Dear Pāli friends,
In the commentary to Dhp 1, there is the following sentence,
tesu anāthapiṇḍikena ekadivasampi satthā pañhaṃ na pucchitapubbo. (Burmese)
which I tentatively translated as , “Amongst these (disciples), for only one day, Anāthapiṇḍika did not ask the Buddha a question.” Literally, “On just one day the teacher was not accompanied by a question from
Anāthapiṇdika,” taking pubba in final compound to mean “accompanied by” as per Childers and MW s.v. pūrva. Or, “On one day however (pi), Anāthapiṇḍika did not ask the Buddha a question as before,” taking pubbo to mean “before” or “previously.” As you know pi can mean several things: “only”, “merely”, “also”, “even”, “however”, “just”, etc., 
However Burlingame (1928) translates, “Not a single day had Anāthapiṇḍika asked the Teacher a question,” taking pi in the sense of “even” I believe. 
Burlingame’s interpretation is followed by the Sinhalese translations and the DPPN (sv Anāthapiṇḍika) which paraphrases, "But we are told that he never asked a question of the Buddha lest he should weary him." Yet as we learn in the preceding paragraph of the commentary, the Buddha spent 19 rains at the Jetvanamahavihara that Anāthapiṇḍika made for him, and it seems inconceivable that he never asked the Buddha a question. Plus we have the record of the suttas, where he in fact did ask the Buddha questions (see DPPN: "There is, however, at least one sutta taught as a result of a question put by Anāthapiṇḍika himself regarding gifts and those who are worthy to receive them  (AN 1, 62-63) and we also find him consulting the Buddha regarding the marriage of his daughter, Cūḷa Subhaddā,” DhA 3, 466), and there are lots of suttas where the Buddha is teaching the dhamma to Anāthapiṇḍika as the only interlocutor in the AN.
 
So what is the correct reading? Did Anāthapiṇḍika never ask the Buddha a question? or on just this one day did he not ask a question, as he had previously done?
 
The PTS edition adds the word eva after ekam which is obviously to clarify what the editor thinks is the correct interpretation:
 
Tesu Anāthapiṇḍikenba ekam eva divasam pi Satthā pañha apucchitapubbo
 
but this is not in the Sinhalese, Burmese or Cambodian recensions, so appears to be a late addition. There are several variants listed in the PTS (page 5, footnote 7) which also indicates that everyone was confused about this line.
 
Your interpretation(s) would be welcome,
 
Mettā,
 
 
Bryan

 

So what is the correct reading? Did Anāthapiṇḍika never ask the Buddha a question? or on just this one day did he not ask a question, as he had previously done.

The PTS edition adds the word eva after ekam which is obviously to clarify what the editor thinks is the correct interpretation:

Tesu Anāthapiṇḍikenba ekam eva divasam pi Satthā pañha apucchitapubbo

but this is not in the Sinhalese, Burmese or Cambodian recensions, so appears to be a late addition. There are several variants listed in the PTS (page 5, footnote 7) which also indicates that everyone was confused about this line.

Your interpretation(s) would be welcome,

Mettā,

Bryan