Dear Nina,
Thank-you for your response and all your comments. I have looked over your
translation below and have inserted my corrections, comments, and some
translations (for you to compare with). I hope you will find them helpful
and of interest. Please ask for further clarification if desired.
> The following excerpts are taken from the Samyuttanikaya commentary and
> subcommentary on the passage you're interested in. That's all there is --
> explanations of the words 'ubhatobhaagavimutta' and 'pa~n~naavimutta'.
>
> ubhato-bhaaga-vimuttaa ti dviihi bhaagehi vimuttaa.
> aruupaavacara-samaapattiyaa ruupa-kaayato vimuttaa, agga-maggena
> naama-kaayato ti. pa~n~naa-vimuttaa ti pa~n~naaya vimuttaa
> tevijjaadibhaava.m appattaa khi.naasavaa. -- PTS SA i 278 (a.t.thakathaa)
>
> [subcommentary:]
> ubhatobhaagavimuttaati ubhayabhaagehi ubhayabhaagato vimuttaati.
> ayamettha atthoti dasseti "dviihi bhaagehi vimuttaa, aruupaa ...pe...
> naamakaayato"ti iminaa. tevijjaadibhaavanti
> tevijjacha.labhi~n~nacatuppa.tisambhidabhaava.m.
> pa~n~naavimuttaa hi ta.m tividha.m appattaa kevala.m pa~n~naaya
> eva vimuttaa. -- Myanmar SA.T 1.291 (.tiikaa)
NVG:
You handed me a nice present, the commentary texts, thank you.
Here goes my translation, and corrections are appreciated, I am here to
learn: first the co:
> ubhato-bhaaga-vimuttaa ti dviihi bhaagehi vimuttaa.
NVG: freed in both ways: being freed in the two parts (bhaago).
JA: For 'dviihi bhaagehi vimuttaa' I'm inclined to translate this as '<are>
freed from two parts'. The past participles (eg. vimutta) are mostly in
the past tense but your 'being freed' is in the present tense. I don't know
for sure if this is right or wrong. I believe some past participles can have
the force of the present tense although in this instance I think 'being'
should perhaps be avoided. 'in both ways' is a common translation for
'ubhatobhaaga' but one also finds 'in both ways' for just the 'ubhato' part
alone which leaves 'bhaaga' untranslated. 'ubhato' consists of the
pronoun 'ubha' (both) and the affix 'to' which make it an indeclinable
(nipaata) in the senses belonging to the fifth or seventh case, singular or
plural. The syntactical relation of 'ubhato' to 'bhaaga' is unclear to me
but according to the interpretation 'dviihi bhaagehi' it's as though only
the pronominal adj. 'ubha' it being read without the meaning of the
indeclinable affix 'to'. Edgerton in his BHSD has 'emancipated from both
parts' for his ubhayatobhaagavimukta entry.
I wonder if the terms: tevijjaa, cha.labhi~n~naa, ubhatobhaagavimuttaa, and
pa~n~naavimuttaa in the sutta (S i 191) are all functioning as nouns
(individuals) or as adjectives or could they be either. The
Puggalapa~n~natti treats these terms as nouns.
> aruupaavacara-samaapattiyaa ruupa-kaayato vimuttaa, agga-maggena
> naama-kaayato ti.
NVG: he is freed from the material body by the attainment of aaruupaavacara
(aruupajhaana), and freed from the mental body by the highest path
(aggamagga).
JA: 'he is freed' is in the wrong number for the plural 'vimuttaa'.
A 'vimutto' would call for the singular. I would perhaps replace 'he is'
with 'are' to indicate a plural. Notice your use of 'from' instead of 'in'
as in your previous sentence. The two parts (bhaaga-s) refer to 'ruupakaaya'
and 'naamakaaya'.
> pa~n~naa-vimuttaa ti pa~n~naaya vimuttaa tevijjaadibhaava.m
> appattaa khii.naasavaa.
