To view the diacritics on this page, you must install the
Indic Times font on your machine and have a browser capable of
displaying the Unicode (utf-8) character set.
If you cannot view the Chinese characters on this page, you must install
a font capable of displaying them, such as CyberCJK.
Department of Indology and Tibetology
Philipps University
35032 Marburg
Germany
Abstract
The present article offers a translation of the Saṃyukta-āgama parallel to the Sāleyyaka-sutta of the Majjhima-nikāya, followed by an examination of the differences found between the Chinese and Pāli versions. This comparison shows the degree to which oral transmission has influenced the shape of the two versions.
Introduction
The ten courses of action (kammapatha)
are a central category in early Buddhist ethics.(1) In their unwholesome
manifestation, these ten courses of action cover:
1. three bodily aspects: killing, stealing,
and sexual misconduct;
2. four verbal aspects: false speech,
malicious speech, harsh speech, and gossiping;
3. three mental aspects: covetousness,
ill will, and wrong view.
According to the Pāli discourses, to
undertake these ten unwholesome courses of action will have evil results now
and in the future,(2) and will lead to a bad rebirth just as surely as a die
thrown up into the air will fall to the ground and remain there.(3)
To refrain from them forms, according to
the Cakkavatti-sīhanāda-sutta,the turning-point after
a period of continuous moral decline in the world.(4) Such refraining, which
corresponds to undertaking the ten wholesome courses of action, will lead to a good
rebirth just as surely as ghee will rise above water.(5) Not only can a good
rebirth be expected from them, but when well developed the ten wholesome
courses of action even lead to awakening.(6) For those who have attained full
awakening the ten wholesome courses of action remain a mode of conduct that is
of continuous relevance, a fact that finds its expression in the statement that
to undertake them constitutes the other shore.(7)
The Sāleyyaka-sutta of the Majjhima-nikāya is one of several discourses that take up the potential of the ten courses
of action and in particular their relationship to types of rebirth.(8) Like all
Pāli discourses, the Sāleyyaka-sutta is the product of a period
of oral transmission, which inevitably has had its effects on the present shape
of the early discourses. Some of the effects of oral transmission on a
discourse can be detected by comparing the Pāli version to parallels
preserved by the reciters of other early Buddhist schools. Though parallels
found in the Chinese Āgamas, among the fragments discovered in
Central Asia, or in the Tibetan Kanjur and Tanjur collections usually agree
closely with their Pāli counterparts on the essentials of the teaching,(9)
often enough they show interesting variations, which help to provide a
complementary or even corrective perspective on the information offered in a
Pāli discourse.(10)
A first look at the standard reference
work for locating such parallels, Chizen Akanuma's Comparative Catalogue,
meets with no success, as this work does not list any parallel to the Sāleyyaka-sutta.(11)Akanuma's groundbreaking work was originally published in 1929 and,
although it remains a chief tool for identifying parallels, research has
progressed since then.(12) Important contributions to the search for parallels
have been made by the late Taiwanese scholar monk Yin-shun, who in his study of The Compilation of the Early Buddhist Canon identifies a counterpart to
the Sāleyyaka-sutta,(13) found in the Saṃyukta-āgama.(14)
The Saṃyukta-āgama collection
to which this parallel belongs was translated during the fifth century under
the leadership of the Indian monk Guṇabhadra.(15) This translation
appears to have been based on a manuscript brought by the Chinese pilgrim Fa-xian
(法顯) from Ceylon to
China,(16) a manuscript that was probably of Sarvāstivāda provenance
(using the term Sarvāstivāda as an umbrella term that also covers the
so-called Mūlasarvāstivāda).(17)
1. I heard like this: at one time the
Buddha was traveling among the people of the Kosalan Country and was staying in
the Rosewood Grove
north of Velāma village.(20)
2. The Brahmin householders of
Velāma village heard that the Blessed One was staying in the Rosewood Grove north of
the village.
3. Having heard this, they gathered and
went to where the Buddha was staying, bowed down at his feet and, sitting down
at one side, said to the Buddha:
4. "Blessed One, what is the cause,
what is the condition for beings to be reborn in hell after the breaking up of
the body at death?"
5. The Buddha told the Brahmin
householders: "Undertaking unrighteous conduct, undertaking harmful and
dangerous conduct is the cause and condition for being reborn in hell after the
breaking up of the body at death."
