Re: Dhammapada commentary

Hi Bryan, I understand it as "(what was) subject to death, died. (what was)
subject to breaking, broke".
hope that helps,
metta,
Lennart

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Bryan Levman <bryan.levman@...>wrote:

>
>
> Dear Friends,
>
> In his commentary on Dhp verse 212, Buddhaghosa tells the story of the
> Buddha
> who consoles a householder whose son has died. The Buddha says:
>
> "ki.m nu kho, upaasaka, dukkhitosii"ti pucchitvaa tena puttaviyogadukkhe
> aarocite, "upaasaka, maa cintayi, ida.m mara.na.m naama na ekasmi.myeva
> .thaane, na ca ekasseva hoti, yaavataa pana bhavuppatti naama atthi,
> sabbasattaana.m hotiyeva. ekasa"nkhaaropi nicco naama natthi. tasmaa
> `mara.nadhamma.m mata.m, bhijjanadhamma.m bhinna'nti yoniso
> paccavekkhitabba.m,
> na socitabba.m.
>
> which I tentatively translate:
>
> “What’s the problem layman, that you are so unhappy?” and once told by him
> about
> the loss of his son, said, “Layman, don’t worry, this thing called death is
> not
> just about one condition (or "does not just happen on one occasion"?) nor
> does
> it apply to just one person, just like what is called “coming into
> existence”
> applies to all beings. There is not a single mental volition, (sa"nkhaara:
> phenomenon, essential property, etc.) that may be called permanent.
> Therefore
> death is subject to death, something broken is subject to destruction, it
> is
> said – this is to be wisely considered/contemplated, not to be grieved
> about.
>
> My question is the translation of the underlined part from ida.m mara.ma.m
> up to
> bhinna'nti.
>
> Is the Buddha saying that death is subject to death because it is conquered
> by
> Nirvaa.na? or is he saying that death is subject to death because of future
>
> rebirth? or is it just a rephrasing of udayabbayadhamma,(rising phenomenon
> are
> subject to cessation)?
>
> Thanks for your help,
>
> Metta, Bryan
>
> P. S. If anyone is interested in the context, I append the entire story
> below
>
> Commentary: piyato jaayatii ti. The teacher spoke this Dharma teaching
> while
> living in the Jetavana grove with reference to a certain man of property.
> For he was overwhelmed with the death of his son and having gone to the
> cremation grounds, he cried and was not able to bear the grief of his son's
>
> loss. The teacher, examining the world at dawn saw a good opportunity for
> the
> path of stream-enterer and taking a junior monk, went in front of his (the
> householder’s) house. He, having heard of the teacher’s arrival, being
> desirous
> of making him feel welcome, ushered in the teacher, prepared a seat in the
> middle of the house, and once the teacher was seated, he came and sat down
> on
> one side of him. The teacher asked him “What’s the problem layman, that you
> are
> so unhappy?” and once told by him about the loss of his son, said, “Layman,
>
> don’t worry, this thing called death is not about just one condition nor
> does it
> apply to just one person, just like what is called “coming into existence”
> applies to all beings. There is not a single mental
> volition/phenomenon/essential property that may be called permanent.
> Therefore
> death is subject to death, something broken is subject to destruction, it
> is
> said – this is to be wisely considered/contemplated, not to be grieved
> about.
> The wise old ancients, knowing that death is subject to death and what is
> broken
> is subject to destruction have not mourned but have become mindful of
> death.” So
> he said. “Sir, who has acted in such a way and when have they done so,
> please
> tell me.” Once asked, taking up a previous explanation of the meaning,
> Buddha
> said:
> “Just like a snake abandons its old skin and goes to a (new) body, in the
> same
> way there is mindfulness in regard to a deserted body, (mindfulness) to the
> dead
> that have died, thinking, the person consumed (by death) is not aware of
> the
> lamentation of his relatives, therefore I will not mourn him, he has gone
> on to
> a new existence.” Having explained the five-part story of the snake birth
> story,
> he said, “Thus in the past, as wise men (have done) in the death of their
> beloved son, so now you, having given up your occupation and wandered about
>
> fasting and crying, not wandering about, not mourning because of the
> strength of
> the cultivation of mindfulness about death, eat food and concentrate on
> your
> business/occupation/working. Do not mourn ‘My dear son has died’, for grief
> or
> fear comes into existence because of just this belovedness/pleasantness.”
> Having
> said this he spoke these verses:
>
> From what is pleasant comes grief, from what is pleasant comes fear. For
> one who
> is freed from what is pleasant there is no grief, much less fear (Norman’s
> translation, 2004, 32).
> Here piyato (“from what is pleasant”) means originating fromsa.msaara, for
> either grief or fear arising, they arise depending on a dear person or
> mental
> formation, but from the freeing from it (what is pleasant), both (grief and
>
> fear) are dead and no longer exist.
>
> At the end of this instruction, the householder was established in the
> fruit of
> a stream-enterer. The Dharma teaching was successful (sampattaanampi?
> sampatta =
> attained)
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> 
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]