Re: Question on Sabhiya sutta commentary

Dear Khris and Petra

>"One/I shall become one having such a form".  (evarūpena attanā bhavitabban)


I am a little unclear as to exactly what this means. The naming of "man, woman" causes the foolish person to think that he/she is also of such a form, i. e. what appears to be an independent entity.  So I would translate, "I (too) must be/exist in such a form." Is that how you see it?

Metta, Bryan



________________________________
  From: petra kieffer-Pülz <kiepue@...>
To: palistudy@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2012 10:21:59 AM
Subject: Re: [palistudy] Question on Sabhiya sutta commentary


 
Hey Khris
>
> These (doctrines) – because, the sixty two speculative views named in the
> Brahmajāla (Sutta), taken together with identity view, are sixty three; and
> because these (doctrines) of recluses who are followers of other sects
> (are) doctrines [satthāni] born of disputation, dependent upon having to be
> pointed out (i.e., learned), not in virtue of arising [i.e., (seemingly)
> ‘naturally’].
>

This sentence as it stands now, has no end. Therefore the construction must be something like:

These (are heresies), because there are sixty three, ... and because they are dependent upon having to be pointed out, not in virtue of arising (naturally).

The next sentence then is constructed in the following way:

But by virtue of arising (naturally), there arise (uppajjati) that which is saññā-akkhara (=)
conventional name ... , and that which is inverted perception of ignorant people (thinking) ...

evarūpena attanā bhavitabbaṃ means "One/I shall become one having such a form". For this type of construction see von Hinüber, Kasussyntax § 143.

Usage of a part. fut. pass. with vasena are very common in younger commentarial literature.

Best,
Petra


> But, in virtue of arising [‘naturally’]: such as (for
> example), the percept-word (i.e., perception constituted through a
> linguistic term/category) [saññā-akkhara] ‘woman, man’, (which is) a
> conventional name: in virtue of the wrong cogitation, tradition, etc. of
> the ignorant (naïve), there arises this inverted perception: “It must come
> into being/exist thus by its own material form [rūpena attanā]” (i.e., ‘it
> is just what the conventional name says that it is, in virtue of its own
> intrinsic material nature’). In virtue of both such dependencies
> (attachments), these (doctrines) arise, not (in virtue of) personal
> experience [lit., ‘(seeing) what is in front of one’s own eyes’].
>
> With metta,
> Khristos
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

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




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