The Connected Discourses of the Buddha

by Bhikkhu Bodhi

  135 Be and Se read onı̄tapattapāṇiṃ, but Ee has oṇitapattapāṇiṃ here and oṇı̄tapattapāniṃ just below; at 41:2–4, where the nominative plural occurs, all three read onı̄tapattapāṇino (see n. 290), though vv.ll. oṇı̄ta- and even oṇitta- are found. Norman, who discusses the expression at length (GD, pp. 257–58, and Collected Papers 2:123–24), explains the construction here as an accusative absolute. He maintains that the form of the compound requires that the initial past participle should apply to both the hand and the bowl and suggests that onı̄ta- is from Skt ava-nı̄, “to put or bring (into water).” Thus in his view the compound means “having put hands and bowl into water” in order to wash them. At an alms offering, however, the Buddhist monk does not immerse his bowl in water; rather, when the meal is finished, water is poured into his empty bowl, and he uses his soiled right hand to clean the bowl, so that bowl and hand are washed simultaneously. Further, Norman seems to have overlooked the phrase bhagavantaṃ dhotahatthaṃ onı̄tapattapāṇiṃ (at Vin I 221,20, 245,35, 249,4), where the washing of the hand is already covered by dhotahatthaṃ. Therefore I accept the usual commentarial gloss: onı̄tapattapāṇin ti patta-to onı̄tapāṇiṃ apanı̄tahatthan ti vuttaṃ hoti, “one with hand removed from the bowl,” or more idiomatically, “one who has put away (or aside) the bowl.”The commentaries make mention of the interesting v.l. oṇitta- (at Sv I 277,18), glossed āmisāpanayanena sucikata (at Sv-pṭ I 405,9–10). Oṇitta (or onitta) probably corresponds to Skt avanikta; see MW, s.v. ava-nij and PED, s.v. oṇojana, oṇojeti. The meaning would then be “one who has washed bowl and hand.”

  136 For a bhikkhu to teach the Dhamma to one wearing sandals who is not ill is a violation of the Vinaya rule Sekhiya 61; to teach to one sitting on a high seat, a violation of Sekhiya 69; to teach to one with the head covered, a violation of Sekhiya 67. All such actions indicate disrespect on the part of the listener.

  137 Due to a misreading of the summary verse at IV 132, Ee wrongly entitles this sutta “Devadahakhaṇo” and the next “Saṅgayha.” Correctly, as in Be and Se, this sutta is “Devadaha,” the next “Khaṇa,” and the third “Saṅgayha.”

  138 Chaphassāyatanikā. Spk: There is no separate hell named “Contact’s Sixfold Base,” for this designation applies to all thirty-one great hells; but this is said here with reference to the great hell Avı̄ci. At 56:43, a hell so described is referred to as mahāpariḷāha niraya, the Hell of the Great Conflagration.

  139 Spk: Here the Tāvatiṃsa city is intended. What does he show by this? “It isn’t possible to live the holy life of the path either in hell, because of extreme suffering, or in heaven, because of extreme pleasure, on account of which negligence arises through continuous amusements and delights. But the human world is a combination of pleasure and pain, so this is the field of action for the holy life of the path. The human state gained by you is the opportunity, the occasion, for living the holy life.”

  140 Ee wrongly entitles this sutta Agayha, and runs it together with the next (beginning at IV 128,8). Thus from 35:137 on my count exceeds Ee’s by one. Be entitles 35:136 Paṭhamarūpārāma and 35:137 Dutiya-rūpārāma, while in Se they are called Sagayha and Gayha respectively. The latter, it seems, should be amended to Agayha, as the distinction between them is the inclusion of verses in the former and their absence in the latter.

  141 The verses = Sn 759–65. The following corrections should be made in Ee (at IV 127–28): v. 5a read: Passa dhammaṃ durājānaṃ; 6cd: santike na vijānanti, magā dhammass’ akovidā; 8b: buddhuṃ. At 3b, Be and Ee have sakkāyassa nirodhanaṃ, Se sakkāyass’ uparodhanaṃ; the meaning is the same. I read 3d with Be and Se as passataṃ, though Ee dassanaṃ is supported by some mss, and Spk can be read as leaning towards either alternative (see following note).

  142 Spk: This view of the wise who see (idạ passantānaṃ paṇḍitānaṃ dassanaṃ) runs counter (paccanı̄kạ), contrary, to the entire world. For the world conceives the five aggregates as permanent, happiness, self, and beautiful, while to the wise they are impermanent, suffering, nonself, and foul.