6. The Brahmin householders said to the
Buddha: "Undertaking what type of unrighteous conduct, harmful and
dangerous conduct, [is the cause and condition for] being reborn in hell after
the breaking up of the body at death?"
7-10. The Buddha told the Brahmin
householders: "Killing living beings . . . (and so on up to)(21) wrong
view, being in possession of these ten unwholesome actions is the cause and
condition. Brahmins, this is unrighteous conduct, harmful and dangerous
conduct, [which is the cause and condition for] being reborn in hell after the
breaking up of the body at death."
The Brahmin householders said to the
Buddha: "What is the cause and condition for beings to attain rebirth in
heaven after the breaking up of the body at death?"
The Buddha told the Brahmin householders:
"Undertaking righteous conduct, undertaking right conduct, this is the
cause and condition for attaining rebirth in heaven after the breaking up of
the body at death."
They asked again: "Blessed One,
undertaking what type of righteous conduct, what kind of right conduct, [is the
cause and condition for] attaining rebirth in heaven after the breaking up of
the body at death?"
11-14. The Buddha told the Brahmin householders:
"Namely, abstaining from killing living beings . . . (and so on up to)
right view, the ten wholesome courses of action are the cause and condition,
for attaining rebirth in heaven after the breaking up of the body at death.
15-17. Brahmin householders, if there is
[someone who] undertakes this righteous conduct, undertakes this right conduct,
and [who] wishes to seek [rebirth] in a great family of warriors, in a great
family of Brahmins, in a great family of householders, he will attain all these
places of rebirth. Why is that? Because of the cause and condition of righteous
conduct and right conduct.
18-23. Again, if [someone] wishes to seek
rebirth among the Four Great Kings, the gods of the Thirty-three . . . (and so
on up to) the gods that wield power over others' creation, all these places of
rebirth will be attained. Why is that? Because of righteous conduct and right
conduct, [one who] maintains pure morality will naturally attain all that his
heart wishes.
24-27. Again, if there is [someone with]
such righteous conduct and right conduct, [who] wishes to seek rebirth in the
Brahmā world, he will also attain that place of rebirth. Why is that?
Because he has undertaken righteous conduct and right conduct. Keeping morality
perfectly pure and separating the mind from craving and sensual desires,
whatever he wishes he will certainly attain.
28-38. Again, if [someone] wishes to seek
a place of rebirth among the radiant gods, the gods of all pervasive purity . .
. (and so on up to) the Akaniṭṭha gods,(22) this also will be like
that. Why is that? Because of keeping morality perfectly pure and separating
the mind from sensual desires.
Again, if [someone] wishes to seek to
abide secluded from sensual desires and evil unwholesome states, with initial and
sustained mental application . . . (and so on up to) being in possession of the
fourth jhāna, all that he will attain and achieve. Why is that?
Because of his righteous conduct and right conduct. Keeping morality perfectly
pure and separating the mind from craving and sensual desires, whatever he
wishes he will certainly attain.
39-42. Wishing to seek [the attainment
of] loving kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, equanimity, the sphere of
space, the sphere of consciousness, the sphere of nothingness, the sphere of
neither-perception-nor-non-perception, all these he will attain. Why is that?
Because of his righteous conduct and right conduct. Keeping morality perfectly
pure and separating the mind from craving and sensual desires, whatever he
wishes he will certainly attain.
43. Wishing to seek the eradication of
the three fetters and attain the fruits of stream-entry, of once-return, and of
non-return, infinite supernormal powers, the divine ear, knowledge of the minds
of others, recollection of past lives, knowledge of the passing away and
rebirth [of beings], knowledge of the destruction of the influxes, all that he
will attain. Why is that? Because of righteous conduct and right conduct.
Keeping morality and separating from sensual desires, whatever he wishes he
will certainly attain."
44. At that time the Brahmin householders
heard what the Buddha said, rejoiced in it and were delighted, paid their
respects and left.
Comparison
The thread of the presentation in the Sāleyyaka-sutta and its Saṃyukta-āgama parallel differs to some extent,
as illustrated in figure 1. While in the Sāleyyaka-sutta the
Brahmins inquire right away about both types of rebirth, in the Saṃyukta-āgama version they at first only inquire about rebirth in hell, and only when
this topic is concluded do they pose the complementary question about rebirth
in heaven.
