RE: Sumaṅgala-Vilāsinī_question

From: venbodhi@...
Message: 4432
Date: 2015-10-15

Dear Bryan,
 
The same passage occurs in the Khuddakapāṭha-aṭṭhakathā and the Vinaya Pārājikakaṇḍa-aṭṭhakathā. Here I paste in the text from the latter source (VRI I 6).
 
Thero sakalanavaṅgasatthusāsanapariyattidhare puthujjana-sotāpanna-sakadāgāmi-anāgāmi-sukkhavipassakakhīṇāsavabhikkhū anekasate anekasahasse ca vajjetvā tipiṭakasabbapariyattippabhedadhare paṭisambhidāppatte mahānubhāve yebhuyyena bhagavatā etadaggaṃ āropite tevijjādibhede khīṇāsavabhikkhūyeva ekūnapañcasate pariggahesi.
 
Note that both these versions have “bhagavatā etadaggaṃ āropite”, which supports the PTS reading of the Sumaṅgala-vilāsinī as against the Be reading, which has bhagavato. Bhagavatā certainly makes better sense to me.
 
Where you distinguish three groups who were excluded, I take “sakalanavaṅga­satthusāsanapariyattidhare” to be descriptive of “puthujjana-sotāpanna-sakadāgāmi-anāgāmi-sukkhavipassakakhīṇāsavabhikkhū”. Mahākassapa certainly must select monks who are learned in the entire teaching with its nine limbs; he just won’t accept learned monks other than those who are arahants fully endowed with the other qualifications mentioned (the analytical knowledges and great spiritual majesty). “Tevijjādibhede” is an accusative plural describing the khīṇāsavabhikkhū.
 
Here is my rendering, using yours as a basis but revised to fit my understanding of the passage:
 
The Elder [Mahākassapa], having avoided (vajjetvā seems preferable to bajjayitvā) those many hundreds and thousands of monks who were common people, stream-enterers, once-returners, non-returners and dry-insight outflow-destroyers [all of whom] knew the entire teaching of the Teacher with its nine limbs, selected just 499 outflow-destroyer monks classified as triple-knowledge bearers and so forth--#those who had attained the analytical knowledges#, who were of great majesty, and who for the most part had been appointed by the Blessed One [to the position of] foremost in that [field].
 
Note that etadagga is a technical term referring to those appointed to the position of foremost in particular areas, such as wisdom, psychic powers, recollection of past lives, etc., as mentioned in the Etadaggavagga of the Anguttara, Book of Ones. Though the commentary says that “for the most part” these monks were appointed as etadagga, this may be an exaggeration typical of the commentaries. The Etadaggavagga mentions only 40 monks as appointees, 459 short of the number selected by Mahākassapa to join the Saṅgīti.

I hope this is helpful.

With best wishes 

Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi
Chuang Yen Monastery
2020 Route 301
Carmel NY 10512
U.S.A.

To help feed the hungry and educate poor children around the world, check out:
http://www.buddhistglobalrelief.org/main.html

For lectures and teachings:
http://www.bodhimonastery.net/bm/
http://www.noblepath.org/audio.html
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/venbodhi

Public photo albums:
http://picasaweb.google.com/venbodhi
 


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [palistudy] Sumaṅgala-Vilāsinī_question
From: "Bryan Levman bryan.levman@... [palistudy]"
<palistudy@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thu, October 15, 2015 3:46 pm
To: <palistudy@yahoogroups.com>

 

 
Dear Pāli friends,
 
In the Sumaṅgalavilāsinī (volune 1, page 4, lines 6-12), Mahākassapa excludes certain people from the first council and includes others. I am having some trouble in understanding how many groups the Pāli refers to or whether the various phrases are appositive.
 
It reads as follows (PTS version):
 
thero sakala-navaṅga-satthu-sāsana-pariyatti-dhare puthujjana-sotāpanna-sakadāgāmi-anāgāmi –sakkha (Burmese: sukkha)-vipassaka-khīṇāsava-bhikkhū anekasate, anekasahasse ca bajjayitvā tipiṭaka-sabbapariyatti-ppabheda-dhare paṭisambhidā-ppatte mahānubhāve yebhuyyena bhagavato (Burmese; PTS Bhagavatā) etadaggaṃ āropite tevijjādi-bhede khīṇāsava-bhikkhū yeva ekūnapañcasate pariggahesi.
 
of which a rough translation is
 
The Elder [Mahākassapa] excluded those many hundreds and thousands who knew the whole nine limbs of the teacher’s teaching by heart, the common people, the stream-enterers, the once-returners, the non-returners and those monks whose outflows had been destroyed through dry-insight [those who achieved insight without samādhi], and he included just 499 monks whose outflows had been destroyed,  of great majesty, who for the most part had  effected that pinacle of the Blessed One consisting in the three knowledges.
 
It looks like those excluded include three groups

1) those who knew the nine aṅgas
2) everyone who wasn’t an arhat (the common people up to the non-returners)
3) monks whose outflows were destroyed through dry-insight

But there are no “ca’s” in the text, leaving open the possibility of an appositive structure.

For those 499 included, there are also no “ca’s” and again the question is, is the commentator talking about one group of monks who have destroyed the outflows, have great majesty, achieved the three knowledges? or two or three different groups? It looks like an appositive structure with everything modifying the khīṇāsava-bhikkhū. That would suggest that the excluded groups should be similarly read, except a putthujana, sotāpanna, etc., can not be read in apposition to khīṇāsava-bhikkū.
 
I would appreciate knowing how you interpret these groups,
 
Best wishes,
 
Bryan
 
 
Next in thread: 4433
Previous message: 4431
Next message: 4433

Contemporaneous posts     Posts in thread     all posts