Dear Robert,
r> I have the Patisambhidhimagga, could you point out where the
r> commentary is mistaken.
Some of these mistakes are pointed by the translator himself, for
example in the note 3 to chapter XIX.
Some are the mistakes around the key term "nimitta"
- see the note 5 to chapter III;
- see the note 8 to chapter III;
- see the note 24 to chapter III.
The simplistic of 'nimitta' by the commentary does not fit the text
itself, for example, paragraph 304 of the chapter I.
In the chapter VIII of Visuddhimagga (paragraph 201 ff., paragraph 217
ff.) which comments the Patisambhidamagga, the interpretation is more
clear and it can be understood from the further explanation (paragraph
204 ff., paragraph 219 ff.) that the term 'nimitta' here is used in
the context of samadhi.
See my previous post:
DAIÄÀÈ> The term 'nimitta' is mentioned in AN 2.16 = DN 3.225:
DAIÄÀÈ> 14. Cattaarimaani, bhikkhave, padhaanaani. Katamaani cattaari?
DAIÄÀÈ> Sa.mvarappadhaana.m, pahaanappadhaana.m, bhaavanaappadhaana.m,
DAIÄÀÈ> anurakkha.naappadhaana.m. Katama~nca, bhikkhave, sa.mvarappadhaana.m?
DAIÄÀÈ> Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu cakkhunaa ruupa.m disvaa na nimittaggaahii
DAIÄÀÈ> hoti naanubya~njanaggaahii
DAIÄÀÈ>
DAIÄÀÈ> Katama~nca, bhikkhave, anurakkha.naappadhaana.m? Idha, bhikkhave,
DAIÄÀÈ> bhikkhu uppanna.m bhaddaka.m samaadhinimitta.m anurakkhati
DAIÄÀÈ> a.t.thikasa~n~na.m pu.lavakasa~n~na.m viniilakasa~n~na.m
DAIÄÀÈ> vicchiddakasa~n~na.m uddhumaatakasa~n~na.m. Ida.m vuccati, bhikkhave,
DAIÄÀÈ> anurakkha.naappadhaana.m. Imaani kho, bhikkhave, cattaari
DAIÄÀÈ> padhaanaaniiti.
DAIÄÀÈ> Here we see that 'nimitta' is closely related to perception, and the
DAIÄÀÈ> monk, seeing a form, hearing a sound, etc., does not cling to it. Note
DAIÄÀÈ> that nimitta is not limited to visual perception. Next, we see, that
DAIÄÀÈ> in the context of samadhi nimitta is the apperception (sa~n~naa) of
DAIÄÀÈ> the object of samadhi.
DAIÄÀÈ> How can we reconcile these aspects of meaning?
DAIÄÀÈ> The passage from Visuddhimagga (XIV 130) gives the clue:
DAIÄÀÈ> "sabbaa va sa~njaanana-lakkha.naa, tad evetan ti puna
DAIÄÀÈ> sa~njaanana-paccaya-nimitta-kara.na-rasaa daaru-aadiisu tacchakaadayo
DAIÄÀÈ> viya, yathaa-gahita-nimitta-vasena abhinivesakara.na-paccupa.t.thaanaa
DAIÄÀÈ> hatthi-dassaka-andhaa (udaa. 54) viya,
DAIÄÀÈ> yathaa-upa.t.thita-visaya-pada-.t.thaanaa ti.na-purisakesu
DAIÄÀÈ> miga-potakaana.m purisaa ti uppanna-sa~n~naa viyaati."
DAIÄÀÈ> "All (sa~n~naa) has the characteristic of recognition (sa~njaanana);
DAIÄÀÈ> its property is the making of perceptual image (nimitta) that is a
DAIÄÀÈ> condition of recognizing again, 'this is the very same thing' - as
DAIÄÀÈ> carpenters and so on do with the wood, etc.; its manifestation is the
DAIÄÀÈ> producing of conviction by virtue of a perceptual image (nimitta) that
DAIÄÀÈ> has been accordingly learnt - like the blind perceiving the elephant
DAIÄÀÈ> (
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/udana/ud6-04.html );
DAIÄÀÈ> its basis is whatever object that has come near - like the
DAIÄÀÈ> apperception (sa~n~naa) 'people' that arises for young animals in
DAIÄÀÈ> respect of scarecrows."
DAIÄÀÈ> Hence, 'nimitta' is the image one forms in the process of apperception
DAIÄÀÈ> (sa~n~naa), used to recognize the object in the future. In
DAIÄÀÈ> psychological terms it is a 'perceptual image' or 'representation'.
DAIÄÀÈ> What it has to do with samadhi? In Mohavicchedani (Mya: .161) we read:
DAIÄÀÈ> "Samathova ta.m aakaara.m gahetvaa puna pavattetabbassa samathassa
DAIÄÀÈ> nimittanti samathanimitta.m."
DAIÄÀÈ> "The perceptual image of calm (samatha) is a perceptual image used to
DAIÄÀÈ> produce calm again when one has already learnt the appearance of
DAIÄÀÈ> calm."