Such variations are typical for material
that derives from oral transmission and can be found regularly between
different versions of a discourse. Memory is to some extent a constructive
effort and not merely reproductive,(23) hence such differences are only to be
expected in the case of oral literature.
In its introductory narration, the Sāleyyaka-sutta
is also more detailed, as it gives a full treatment of the favorable report
about the recluse Gotama heard by the Brahmins of Sālā that motivated
them to visit the Buddha.(24) The Chinese version simply mentions that the
Brahmins had come to know about the Buddha's presence and so went to pay him a
visit.(25) The Pāli version is again more detailed in regard to the
behavior of the Brahmins, reporting that on coming into the Buddha's presence
some behaved more respectfully and others less respectfully.(26) The Chinese
version does not mention such differences. The Sāleyyaka-sutta, moreover,
notes that the Buddha was in the presence of a great company of monks, a
circumstance not recorded in its Saṃyukta-āgama parallel.(27)
Descriptions of the Buddha's fame
and of the behavior of visitors are standard pericopes in the discourses found
in the Pāli Nikāyas and in the Chinese Āgamas,
hence these differences between the Sāleyyaka-sutta and its Saṃyukta-āgama
parallel merely show that these pericopes were at times applied to
different occasions.
The Pāli version stands alone
in introducing the exposition of each of the ten courses of action by
distinguishing them into three bodily, four verbal, and three mental types.(28)
Another difference is that the Chinese version simply enumerates the ten
unwholesome courses of action, whereas the Pāli version offers a detailed
exposition of each course of action.(29)
Such a detailed exposition of each
course of action fits the context well. According to both versions, the
Brahmins had requested practical instructions about the path to heaven and hell.
As the present occasion may have been their first visit to the Buddha,(30) it
would suit the occasion if they were to receive a detailed explanation of the
ten courses of action and practical illustrations of how these courses of
action are to be implemented.
The Pāli version is also more
detailed in its treatment of rebirth in the heavenly realms that correspond to jhāna
attainment.(31) Whereas the Saṃyukta-āgama discourse
simply lists two realms that correspond to the second and the third jhānas,(32)
the Sāleyyaka-sutta enumerates a set of subdivisions in regard to
these two realms, illustrated in figure 2. Thus, after first referring to the
realm of the second jhāna in general,(33) the Sāleyyaka-sutta
lists three subdivisions of this realm. Again, after referring to the realm of
the third jhāna in general,(34) the Pāli version lists also
three subdivisions of this realm.
Another and perhaps the most
noteworthy difference between the Sāleyyaka-sutta and its Saṃyukta-āgama
parallel are their presentations of the potential of the ten wholesome
courses of action. According to the Pāli account, the ten wholesome
courses of action will lead not only to rebirth in a good family or in the
celestial realms of the sense-sphere, but also to rebirth in the Brahmā
realms, the Pure Abodes and the formless realms. Though the Chinese version
works its way through a similar range of possible rebirths, it differs in
offering additional specifications on the requirements for such rebirths.
According to the Saṃyukta-āgama presentation, rebirth in the
celestial realms of the sense-sphere requires not only undertaking the ten
wholesome courses of action, but also pure moral conduct.(35) Though pure moral
conduct is already implicit in the stipulation to undertake the ten wholesome
courses of action, this additional qualification highlights that a celestial
rebirth requires higher ethical standards than rebirth in a human family of
good standing.(36)
For rebirth in the Brahmā
realms, the Chinese version stipulates not only pure morality but also freedom
from sensual desires.(37) This additional stipulation expands on the absence of
covetousness mentioned as part of the ten wholesome courses of action and thus
throws into relief the qualitative difference between rebirth in the celestial
realms of the sense-sphere and rebirth in the Brahmā realms.(38))
After treating rebirth in the Brahmā
realms up to the highest realm of the Pure Abodes, the Saṃyukta-āgama
discourse shows that the same conditions (the ten wholesome courses of action,
moral purity, and freedom from sensual desires) also serve as a foundation for
attaining the four jhānas here and now.(39) In this way, the Saṃyukta-āgama presentation leads the discussion from the otherworldly benefits, about
which the Brahmin visitors had inquired, to benefits that can be achieved in
the present life. Such benefits cover the four jhānas, the four brahmavihāras,
the four formless attainments, various supernormal knowledges, and the four
stages of awakening. The Sāleyyaka-sutta also offers such a shift
of perspective, though in the Pāli version this takes place only in regard
to the last benefit mentioned in both versions, the destruction of the
influxes. Consequently, whereas in the Chinese version the formless attainments
range among benefits to be achieved here and now, the Pāli version still
treats them from the perspective of modes of rebirth.
