297 In this discussion, IV 293,7–294,10 corresponds to MN I 301,17–302,5; IV 294,11–24 to MN I 296,11–23; and IV 294,26–295,21 to MN I 302,6–27. The last question and answer, however, are not found in either MN No. 43 or 44. Spk explains that Citta used to abide in cessation [Spk-pṭ: as a nonreturner] and thus he raised the question to ask about the formations that are the basis for cessation (see n. 299).
298 The three terms—kayasȧkhāra, vacı̄saṅkhāra, cittasȧkhara—are in Pāli identical with those that make up the saṅkhāra factor of dependent origination (as at 12:2; see II, n. 7), but in this context the purport is different, as the following discussion will show. Here, in the compounds kāyasaṅkhāra and cittasaṅkhāra, saṅkhāra clearly has a passive sense: what is formed or generated (sȧkharı̄yati) in dependence on the body or the mind. In the case of vacı̄saṅkhāra the sense is active: what generates (sȧkharoti) speech.
299 The question refers to saññāvedayitanirodha, also called nirodhasamāpatti, the attainment of cessation, a meditative state in which mind and all mental functions stop. It is said to be accessible only to arahants and nonreturners who have mastered the eight attainments of samādhi. For a detailed treatment according to the commentarial method, see Vism 702–9 (Ppn 23:16–52). Spk says Citta had asked this question to find out if the monk was familiar with the attainment.
300 Spk: This means that before attaining cessation he has delimited the duration of the attainment, resolving, “I will be mindless (acittaka) for such a time.”
301 The verbal formation (thought and examination) ceases in the second jhāna; the bodily formation (in-and-out breathing) ceases in the fourth jhāna; the mental formation (perception and feeling) ceases on entering the attainment of cessation.
302 Indriyāni vippasannāni. Spk: The sense faculties are fatigued when activity occurs and external objects impinge on the senses. They are afflicted, soiled as it were, like a mirror set up at a crossroads hit by dust carried by the wind. But as a mirror placed in a casket and deposited in a case shines within, so the five senses of a bhikkhu who has attained cessation shine brightly within cessation.
303 Spk: Before attaining cessation, at the time of delimiting the duration, he resolves, “I will be mindless for such a time and afterwards will again become mindful.”
304 Spk: When one emerges from cessation the mind of fruition attainment is the first to arise. It is with reference to the perception and feeling associated with that mind that it is said, “First the mental formation arises.” Afterwards, at the time of bhavaṅga, the bodily formation (breathing) arises, and still later, at the time of regular activity, the verbal formation resumes, namely, thought and examination able to originate speech.
305 Suññataphassa, animittaphassa, appaṇihitaphassa. Spk: These can be explained by way of their own quality (sagụa) or by way of their object (̄rammạa). By way of quality: the attainment of fruition (phalasam̄patti) is called emptiness, and the accompanying contact is called emptiness-contact; the same method in the other two cases. By way of object: Nibbāna is called emptiness because it is empty of lust, etc.; signless, because the signs of lust, etc., are absent; and undirected, because it is not directed towards lust, hatred, or delusion. The contact of the arisen fruition attainment, which takes emptiness-Nibbāna as object, is called emptiness-contact; the same method in the other two cases.Fruition attainment is a special meditative attainment in which the mind directly experiences the bliss of Nibbāna. It is said to be of four levels, corresponding to the four levels of awakening (the fruition attainment of stream-entry, etc.). See Vism 698–702 (Ppn 23:3–15).
306 Spk: It is Nibbāna that is called seclusion (viveka). His mind slants, slopes, and inclines towards that seclusion.
307 This is said because cessation is attained by first entering each jhāna and formless attainment and then contemplating it with insight by way of the three characteristics. The procedure is explained at Vism 705–7 (Ppn 23:31–43).
308 Godatta’s verses are at Th 659–72. The conversation that follows is also at MN I 297,9–298,27, with Sāriputta and Mahākoṭṭhita as the speakers.
309 Spk: There are twelve kinds of measureless liberation of mind (appaṃ̄̄ cetovimutti): the four divine abodes, the four paths, and the four fruits. The divine abodes are called “measureless” because of their measureless radiation (towards countless beings), the paths and fruits because they remove the defilements, the causes of measurement.