  143 Spk: Who else except the noble ones are able to know that state of Nibbāna (nibb̄napadạ)? Having known it rightly by the wisdom of arahantship, they immediately become taintless and are fully quenched by the quenching of the defilements (kilesaparinibb̄nena parinibbanti). Or else, having become taintless by rightly knowing, in the end they are fully quenched by the quenching of the aggregates (khandhaparinibb̄nena parinibbanti).

  144 This sutta and the next are parallel to 22:33–34, and are more concise variants on 35:101–2. My title here follows Be; Se entitles them Palāsa, Ee Palāsinā, both meaning “foliage.”

  145 35:140–45 are parallel to 22:18–20.

  146 Cp. 12:37. Spk here offers essentially the same explanation as that included in II, n. 111, adding that in this sutta the preliminary stage of insight (pubbabhagavipassanā) is discussed.

  147 Nibbānasappāyaṃ paṭipadaṃ. Spk: The practice that is helpful (upakārapaṭipad̄ā), suitable, for Nibbāna.

  148 Anantevāsikam idaṃ bhikkhave brahmacariyaṃ vussati anācariyakaṃ. This is a riddle which turns upon two puns difficult to replicate in English. A “student” (antev̄s̄) is literally “one who dwells within,” and thus (as the text explains below) one for whom defilements do not dwell within (na antovasanti) is said to be “without students.” The word “teacher” (̄cariya) is here playfully connected with the verb “to assail” (samud̄carati); thus one unassailed by defilements is said to be “without a teacher.” Spk glosses anantevāsikaṃ with anto vasanakilesavirahitạm (“devoid of defilements dwelling within”), and anācariyakaṃ with ā̄caraṇakilesavirahitạm (“devoid of the ‘assailing’ defilements”).

  149 See n. 79 above.

  150 As at 12:68. See II, n. 198.

  151 Cp. 35:70. Spk says that in this sutta the reviewing (paccavekkhaṇā ) of the sekha and the arahant is discussed.

  152 Indriyasampanno. Spk: Complete in faculties (paripunṇ̣indriyo ). One who has attained arahantship by exploring with insight the six (sense) faculties is said to be “complete in faculties” because he possesses tamed faculties, or because he possesses the (spiritual) faculties of faith, etc., arisen by exploring with insight the six (sense) faculties, the eye, etc. For another interpretation of “equipped with faculties,” see 48:19.

  153 Parallel to 12:16 and 22:115.

  154 This sutta and the next are parallel to 22:51, but while the last sentence of the latter reads cittaṃ vimuttaṃ suvimuttan ti vuccati, the present one has simply cittaṃ suvimuttan ti vuccati.

  155 This sutta and the next are parallel to 22:52.

  156 This sutta and the next are partly parallel to 22:5–6.

  157 Okkhāyati. Spk glosses with paññāyati pākaṭaṃ hoti, “is discerned, becomes clear.”

  158 This sutta and the next two correspond to 22:137, 140, and 143.

  159 This sutta and the next two correspond to 22:154–56.

  160 In Pāli, “Saṭṭhipeyyāla.” Ee groups each triad of suttas under one sutta number, but Be and Se, which I follow, count each sutta separately. Thus by the end of this series our numbering schemes end respectively at 186 and 227.Spk: These sixty suttas were spoken differently on account of the inclinations of those to be enlightened; thus they are all expounded separately by way of the person’s inclination (puggala-ajjhāsayavasena). At the end of each sutta sixty bhikkhus attained arahantship.

  161 Spk: The eye is the ocean for a person: both in the sense of being hard to fill and in the sense of submerging (samuddanatthena ). It is an ocean in the sense of being hard to fill because it is impossible to fill it (satisfy it) with visible objects converging on it from the earth up to the highest brahmā world. And the eye is an ocean in the sense of submerging because it submerges (one) among various objects, that is, when it becomes unrestrained, flowing down, it goes in a faulty way by being a
cause for the arising of defilements. Its current consists of forms: As the ocean has countless waves, so the “ocean of the eye” has countless waves consisting of the various visible objects converging on it.

  162 At It 114,15–18 the following explanation of these dangers is given: “waves” (̄mi) are anger and despair (kodh̄p̄ȳsa); “whirlpools” (̄vạ̣a) are the five cords of sensual pleasure; “sharks and demons” (ḡharakkhasa) are women. A similar explanation is at MN I 460–62, with susukā in place of gāharakkhasa . Cp. It 57,8–16. For the image of the brahmin standing on high ground, see 2:5 and AN II 5,29–6,5.