A last difference is that while the
Pāli version concludes with the Brahmins taking refuge, its Chinese
parallel reports only that the Brahmins rejoiced in the Buddha's exposition.
Here again the use of pericopes by different reciter traditions may be
responsible for the variation.
In fact, variations in regard to
the conclusion of a discourse can even be found between Pāli versions of
the same discourse. Such is the case with the two Kasibhāradvāja-suttas found in the Saṃyutta-nikāya
and in the Sutta-nipāta. Though these two discourses agree in
content, they differ in their concluding narration, as according to the Saṃyutta-nikāya
account Kasibhāradvājaonly took refuge and declared
himself to be a lay follower, while according to the Sutta-nipāta version
he requested ordination and became an arahant.(40)
This shows the information supplied by the reciters at the conclusion of a
discourse to be less reliable than the contents of the actual discourse.
The above comparison of the Sāleyyaka-sutta
and its Chinese parallel shows how the process of oral transmission has
left its mark on the actual form of each of the two discourses. From the
perspective of oral tradition, another point worth exploration is that in the Majjhima-nikāya
collection the Sāleyyaka-sutta is followed by another nearly
identical discourse, the Verañjaka-sutta. In the Saṃyukta-āgama
collection the same situation obtains, as the Chinese parallel to the Sāleyyaka-sutta
is also followed by another nearly identical discourse. In view of the
close similarity of these two consecutive discourses in the Pāli and
Chinese collections, one might wonder if these two pairs go back to a single
original. That is, was the same discourse delivered twice, or was it delivered
only once, with the vicissitudes of oral transmission leading to a doubling of
the discourse?
The two Pāli versions take
place at different locations, as the Sāleyyaka-sutta has the
village Sālā in the Kosalan country as its setting, while the Verañjaka-sutta
has Jeta's Grove near Sāvatthī as its venue.(41) The Chinese
parallels to the Sāleyyaka-sutta and the Verañjaka-sutta,
however, take place at the same location.(42) The two Pāli versions also
differ from each other in that the Sāleyyaka-sutta mentions the
number of monks that were present, while neither the Verañjaka-sutta nor
the two Chinese versions mention their presence.(43) The two Saṃyukta-āgama
versions differ from each other in the way they describe how the Brahmins went
from the village to the place where the Buddha was staying. The parallel to the
Sāleyyaka-sutta simply mentions that the Brahmins went to the
Buddha's presence,(44) while the parallel to the Verañjaka-sutta treats
the same in more detail, describing how they traveled by vehicle until they had
reached the vicinity of the Buddha's place of residence, where they got down
and proceeded on foot.(45) Such a detailed description of the means of
transportation is not found in either of the two Pāli versions.
Thus, the differences between the
members of each pair appear to be of a rather minor nature. Moreover, the
differences found between the members of one pair do not recur between the
members of the other pair: whereas the Pāli versions differ on the
location, the Chinese versions agree on it; whereas the Pāli versions
differ on whether monks were present, the Chinese versions agree in this
respect; and whereas the Chinese versions differ on whether they describe the
Brahmins' means of transportation, the Pāli versions agree in not
mentioning it. Thus these variations could indeed be accidents of oral
transmission and it seems possible that during recitation an originally single
discourse came to be doubled.
A relatively clear instance of a
doubling of a discourse can be found in the Madhyama-āgama collection,
which has preserved two parallels to the Vanapattha-sutta.(46) These two
Chinese discourses are nearly identical, and the circumstance that they have
only a single Pāli counterpart supports the impression that they probably
go back to what was originally a single discourse.
