Hi yifertw,

Here are some comments on those parts of your post which haven't
already been answered by Dhammanando. Please let me know if
anything's doubtful or unclear.

>
> In Norman's remarks, viyattesu is trated as " set apart, separate",
> "vaggasaarii" is treated as "paravada, people who has different
>views".
> Could you please comments it?

From looking at Norman's footnotes and the PED I would read that line
with the following in mind.

saa should be read as sa (Norman)

viyattesu < skt vyakta ! = 'distinct, enunciated, set apart' (Norman)

vaggasaarii < vagga = 'troop, group, company, party, faction' &
saarin = 'follower'. So a vaggasaarii = "follower of a faction" (PED)

saa ve viyattesu na vaggasaarii

literally: he (sa) indeed (ve) among those who are distinct [i.e.
who distinguish themselves by holding a particular view] (viyattesu)
not (na) a factionalist (vaggasaarii) .

Norman turns that into readable English as:

"He indeed does not follow any faction among those who hold different views".

>
>
> The reason we go to SN Verses 796 to 803 is:
> We are reading S1.2.10 Samiddhi, and find it difficult to explain
>why Bhikkhus should not perceive "I am superior", "I am equal" or "I
>am inferior". We propose the Paramatthaka Sutta of SN may echo or is
>the sources of it.

It would be interesting to hear what sorts of conclusions your group
reaches from this study. This verse might connect with your question
in that it seems to say that the true sage steps out of the field of
debate altogether, yet doesn't even consider himself superior for
that reason. This would appear different from other parts of the
canon where monks are trained in debating techniques and ways to win
arguments with members of other sects. Thanks for the interesting
questions.

best regards,

/Rett