  163 Samunna, glossed by Spk with kilinna tinta nimugga, “defiled, tainted, submerged.” In Skt samunna is the past participle of the verb samunatti, from which the noun samudra (Pāli: samudda), ocean, is also derived; see MW, s.v. samud . Spk says that “for the most part” (yebhuyyena) is said making an exception of the noble disciples. The sequel is also at 12:60.

  164 Ee wrongly takes the first verse below to be prose and makes it the first paragraph of the next sutta. Woodward, at KS 4:99, has been misled by this division. The verses are also at It 57–58.

  165 I read with Be and Se pahāsi dukkhaṃ, as against Ee pahāya dukkhaṃ. It 58 also has pahāsi.

  166 I read vadhāya with Be, as against vyābādhāya in Se and Ee. See I, v. 371d, which supports vadhāya.

  167 Khı̄rarukkha: a tree that exudes a milky sap. The four are types of fig trees; see too 46:39.

  168 Because, as long as one has the six sense bases, one would always be fettered to the six sense objects and thus liberation would be impossible.

  169 As at 22:95 (III 141,25–31).

  170 This passage is quoted at Vism 36,24–27 (Ppn 1:100). Spk: One “grasps the sign through the features” (anubyañjanaso nimittaggāho) thinking: “The hands are beautiful, so too the feet, etc.” The grasp of the sign is the composite grasping, the grasp of the features occurs by separation. The grasp of the sign grasps everything at once, like a crocodile; the grasp of the features takes up the individual aspects like the hands and feet separately, like a leech. These two grasps are found even in a single javana process, not to speak of different javana processes.

  171 Maliciously creating a schism in the Saṅgha is one of the five crimes with immediate retribution (ānantarikakamma) said to bring about rebirth in hell in the next existence; see It 10–11 and Vin II 198, 204–5.I read the last sentence with Se: imaṃ khvāhaṃ bhikkhave ādı̄navaṃ disvā evaṃ vadāmi. Be and Ee (following a Burmese ms) read imaṃ khvāhaṃ bhikkhave vañjaṃ jı̄vitānaṃ ādı̄navaṃ disvā, which seems unintelligible.

  172 Spk: In this sutta and the next, the round of existence and its cessation are discussed by showing kammically resultant pleasure and pain.

  173 Spk says this sutta was addressed to bhikkhus who practised meditation using the characteristic of suffering as their meditation subject. Spk takes the “four vipers” (catt̄ro āsı̄visā) as referring to the four families of vipers, not four individual serpents. The four are: (i) the wooden-mouthed (kạ̣hamukha), whose bite causes the victim’s entire body to stiffen like dry wood; (ii) the putrid-mouthed (p̄timukha), whose bite makes the victim’s body decay and ooze like a decaying fruit; (iii) the fiery-mouthed (aggimukha), whose bite causes its victim’s body to burn up and scatter like ashes or chaff (see 35:69); and (iv) the dagger-mouthed (satthamukha), whose bite causes the victim’s body to break apart like a pole struck by lightning.The etymology of āsı̄visa is uncertain. Spk offers three alternatives, none especially persuasive: (i) āsittavisa, “with besprinkled poison,” because their poison is stored as if it were sprinkling (̄siñcitv̄ viya) their whole body; (ii) asitavisa, “with eaten poison,” because whatever they eat becomes poison; and (iii) asisadisavisa, “with swordlike poison,” because their poison is sharp like a sword. Sp I 220,13 offers: āsu sı̄ghaṃ etassa visaṃ āgacchatı̄ ti āsı̄viso; “it is a viper because its poison comes on quick and fast.” Four types of āsı̄visa are mentioned at AN II 110–11.

  174 Be and Se: saṃvesetabbā (Ee: pavesetabb̄). Spk glosses with nipajjāpetabbā, “to be made to lie down.” Spk provides an elaborate background story, making this a punishment imposed on the man by the king.

  175 Chaṭṭho antaracaro vadhako. Spk: The king spoke to his ministers thus: “First, when he was pursued by the vipers, he fled here and there, tricking them. Now, when pursued by five enemies, he flees even more swiftly. We can’t catch him, but by trickery we can. Therefore send as a murderer an intimate companion from his youth, one who used to eat and drink with him.” The ministers then sought out such a companion and sent him as a murderer.

