Dear friends,
I frwd this since it was discussed here on this list.
Nina.
----------
Van: "abhidhammika" <
suanluzaw@...>
Beantwoord:
dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com
Datum: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:26:19 -0000
Aan:
dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com
Onderwerp: [dsg] Re: FW: [Pali] Buddhaghosa: To Nina
Dear Nina
How are you? Are you in Bankok?
Thank you for forwarding Rett's reply to your request.
Regarding commentary definitions of the term "bandhu", I have the
following quotes.
1. Bandhupaadaapaccaati ettha bandhuuti brahmaa adhippeto.
Tañhi braahma.naa pitaamahoti voharanti. Paadaanam apaccaa
paadaapaccaa, brahmuno pi.t.thipaadato jaataati adhippaayo.
Section 263, Amba.t.thasuttava.n.nanaa, Siilakkhandhavagga
Diighanikaayo.
2. Bandhuuti maarassa bandhubhuute maarapakkhike. Paadaapa
cceti mahaabrahmuno paadaanam apaccabhuute paadato jaateti
adhippaayo.
Section 113, Aggaññasuttava.n.nanaa, Paathikavaggo, Diighanikaayo.
3. Bandhana.t.thena bandhu, kassa pana bandhuuti aaha maarassa
bandhubhuuteti.
Section 113, Aggaññasutta .Tiikaa, Paathikavaggo, Diighanikaayo.
As you see, in the quote (1), Buddhaghosa defined the term "bandhu"
as a brahmaa.
But, in the quote (2), he defined the term "bandhu" as "a relative"
which is also correct. In this passage, he seemed to want to indicate
the meaning of relative in addition to the meaning of brahmaa.
And he did not forget to include the meaning of brahmaa because he
explained the expression "Paadaapacce" as the sons born from the feet
of the great brahmaa.
Thus, we have the swearing word "bandhupaadaapacce" as meaning the
sons born from the feet of the great brahmaa who are also the
relatives of the Devil (maaraa).
In short, the swearing word "bandhupaadaapacce" contains the meanings
of double insult by defining the term "bandhu" as relative(s) as well
as a brahmaa.
With regards,
Suan
http://www.bodhiology.org
----------
Van: "Jim Anderson" <
jimanderson_on@...>
Hi Rett,
I don't understand why it is glossed that way yet. Elsewhere,
Buddhaghosa does recognize that 'bandhu' is an epithet of Brahmaa at
Sv I 254, Ps II 418, Ppk II 397. And even for 'paadaapacce' at Sv III
862 he has 'mahaa-brahmuno paadaa . . . For the 'bandhu' gloss that
you quote, Dhammapaala has: bandhana.t.thena bandhu, kassa pana
bandhuuti aaha: maarassa bandhubhuute ti. (Sv-p.t III 47). Perhaps
Buddhaghosa is merely adding a second interpretation. We also have to
keep in mind that the gloss is likely not his interpretation, but
comes from the old Sinhalese commentary he has translated into Pali.
Jim
Rett wrote:
Nina: When people think that Buddhaghosa is wrong, could you, please,
give
>concrete examples. Have you heard of such? Or maybe just one concrete
>example?
Here is an example which I read of in an article yesterday, and which
I promised to provide earlier today. In D27 at the end of section
four, (PTS Diigha Nikaaya, Vol iii, page 81, line 20 ) the bhikkhus
are disparagingly referred to by brahmins as 'bandhupaadaapacce'
which means 'offspring of the feet of the kinsman'. Kinsman (bandhu)
is an epithet of Brahman, from whose mouth the brahmins are said to
originate. This context has already been established, since a few
lines earlier the brahmins describe themselves as 'mukhato jaataa
brahmajaa'.
This is an allusion to the Rig Veda X,19,13 "His mouth was the
Braahman...from his two feet the ´Sudra was born". (Macdonell, page
201)
Buddhaghosa, in the Sumangalavilaasinii (vol iii, p862) misses that
'Bandhu' is an epithet of Brahman, and instead glosses: bandhuu ti
maarassa bandhubhuute maarapakkhike. either "Allies of Maara" in acc
plural (-uu), or if singular perhaps locative of sense. 'in the
sense: ally of maara'. In any case Buddhaghosa has given the wrong
meaning for the word 'Bandhu' at that point in the commentary by
missing that it is just an epithet. I don't see why this should in
any way detract from Buddhaghosa's deserved reputation, or the
reputation of the commentarial tradition of which he was the
custodian. It is only if we make the exaggerated claim that he could
somehow be entirely free of mistakes (over the course of thousands of
pages of exegetical writing) that the occasional miss would count
against him. I doubt that he himself would ever have made the claim
"my work is entirely without errors".
Nina: First we read how brahmans considered themselves. After that we
have
deprecating words about the recluses. Footborn, and this is used here
in a
disparaging way, after all, the brahmans are disparaging the samanas.
That
is why Buddhaghosa adds here: allies of Maara. Also PED at the
end:<bandhupaadaapacce applied as contemptuous epithet.> It must be
this way
when we see the whole context. We coculd easily miss the subtle
point. But
then the Tiika can help us.
And as Jim said, < For the 'bandhu' gloss that
> you quote, Dhammapaala has: bandhana.t.thena bandhu, kassa pana
> bandhuuti aaha: maarassa bandhubhuute ti. (Sv-p.t III 47).>