310 Spk: There are nine kinds of liberation of mind by nothingness (̄kiñcaññ̄ cetovimutti): the base of nothingness, and the four paths and fruits. The first is called “nothingness” because it does not have any “something” (impediment; see n. 315 just below) as object, the paths and fruits because of the nonexistence in them of the excruciating and obstructive defilements.
311 Spk does not gloss this, but it seems the expression “liberation of mind by emptiness” (suññat̄ cetovimutti) is used to signify concentration based on insight into the selfless nature of phenomena and also the supramundane paths and fruits.
312 Spk: There are thirteen kinds of signless liberation of mind (animitt̄ cetovimutti): insight—because it removes the “signs” of permanence, happiness, and self; the four formless attainments—because the sign of form is absent in them; and the four paths and fruits—because the defilements, the “makers of signs,” are absent in them.
313 On this interpretation, the measureless liberation of mind is the four divine abodes; the liberation of mind by nothingness, the third formless attainment; and the liberation of mind by emptiness, concentration based on insight into the selfless nature of phenomena. The signless liberation of mind is hard to pinpoint in terms of a familiar doctrinal category. Spk takes it here as supramundane with Nibbāna as object.
314 Akuppā cetovimutti. Spk: The liberation of mind consisting in the fruition of arahantship.
315 Spk explains kiñcana as if it were derived from a verb kiñcati glossed maddati palibundhati (“crushes, impedes”), thus as meaning obstruction or impediment. The true derivation, however, is from kiṃ + cana—meaning simply “something”; see MW, s.v. (2) ka, kas, ka, kim. The word is used idiomatically in Pāli to mean a possession considered as an impediment; see MN II 263,34–264,1. This acquired meaning seems to have been devised for a didactic purpose. See PED for other references where this sense is evident.
316 Spk explains that lust, etc., are called sign-makers (nimittakaraṇa ) because they mark a person as lustful, hating, or deluded. Perhaps, though, the statement means that lust causes the “sign of beauty” (subhanimitta) to appear, hatred the “sign of the repulsive” (paṭighanimitta), and delusion the signs of permanence, pleasure, and self.
317 Spk: Though the emptiness liberation of mind is not mentioned separately, it is included throughout by the phrase “empty of lust,” etc.
318 Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta is identical with Mahāvı̄ra, the historical progenitor of Jainism. Though he makes several personal appearances in the Pāli Canon (see particularly MN No. 56), there is no report of him meeting the Buddha. His followers were called nigaṇṭhas, “knotless ones.”
319 Spk: Why did this noble disciple, a nonreturner, approach a wretched, misguided, naked ascetic? To free (the Buddhists) from blame and to refute his doctrine. For the nigaṇṭhas held that the Buddha’s followers do not show hospitality to anyone else, and he wanted to free his coreligionists from this criticism. He also approached with the idea of refuting Nātaputta’s doctrine.
320 Atthi avitakko avicāro samādhi, atthi vitakkavicārānaṃ nirodho. As will be shown, this refers to the second jhāna.
321 Na khvāhaṃ ettha bhante bhagavato saddhāya gacchāmi. Citta is here laying a verbal trap, which will be sprung just below. While he appears to be disclaiming allegiance to the Buddha, he is actually asserting that he has realized the truth of the Buddha’s statement by personal experience and thus need not rely on mere fai
th in his word. The pun recurs at 48:44.
322 All three eds. read ulloketvā here, though SS read apaloketvā and Spk (Se) oloketvā. The explanation in Spk supports ulloketvā: “He swelled his chest, drew in his belly, stretched forth his neck, surveyed all directions, and then looked up.” Below I follow Be and Ee in reading apaloketvā (Se repeats ulloketv̄), which provides a meaningful contrast: he looks askance because he is too embarrassed to look his followers in the eye.