  176 Be: pivisanti; Se and Ee: vadhissanti.

  177 See the better known simile of the raft at MN I 134–35.

  178 As at 35:228 above.

  179 Spk correlates each element with a particular family of vipers: the earth element with the wooden-mouthed; the water element with the putrid-mouthed; the fire element with the fiery-mouthed; and the air element with the dagger-mouthed. See too Vism 367–68 (Ppn 11:102). Spk devotes three pages to elaborating on the comparison.

  180 See the simile of the murderous servant at 22:85 (III 112–14). The explanation Spk gives here is almost identical with the explanation it gives of the word vadhako in 22:95, v. 5c, summarized in III, n. 196.

  181 Nandirāga. Spk: Delight and lust is like a murderer with drawn sword in two respects: (i) because when greed arises for a specific object it fells one’s head, namely, the head of wisdom; and (ii) because it sends one off to rebirth in the womb, and all fears and punishments are rooted in rebirth.

  182 Sakkāya. Spk: “Identity” (personal identity) is the five aggregates pertaining to the three planes. Like the near shore with its vipers, etc., “identity” is dangerous and fearful because of the four great elements and so forth.

  183 Yoni c’ assa āraddhā hoti. Spk: Kāraṇañ c’ assa paripuṇṇaṃ hoti; “and the cause for it is complete.” See III, n. 54. Cp. AN I 113–14. The simile of the charioteer is also at MN III 97,6–10.

  184 Text uses both words, kummo kacchapo. See II, n. 317.

  185 Apposukko tuṇhı̄bhūto saṅkasāyati. As at 21:4. See too I, n. 54.

  186 The verse = I, v. 34. As the verse is not preceded by the usual sentence stating that the Buddha spoke it on this occasion, it seems the redactors of the canon have tacked it on by reason of the tortoise simile.

  187 Also at 22:3 (III 11,5–7).

  188 Also at AN II 239,29–240,1, IV 128,23–26, 201,20–23; Ud 52,13–16, 55,10–13. On saṅkassarasamācāro, “of suspect behaviour,” Spk says: “His conduct is to be recalled with suspicion (sȧkāya saritabbasamācāro) by others thus, ‘It seems he did this and that’; or else he recalls the conduct of others with suspicion (sȧk̄ya paresaṃ samācāraṃ sarati), thinking, when he sees a few people talking among themselves, ‘They must be discussing my faults.’” Spk glosses kasambujāto thus: rāgādı̄hi kilesehi kacavarajāto, “rubbish-like because of such defilements as lust, etc.”

  189 I understand upagacchāmi here to be a true future form, in conformity with the futures that follow.

  190 Aññataraṃ saṅkiliṭṭhaṃ āpattiṃ āpanno hoti. Spk says there is no offence (i.e., an infraction of the monastic rules) that is not “defiled” from the time it is “concealed” (i.e., not confessed to a fellow monk to obtain absolution). However, I take the expression here to refer to a serious offence, one belonging to either the Pārājika or Saṅghādisesa class; the former entails expulsion from the Saṅgha, the latter a special process of rehabilitation.The next phrase is read differently in the various eds. of both text and commentary. Be, which I follow, reads: yathārūpāya āpattiyā na vuṭṭhānaṃ paññāyati, on which Spk says: “Rehabilitation is not seen (na dissati) by means of parivāsa, mānatta, and abbhān”—these being the three stages of rehabilitation from a Saṅghādisesa off
ence. Se and Ee do not include the negative na in either text or commentary. Thus, on the testimony of Be, the monk is guilty of Pārājika, while on that of Se and Ee, of Saṅghādisesa. I side with Be on the assumption that this “inward rottenness” must have the same implications as the corresponding passage of the preceding sutta, according to which the monk is not a genuine bhikkhu. At 20:10 (II 271,15–16) saṅkiliṭṭhā āpatti clearly refers to a Saṅghādisesa, since this offence is described as “deadly suffering” in contrast to “spiritual death” (the consequence of a Pārājika).

  191 This invitation reflects the widespread belief in South Asian religion that it is auspicious to invite a holy man to spend the first night in a new residence before the lay owners move in to occupy it. This honour would have been especially cherished by the Sakyans, who were the Buddha’s own kinsmen. Similar ceremonies are reported at MN I 353–54 and DN II 84–85 (= Ud 85–86).