RE: another question based on Digha Tika

Dear Ven. Pandita,          



Thank you for your email with your explanation of the sentence:

> Anāvaraṇañāṇapadaṭṭhānañhi maggañāṇaṃ, maggañāṇapadaṭṭhānañca anāvaraṇañāṇaṃ ‘‘sammāsambodhī’’ti vuccatīti.



It struck me already that there is an ambiguity in the use of -padaṭṭhāna, which could be understood to function in either of the two ways you mention.



But it also seems to me strange that in a sentence with two parallel clauses, one the inverse of the other, the -padaṭṭhāna compound would function in one way in one clause and in a different way in the other clause. It seems more natural to suppose the usage in the two parallel clauses is the same. Are there any other examples in the texts—especially the Tikas—where this occurs, and where there is no ambiguity about what is intended? Perhaps I’ll have to look up some of the other passages that contain variations on the above sentence.



With metta,

Bhikkhu Bodhi





From: palistudy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:palistudy@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Soe Naung
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2013 1:26 PM
To: Pali Study Group
Subject: Re: [palistudy] another question based on Digha Tika



  

Dear Venerable,

​You wrote:​

> I have another question arising from this portion of the Digha-Tika. The
question pertains to a subtle point in Tika doctrinal exposition. The
relevant sentences are at VRI I.7, PTS I.9:

> >
> > ‘‘Paññāpajjotavihatamohataman”ti etena sammāsambodhiṃ dasseti.
> ​​
> Anāvaraṇañāṇapadaṭṭhānañhi maggañāṇaṃ, maggañāṇapadaṭṭhānañca
> anāvaraṇañāṇaṃ ‘‘sammāsambodhī’’ti vuccatīti.
> >
>

​My understanding of this sentence is different both from you and Dr.
Cousins. So I will give my own rendering first, and explain it.

​
​"By the expression "Paññāpajjotavihatamohataman" (the commentator)
indicates perfect enlightenment. Indeed, the path knowledge, which is the
base of the unobstructed knowledge, and the unobstructed knowledge, which
has the path knowledge as (its) base, are called 'perfect enlightenment.'"

From my perspective, ​

​"​anāvaraṇañāṇapadaṭṭhānaṃ" is is a genitive Tappurisa compound whereas
"maggañāṇapadaṭṭhānaṃ" is a Bahubbīhi compound. Accordingly this sentence
is in perfect accord with your understanding which you have given as
follows:​​

>
> > I had understood that in the case of a Buddha path knowledge—the
> knowledge of the path of arahantship—arises destroying all defilements
> along with their residual tendencies (vāsanas), and then at that point,
> with all defilements destroyed, the sabbaññutaññāṇaṃ (= anāvaraṇañāṇaṃ)
> arises.
>

​But you wrote:​

So how can the author say that the path knowledge is based on the
> unobstructed knowledge? I don’t believe they occur simultaneously, or that
> padaṭṭhāna could apply to things that occur simultaneously.
>

I
​n my opinion, the author does not say that ​
​the path knowledge is based on the unobstructed knowledge.
​

​On the other hand, Dr. Cousins writes:​

​> ​
Well, we are talking about wisdom in various aspects. So I would
understand that wisdom reaches its culmination at the moment of the
arahattamagga. So that wisdom must be the same level of wisdom as that
called sabbaññutañāṇa; it's just that it can't be applied until later,
when the mind turns to different objects.
​
This is different from the orthodox understanding of ​sabbaññutañāṇa, which
is, from the abhidhammic point of view, the mental factor (cetasika) of
wisdom accompanying one of the four sense-sphere beautiful functional minds
associated with knowledge, and certainly different from the
arahattamaggañāṇa (wisdom accompanying the Arahat Path supramundane
consciousness).

with metta and respect,

Ven. Pandita

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





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