323 Atha maṃ paṭihareyyāsi saddhiṃ nigaṇṭhaparisāya. Spk paraphrases: “When the meaning of these (questions) is known, then you might come up to me (abhigaccheyȳasi) along with your retinue of nigaṇṭhas; having come into my doorkeeper’s presence (patı̄h̄rassa me santikaṃ ̄gantv̄), you might inform me of your arrival.” Spk thus glosses the verb paṭiharati with abhigacchati and connects it with patı̄hāra as doorkeeper (a sense confirmed by MW, s.v. prati-hṛ > pratih̄ra). At MN II 220,8, however, we find the expression sahadhammikaṃ vādapaṭihāraṃ, which in context seems to mean “a reasonable defense of (their) doctrine.” Thus here paṭiharati could mean “to respond, to offer a rejoinder,” a meaning that appears more relevant than the one proposed by Spk. The exact import of the following sentences is obscure in the Pāli. Spk identifies the ten questions with the catechism at AN V 50–54 (see too Khp 2). The questions begin, “What is one?” with the answer, “All beings subsist on nutriment,” “What is two?”—“Name and form,” etc. According to Spk-pṭ the “question” (pañha) means the inquiry (vı̄mạs̄); the synopsis (uddesa), a brief statement of the meaning; and the answer (veyȳkarạa), a detailed explanation of the meaning. One might have translated, “The question about one ... the question about ten,” but the numbers are clearly distributive and the expressions dve pañhā and so forth are plurals. It is unclear whether Citta actually posed the questions (which were then abbreviated by the redactors) or merely indicated the format of the questions without filling it in. See the following note.
324 I follow Ee here in reading pañhe apucchitvā. Both Be and Se read pañhe āpucchitvā, which is problematic, as the latter verb generally means “to take leave” and is not typically used in relation to asking questions. The point seems to be that because Nātaputta did not accept Citta’s challenge, Citta left without actually posing his ten questions.
325 Reading with Be and Se, koci uttari manussadhammā alamariyañāṇadassanaviseso . Ee should be amended accordingly. The expression occurs often in the suttas as an umbrella term for all the higher meditative attainments and stages of realization. The analysis at Vin III 91 bifurcates the the two main components of the compound and treats uttari manussadhammā as an independent plural compound, but the singular koci here (and just below, the evarūpaṃ before -visesaṃ ) indicates that in sutta usage uttari manussadhammā functions as an adjectival ablative in relation to alamariyañāṇadassanavisesa . Spk explains manussadhamma, “the human norm,” as the ten courses of wholesome action. What is beyond that (tato manussadhammato uttari) is “superhuman.” Alamariyañāṇadassanavisesa is explained as “distinction of knowledge and vision capable of engendering the state of a noble one.”
326 Pāvaḷanipphoṭanā. According to Spk, this is a brush made from peacock’s feathers, used to sweep the ground of grit and dust before sitting down.
327 Dhammassa svākkhātatā. It is not clear to me whether Citta’s exclamation is intended as a straightforward praise of the Buddha’s teaching or as an ironic putdown of the ascetic’s teaching.
328 I read with Se: kiṃ hi no siyā bhante.
329 This means he is a nonreturner, having eradicated the five lower fetters binding beings to the sense-sphere realm.
330 Se alone has the correct reading here: dhammiko dhammarājā dhammikaṃ baliṃ anuppadassati. The devatās want him to become a universal monarch so they will be assured of receiving the offerings due to them. I translate dhammarājā as “king of righteousness” rather than “king of the Dhamma,” since the latter is properly an epithet only of the Buddha.
331 Ee seems to have the best reading: saṅghe ca pasādetvā cāge ca samādapetvā.42. Gāmaṇisaṃyutta
332 According to Spk, caṇḍa (“wrathful”) is a sobriquet assigned to this headman by the redactors of the Dhamma. I give the name both in Pāli and English, also at 42:3–5.
333 Sorata (Ee: s̄rata). See I, nn. 256, 462.
334 His name means “palmyra box.” Spk says he was called thus because his facial complexion was the colour of a ripe palmyra fruit just fallen from its stalk. He was the director of a large troupe of actors and had become famous throughout India. His verses, which stand out by their moral earnestness, are at Th 1091–1145.
335 Saccālikena. Woodward renders “by his counterfeiting of the truth” (KS 4:214), but I follow Spk, which glosses this as a dvanda compound: saccena ca alikena ca.
336 Here, where the present is required, we should read with Be and Se na labhāmi, and below, where the aorist is appropriate, nālatthaṃ. Ee has the latter reading in both places.