Another instance of a doubling of a
discourse can be found in the Saṃyutta-nikāya, which records
two instances in which Ānanda received instructions on mindfulness of
breathing from the Buddha.(47) These two discourses are identical in content
and differ only on whether the Buddha gave these instructions after an inquiry
by Ānanda or without Ānanda's prompting. Of these two discourses,
only the one in which Ānanda inquired about the subject of mindfulness of
breathing has a counterpart in the Saṃyukta-āgama.(48) Given
that according to the traditional account Ānanda had such mental retention
that he had been able to memorize all the discourses spoken by the Buddha,(49)
one would not expect him to need to be given exactly the same instructions
again on a second occasion. As only one of these two instances has a Chinese
counterpart, in this case it seems quite probable that the two discourses in
the Saṃyutta-nikāya are a doubling of what should be
considered a single instance.
In the case of the Sāleyyaka-sutta and
the Verañjaka-sutta, however, the Saṃyukta-āgama
agrees in presenting this exposition by the Buddha in a pair-wise fashion.
Hence comparison with the Chinese versions does not lend support to the
hypothesis that the Sāleyyaka-sutta and the Verañjaka-sutta
go back to a single discourse. If a doubling happened, it would have to have
happened at a very early stage during the transmission of the discourses in
order to affect both the Majjhima-nikāya and the Saṃyukta-āgama
collections.
Alternatively, perhaps no doubling
occurred. After all, an exposition of the ten courses of actions and their
potential to lead to heaven or hell should have been a topic of such common
interest that it would not be extraordinary for different groups of Brahmins to
receive the same exposition from the Buddha. If originally there were indeed
two discourses, it is also possible that the effect of oral transmission was
such as to make them more similar to each other than they were at the outset.
Looking back on the variations
between the Sāleyyaka-sutta and its Chinese parallel, what makes
the Saṃyukta-āgama version particularly noteworthy is its
treatment of the potential of the ten courses of action. The Chinese version
makes it clear that, although the ten wholesome courses of action form the
indispensable foundation for any of the rebirths depicted in both versions, the
undertaking of these ten courses needs to be supplemented with additional
qualities, such as a further enhancement of moral purity or aloofness from the
attraction of sensuality in order to lead to higher types of rebirth. The same
would also be implicit in the Pāli version, because to fully perfect the
ten courses of action would result in a supreme degree of moral purity and to
go beyond covetousness could be understood to cover aloofness from sensual
desires. Yet, in the Saṃyukta-āgama version the qualitative
differences in the requirements for higher types of rebirth stand out with
increased clarity.
Another aspect that stands out with
increased clarity in the Saṃyukta-āgama discourse is the
relevance of the ten wholesome courses of action to the present life. Here,
again, this is to some extent implicit in the Pāli version, which presents
the destruction of the influxes as the culmination of its range of benefits of
the ten wholesome courses of action. Yet, by taking up a whole range of
meditative attainments, covering the jhānas, the brahmavihāras,
the immaterial attainments, various supernormal knowledges, and all four stages
of awakening, the Saṃyukta-āgama version throws more clearly
into relief that the ten wholesome courses of action have the potential to
ensure fulfillment of any wish, whether such wish be for social status,
heavenly pleasures, supernatural power, or liberating insight.
Notes
(1) Keown (2001:29) lists the ten
courses of action as one out of "four major canonical formulations of
moral precepts." Return to text.
(9) Cousins (1983:5) remarks that
"divergences are typically greatest in matters of little importance—such items
as the locations of suttas, the names of individual speakers or the precise
order of occurrence of events. Only very rarely are they founded on doctrinal
or sectarian differences." Return to text.
(14) SĀ 1042 at T II
272c18-273a27. Although the Sāleyyaka-sutta appears to be without a
Sanskrit fragment or Tibetan parallel, a listing of the ten courses of action
can be found in a Daśottara-sūtra fragment edited in
Schlingloff (1962:27) (for other Sanskrit references see Bechert (2003:31) s.v.
karmapatha), and in a sūtra quotation in Śamathadeva's Abhidharmakośopāyikā-ṭīkā at D mngon pa ju 238b5 or Q tu 272b6 (this quotation is a
counterpart to AN 10:174 at AN V 261,19 and SĀ 1049 at T II 274b23). Return to text.
(15) On this Saṃyukta-āgama
collection see also Bucknell (2006) and Lü (1963:242); on its translator
see Bagchi (1927:378). Choong (2000) offers a comparison of major parts of this
collection with their Pāli counterparts. Return to text.
(16) T 2085 at T LI 865c25,
translated in Legge (1998:111), see also de Jong (1981:105) and Glass (2006:20-25). Return to text.