DAIÄÀÈ> The principle of recognition is applied in the practice of samadhi, when
DAIÄÀÈ> practitioner reaches the jhana again with the help of learnt
DAIÄÀÈ> perceptual image of it.
There's also a usual mistake regarding the interpretation of 'parimukha.m',
given in the note 14 to chapter III.
See my previous post:
ÄÀÈDAI> "Parimukha.m sati.m upa.t.thapetvaa"ti tattha katamaa sati? Yaa
ÄÀÈDAI> sati anussati pa.tissati
pe
sammaasati - aya.m vuccati "sati".
ÄÀÈDAI> Aya.m sati upa.t.thitaa hoti supa.t.thitaa naasikagge vaa
ÄÀÈDAI> mukhanimitte vaa. Tena vuccati "parimukha.m sati.m
ÄÀÈDAI> upa.t.thapetvaa"ti.
ÄÀÈDAI> Vibhangapali .252
ÄÀÈDAI> "parimukha.m sati.m upa.t.thapetvaati kamma.t.thaan'aabhimukha.m sati.m
ÄÀÈDAI> .thapayitvaa. mukhasamiipe vaa katvaati attho. teneva vibha'nge
ÄÀÈDAI> vutta.m - "aya.m sati upa.t.thitaa hoti s³pa.t.thitaa naasikagge vaa
ÄÀÈDAI> mukhanimitte vaa, tena vuccati parimukha.m sati.m upa.t.thapetvaa"ti
ÄÀÈDAI> (vibha. 537). athavaa pariiti pariggaha.t.tho. mukhanti
ÄÀÈDAI> niyyaana.t.tho. satiiti upa.t.thaana.t.tho. tena vuccati- "parimukha.m
ÄÀÈDAI> satin"ti. eva.m pa.tisambhidaaya.m vuttanayenapettha attho
ÄÀÈDAI> da.t.thabbo. tatraaya.m sa'nkhepo- "pariggahitaniyyaanasati.m
ÄÀÈDAI> katvaa"ti.
ÄÀÈDAI> Silakkhandhavagga-Atthakatha 1.211
ÄÀÈDAI> In my inexperienced opinion Vibhanga seems to be one of the most
ÄÀÈDAI> authoritative commentaries. In the passage above it clearly explains
ÄÀÈDAI> 'parimukha.m' as 'the tip of the nose (naasikagge) or lip of the mouth
ÄÀÈDAI> (mukha)'. Buddhaghosa's commentaries seem to be later.
See also the article 'The Mystery of Breath Nimitta' by Bhikkhu Sona:
http://my.tbaytel.net/arfh/dhamma/nimitta.html
Besides, the commentary to the paragraph 6 of the chapter III, given in the
note III, does not fit the text.
r> Why do you recommend the Vimuttimagga, a non-Theravada text?
Why do you think it is non-Theravadan? It would be more exact to say
that it is non-Maha-Vihara text.
The criteria of accepting the texts are given by Buddha in the
Mahaparinibbana sutta as the "Four Great References".
Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the
sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses
and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable
in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must
conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's
utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu -- or by
that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that
way, bhikkhus, you should reject it. But if the sentences
concerned are traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the
Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is the
Blessed One's utterance; this has been well understood by that
bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that
elder.'
Comparing the Vimuttimagga with suttas, we see that it closely
conforms to the suttas. For example, the system of kasinas described
exactly fits the suttas, even better than the description of the same
system in Visuddhimagga. The three last kasinas in Vimuttimagga are
the light kasina, space kasina and consciousness kasina, which
conforms to the Sangiti sutta (D iii. 268)
346. Dasa kasi.naayatanaani. pathaviikasi.nameko sa~njaanaati,
uddha.m adho tiriya.m advaya.m appamaa.na.m. aapokasi.nameko
sa~njaanaati
pe
tejokasi.nameko sa~njaanaati
vaayokasi.nameko
sa~njaanaati
niilakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati
piitakasi.nameko
sa~njaanaati
lohitakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati
odaatakasi.nameko
sa~njaanaati
aakaasakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati
vi~n~naa.nakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati, uddha.m adho tiriya.m
advaya.m appamaa.na.m.
and Mahasakuladayi sutta (M ii. 330):
250. "Puna capara.m, udaayi, akkhaataa mayaa saavakaana.m
pa.tipadaa, yathaapa.tipannaa me saavakaa dasa kasi.naayatanaani
bhaaventi. Pathaviikasi.nameko sa~njaanaati uddhamadho tiriya.m
advaya.m appamaa.na.m; aapokasi.nameko sa~njaanaati
pe
tejokasi.nameko sa~njaanaati
vaayokasi.nameko sa~njaanaati
niilakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati
piitakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati
lohitakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati
odaatakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati
aakaasakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati
vi~n~naa.nakasi.nameko
sa~njaanaati uddhamadho tiriya.m advaya.m appamaa.na.m. Tatra ca
pana me saavakaa bahuu abhi~n~naavosaanapaaramippattaa viharanti.
whereas in Visuddhimagga the last two kasinas are light kasina
and limited-space kasina (see chapter V, paragraph 22).
Best regards,
Dimitry