn on account of wood, and it is called wood fire. It may burn on account of straw, and then it is called straw fire.

    So consciousness is named according to the condition through which it arises. Dwelling on this point, Buddhaghosa, the great commentator, explains: '. . . a fire that burns on account of wood burns only when there is a supply, but dies down in that very place when it (the supply) is no longer there, because then the condition has changed, but (the fire) does not cross over to splinters, etc., and become a splinter-fire and so on; even so the consciousness that arises on account of the eye and visible forms arises in that gate of sense organ (i.e., in the eye), only when there is the condition of the eye, visible forms, light and attention, but ceases then and there when it (the condition) is no more there, because then the condition has changed, but (the consciousness) does not cross over to the ear, etc., and become auditory consciousness and so

  129. What is the difference between consciousness and perception?

  130. How does the Buddha define consciousness?

  131. What is the significance of the simile of the fire used by the Buddha?

  132. What is the Buddha’s message regarding the nature of the self or individual?

  133. What is the Buddha's warning against the misconception of consciousness as a permanent self?


    134. The Buddha declared in unequivocal terms that consciousness depends on matter, sensation, perception and mental formations, and that it cannot exist independently of them. He says: 'Consciousness may exist having matter as its means (riipupayam), matter as its object (rupdrammanani), matter as its support (rupapatittham), and seeking delight it may grow, increase and develop; or consciousness may exist having sensation as its means . . . or perception as its means . . . or mental formations as its means, mental formations as its object, mental formations as its support, and seeking delight it may grow, increase and develop. 'Were a man to say: I shall show the coming, the going, the passing away, the arising, the growth, the increase or the development of consciousness apart from matter, sensation, perception and mental formations, he would be speaking of some thing that does not exist.'2 Very briefly these are the five Aggregates. What we call a 'being', or an 'individual', or T, is only a convenient name or a label given to the combination of these five groups. They are all impermanent, all constantly changing. 'Whatever is impermanent is dukkha(Yad aniccam tam dukkham). This is the true meaning of the Buddha's words: 'In brief the five Aggregates of Attachment are dukkha.' They are not the same for two consecutive moments. Here A is not equal to A. They are in a flux of momentary arising and disappearing.

    'O Brahmana, it is just like a mountain river, flowing far and swift, taking everything along with it; there is no moment, no instant, no second when it stops flowing, but it goes on flowing and continuing. So Brahmana, is human life, like a mountain river.'1 As the Buddha told Ratthapala: 'The world is in continuous flux and is impermanent.' One thing disappears, conditioning the appearance of the next in a series of cause and effect. There is no unchanging substance in them. There is nothing behind them that can be called a permanent Self (Atmari), individuality, or anything that can in reality be called T. Every one will agree that neither matter, nor sensation, nor perception, nor any one of those mental activities, nor consciousness can really be called 'I'.2 But when these five physical and mental aggregates which are interdependent are working together in combination as a physio-psychological machine,3 we get the idea of T. But this is only a false idea, a mental formation, which is nothing but one of those 52 mental formations of the fourth Aggregate which we have just discussed, namely, it is the idea of self (sakkaya-ditthi).

  134. What is the Buddha's view on the nature of consciousness?

  135. How does the Buddha describe the relationship between consciousness and the five aggregates?

    136.
                                
    หมูเด้งขออวยพรให้ได้คะแนนเยอะๆนะฮับ
    กด Submit เพื่อตรวจคะแนน กด กด กดเลยฮับ // เมื่อได้จำนวนคะแนนแล้ว ให้ไปแจ้งผู้คุมสอบ อย่าลืมหลักฐานเอาไปแสดงด้วย เป็นมือถือ หรือ โน็ตบุค เพื่อให้ผู้คุมสอบบันทึกคะแนนลงสมุดคะแนน