(17) On the school affiliation of
the Saṃyukta-āgama see Mayeda (1985:99) and Schmithausen
(1987:306), on the relationship or perhaps identity between Sarvāstivāda
and Mūlasarvāstivāda see Enomoto (2000). Return to text.
(18) In order to facilitate comparing
my translation of the Saṃyukta-āgama discourse with the
English translation of the Sāleyyaka-sutta offered in Ñāṇamoli
(2005:379-385), I adopt the same paragraph numbering as used by Ñāṇamoli.
For the same reason, I also use Pāli terminology, without thereby
intending to take a position on the original language of the Saṃyukta-āgama
manuscript. Return to text.
(19) The Taishō (大正) and
Fo-guang (佛光) editions
do not give a title, so I follow Anesaki (1908:115) in taking as title the name
of the village given in SĀ 1042 at T II 272c19 as 鞞羅磨 (Bi-luo-mo), which Anesaki
suggests corresponds to Velāma. In fact, the early middle Chinese
pronunciation of 鞞羅磨, following
Pulleyblank (1991), would be pji' la ma, a pronunciation equally valid
for a 宋 (Song), 元 (Yuan), and 明 (Ming)
variant of the name of the location as 鞞羅摩 (Bi-luo-mo).
In regard to this variant, the next and otherwise similar discourse SĀ
1043 at T II 273a29 supports the reading 鞞羅磨. T 2130 at
T LIV 1040a10 explains 鞞羅磨 to mean
"many offerings," 譯曰種種施也 (yi yue
zhong zhong shi ye), which could be a reference to the Velāmamahāyañña
mentioned in Ps III 90 or Mp IV 100. To take 鞞羅磨 as
standing for Velāma would also find support in the way this proper name is
rendered in the parallels to an occurrence of the name of the Brahmin Velāma
in AN 9:20 at AN IV 393,16. The parallel T 72 at T I 878c11 speaks of 毗羅摩 (Bi-luo-mo), T 74 at T I
880a23 of 彌羅摩 (Mi-luo-mo),
and EĀ 27:3 at T II 644c6 of 毘羅摩 (Pi-luo-mo),
so that these three versions employ the same second character used in SĀ
1042 and the third character found as a variant reading in SĀ 1042.
Another parallel to AN 9:20, T 73 at T I 879b8, renders Velāma as 鞞藍大 (Bi-lan-da), and thus
employs the first character used in SĀ 1042. The first two characters used
in SĀ 1042 recur in the same Saṃyukta-āgama collection,
for example in SĀ 913 at T II 229c4 or in SĀ 1074 at T II 279a28, to
render (Uru)vela, (欝)鞞羅 (Yu-bi-luo). Thus it seems safe to
conclude that SĀ 1042 takes place at a village by the name of Velāma,
though a Kosalan village by this name does not appear to be known in the Pāli
tradition, see Law (1979:4) and Malalasekera (1995:695). A Kosalan village with
a somewhat similar name is the Veḷudvāra village mentioned in SN
55:7 at SN V 352,16, which its counterpart in SĀ 1044 at T II 273b10
refers to as 鞞紐多羅 (Bi-niu-duo-luo). Return to text.
(20) The 身恕 (Shen-shu) grove, which recurs in SĀ
619 at T II 173b6 and SĀ 1044 at T II 273b10 as a grove located north of
two other villages in the Kosalan country, and in SĀ 565 at T II 148c12 as
a grove north of a village in the Koliyan country, seems to stand for a siṃsapā
grove, a grove of Indian Rosewood trees (Dalbergia sissoo). The
Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra similarly associates a śiṃśapā
grove with various locations, each time specified to be "north of the
village," uttareṇa grāmasya, see frag. S 360 folio 164
R4, folio 170 R3, and folio 178 V5+R1 in Waldschmidt (1950:14, 17, and 21). Return to text.
(21) The abbreviation is found in
the Chinese original. Return to text.
(22) SĀ 1042 at T II 273a15: 阿伽尼吒 (A-jia-ni-zha). Return to text.
(23) Rosenberg (1987:81) points out that
"memory is . . . not a reduplicative process . . . but a procedure of creative reconstruction." Return to text.
(24) MN 41 at MN I 285,8: iti pi
so bhagavā . . . Return to text.
