I've come across a curious detail in the commentary to the
satipatthana Samyutta. The first sutta, SN 47.1, contains the famous
phrase that satipatthana is the 'one-way path' (ekayana magga).
The commentary says this: 'ekaayanvaayan'ti ekaayano maggo
This is straightforwrd enough: the compound 'ekaayanvaayam' is to be
resolved into the components 'ekaayano ayam'
The curious thing is that this compound, the reading commented on,
does not occur in the sutta, here or anywhere else. The sutta just
says 'ekaayano ayam'. Nor does the particular comment occur in the
Majjhima or Digha commentaries.
It seems that the reading ekaayanvaayam might have been the older
one, glossed with ekaayano ayam, then the commentarial gloss found
its way into the suttas. Thus a reading of the commentaries might
here be more reliable than the suttas.
Does anyone have anything to remark on this? I have been using the
CSCD of the VRI and don't have other versions available to check.
Are there any editions that read 'ekaayanvaayam'?
Also, are there any other similar cases? Rod Bucknell has uncovered
a detail in the samyutta commentary that suggests that it was based
on a source that used a differently structured samyutta than we have
today.