NVG: freed by pa~n~naa: he is freed by pa~n~naa: he has destroyed the
aasavaas without having attained the threefold knowledge etc.
JA: Again, 'he is' & 'he has' should both be in the plural. You didn't
translate '-bhaava.m'. Perhaps: 'without having attained the state of
<possessing> the three knowledges, etc.'
Now the subco:
> ubhatobhaagavimuttaa ti ubhayabhaagehi ubhayabhaagato vimuttaa ti.
NVG: freed in both ways: he is freed in both parts, by both parts.
JA: the subcommentary reads the fifth case plural for -bhaagehi
and -bhaagato. This is a good example of how aome Pali phrases taken
together do not translate well into English. A literal translation would be:
'from both parts freed: from both parts, from both parts freed' which
doesn't make much sense until one reads it in Pali.
> ayamettha attho ti dasseti "dviihi bhaagehi vimuttaa, aruupaa ...pe...
> naamakaayato"ti iminaa.
NVG: This here (ayamettha) is the meaning. He shows by this (iminaa) : <
freed by two ways, aruupa...etc. ...he is freed from the mental body >.
JA: I take 'ayamettha attho' to be the patient of 'dasseti' ie: He shows:
'this here is the meaning' with this: '<are> freed from the two parts,
aruupa . . . <are freed> from the mental body.' Or simply put: he shows x by
means of y.
>tevijjaadibhaavan ti tevijjacha.labhi~n~nacatuppa.tisambhidabhaava.m.
NVG: The threefold knowledge and others (aadi) are existing, the threefold
knowledge, the six abhi~n~naa, the four discriminations (pa.tisambhidas).
JA: The state of <possessing> the three knowledges, etc: the state of
<possessing> the three knowledges, the six superknowledges, or the four
discriminations.
> pa~n~naavimuttaa hi ta.m tividha.m appattaa kevala.m pa~n~naaya
> eva vimuttaa.
NVG: pa~n~naavimuttaa: he is thus freed entirely by pa~n`naa, without having
attained the threefold knowledge.
JA: For freed by wisdom <they are> freed entirely by wisdom alone without
having attained <any one of> these three kinds [enumerated in the previous
sentence].
NVG:
kevala.m, wholly, entirely, seems to put a lot of stress on pa~n~naa.
> I find the groupings in the sutta a little odd. Couldn't the tevijja and
> cha.labhi~n~na monks also be included in the ubhatobhaagavimutta category?
NVG:
In the freed both ways catagory are included those with the eight
attainments: ruupajhaanas and aruupajhaanas, or just by aruupajhaana. This
has been explained in Wheel351-353, The Jhaanas, by Ve. Henepola (he gives
many texts) and also Ve. Bodhi, The Great Discourse on Causation, in the
Intro. There are variations, some texts, the Puggalap~n~natti give the
ruupajhaana and aruupajhaanas, whereas other texts mention just the
aruupajhaanaa for this distinction in freedom. I think that it depends on
the headings, the different angles.
Now, the threefold knowledge, and then the six abhi~n~naas are additional
distinctions, also the four discrimination mentioned in the subcommentary.
My personal opion, I would like Robert's comment, is that this is the reason
for mentioning them separately in the commentary. Also: three times 60 may
be a reason for this classification.
JA: Thank you for the detailed and helpful explanation. This is a difficult
subject for me.
NVG:
Is there more in the commentary, I would like to know more about the
circumstances, why such a great percentage of arahats is just
pa~n~naavimuttaa.
JA: There is nothing more about this in the SN com. on the sutta. My guess
is that pa~n~naavimutti ranks lower than ubhatobhaagavimutti. The higher the
attainments the fewer there are that reach them.
NVG:
P.S. this address is different from the psg group address, I mean all this
for the group. What is correct?
The correct address to use to post directly to psg is:
palistudy@yahoogroups.com
Best wishes,
Jim
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com