337 Pahāso nāma nirayo. Spk: There is no separate hell with this name. This is actually one part of the Avı̄ci hell where the denizens are tortured in the guise of actors dancing and singing.
338 See MN I 387–89, partly parallel to this passage, though concerned with a different wrong view about rebirth.
339 Spk explains the name as meaning “one who earns his living by warfare” (yuddhena jı̄vikạ kappanako); this name, too, was assigned by the redactors of the Dhamma. I take the occupation to be that of a mercenary or professional soldier.
340 This free rendering of the name was suggested by V̄T. Se and Ee read sarañjitānaṃ, but Be parajitānaṃ, “conquered by others,” makes better sense.
341 Again, Spk says this is not a separate hell but a section of Avı̄ci where beings appear as soldiers conquered in battle.
342 The three verbs are uyyāpenti (glossed upari ȳpenti), saññāpenti (glossed sammā ñ̄penti), and saggaṃ okkāmenti, on which Spk says: “They stand around him saying, ‘Go, sir, to the brahmā world; go, sir, to the brahmā world,’ and thus make him enter (pavesenti) heaven.”
343 The Jains. On Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta, see 41:8.
344 Yathābhataṃ (Ee: yathā hataṃ) nikkhitto evaṃ niraye. The idiom is obscure and the rendering here conjectural. The phrase also occurs at MN I 71,31, rendered at MLDB p. 167: “then as [surely as if he had been] carried off and put there he will wind up in hell.” This rendering, which follows Ps II 32 (yath̄ nirayapālehi ābharitvā niraye ̣hapito), is problematic, for yathābhataṃ is an indeclinable with an adverbal function, not a substantive set in apposition to the subject. The function of evaṃ, too, is obscure. See the inconclusive discussion in PED, s.v. yathā.
345 Ee here omits evam etassa pāpassa kammassa pahānaṃ hoti.
346 Cp. AN V 299-301. Spk: When (simple) “lovingkindness” is said, this can be interpreted either as access concentration or absorption, but when it is qualified as “liberation of mind” (cetovimutti) it definitely means absorption. It is sense-sphere kamma that is called limited kamma (paṃ̄akatạ kammạ); form-sphere kamma is called limitless (or measureless, appamāṇakataṃ) kamma. This is called limitless because it is done by transcending the limit, for it is developed by way of specified, unspecified, and directional pervasion (see Vism 309–11; Ppn 9:49–58).Does not remain there, does not persist there (na taṃ tatrāvasissati, na taṃ tatrāvattị̣hati). Spk: That sense-sphere kamma does not linger on, does not stay on, in that form-sphere or formless-sphere kamma. What is meant? That sense-sphere kamma is unable to overpower the form-sphere or formless-sphere kamma or to persist and gain the opportunity (to yield its own results); rather, as a great flood might inundate a little stream, the form-sphere or formless-sphere kamma overpowers the sense-sphere kamma and remains after having made an opportunity (for its own results). The superior kamma, having prev
ented the sense-sphere kamma from producing its result, on its own leads to rebirth in the brahmā world.
347 I follow von Hinüber’s proposals regarding the correct reading and interpretation of these terms in his paper, “The Ghost Word Dvı̄hitikā and the Description of Famines in Early Buddhist Literature.” The reading, firstly, should be: Nālandā dubbhikkhā hoti duhitikā setaṭṭikā salākāvuttā. All extant mss, it seems, have been contaminated by dvı̄hitikā and setaṭṭhikā, though Spk recognizes duhitikā as a v.l. here and other texts on crop failure preserve setaṭṭikā (Vin II 256,21–23 = AN IV 278,28–279,2). While Spk explains both dvı̄hitikā and duhitikā as derived from du-ı̄hiti (or du-ihiti , “difficult faring”), the correct derivation is from du-hita (see n. 212 above). The corrupt reading setaṭṭhikā is explained by Spk as meaning “white with bones,” i.e., with the bones of people who have perished in the famine, but other commentaries identify setaṭṭikā as a crop disease (rogajāti) caused by insects that devour the pith of the grain stalks. The word is analysed seta-aṭṭi-kā, “the white disease,” because the afflicted crops turn white and do not yield grain (see Sp VI 1291,5–7 = Mp IV 136,16–18; Sp I 175,4–8).
The Connected Discourses of the Buddha Page 159