(26) MN 41 at MN I 285,18. For a
study of different approach formulas see Allon (1997:18-190). Return to text.
(27) MN 41 at MN I 285,2: mahatā
bhikkhusaṅghena saddhiṃ, an expression the commentary explains
as referring to a hundred, a thousand, or a hundred-thousand monks, Ps II 327: sataṃ
vā sahassaṃ vā satasahassaṃ vā. Return to text.
(28) MN 41 at MN I 286,10: tividhaṃ
. . . kāyena adhammacariyā . . . catubbhidaṃ vācaya . . .
tividhaṃ manasā, with the corresponding treatment of their
wholesome counterparts in MN 41 at MN I 287,23. Return to text.
(29) MN 41 at MN I 286,14 and MN I
287,27. This detailed treatment recurs in AN 10:176 at AN V 264,12 and AN V
266,22, in which case it is also found in its parallel SĀ 1039 at T II
271b20 and T II 271c22. Return to text.
(30) In the Pāli Nikāyas,
the Brahmins from Sālā occur again in MN 60 at MN I 400,29, where
they form the audience to a detailed examination of various types of views.
Though MN 60 does not stand in an explicit temporal relation to MN 41, the
relatively more basic exposition given to the Brahmins from Sālā in
MN 41 suggests the present discourse to be the earlier of these two meetings,
which could thus be their first meeting with the Buddha. Return to text.
(31) MN 41 at MN I 289,17. The same
type of listing recurs in MN 120 at MN III 102,26+31 and in the Mahāvastu
in Senart (1890:348,19) (though without the parittasubhā devā,
which are, however, mentioned in another listing in the same work, see Senart
(1890:360,19)). Return to text.
(32) SĀ 1042 at T II 273a15: 光音 (guang-yin) and 遍淨 (bian-jing), which according to
Hirakawa (1997:155 and 1155) correspond to ābhāsvara and śubha-kṛtsna. Return to text.
(33) Ps II 333 explains that the ābhā
devā are not a separate realm, but an umbrella term for the three
subrealms of the second jhāna realm, ābhā nāma
visuṃ n' atthi, parittābha-appamāṇābha-ābhassarānam
etaṃ adhivacanaṃ. Return to text.
(34) The subhā devā are
not listed in the Burmese and Siamese editions, Be-MN I 359,29 and Se-MN
I 526,16. Return to text.
(35) SĀ 1042 at T II 273a11: 行淨戒 (xing jing jie). Return to text.
(36) The Karmavibhaṅga in
Kudo (2004:76,12 and 77,12) similarly highlights the higher ethical standards
required for such rebirth, as according to its presentation to undertake the
ten wholesome courses of action "well [yet] weakly," subhāvitā
mandabhāvitāś ca, is the condition for rebirth as a human,
whereas rebirth in a sensual heavenly world requires undertaking the same ten
courses of action in a way that is "well completed," susamāptā
(ibid:78,3 and 79,2). Return to text.
(37) SĀ 1042 at T II 273a13: 持戒清淨, 心離愛欲 (chi jie qing-jing, xin li ai yu). Return to text.
(38) DN 33 at DN III 260,1 and AN
8:35 at AN IV 241,7 similarly indicate that for an aspiration for rebirth in
the Brahmā world to be realized, the maintenance of morality (sīla)
and freedom from sensuality (vītarāga) are required. The Karmavibhaṅga
in Kudo (2004:78,7 and 79,5) does not explicitly mention freedom from
sensuality as a requirement for rebirth in the Brahmā worlds, but only
speaks of undertaking the ten courses of action to a degree superior to the
degree required for rebirth in a sensual heavenly world. Return to text.
(39) The commentarial gloss at Ps
II 333 indicates that the present section in the Sāleyyaka-sutta implicitly
covers jhāna attainment, as rebirth in the higher heavenly realms
that are beyond the sense-sphere celestial realms would require previous jhāna
development (based on undertaking the ten wholesome courses of action). Return to text.
(40) SN 7:11 at SN I 173,20 andSn
1:4 at Sn p. 16,1. The Chinese parallels SĀ 98 at T II 27b26, SĀ2
264 at T II 466c10 and SĀ3 1 at T II 493b8 agree with Sn 1:4,
as they also report that he went forth and became an arahant. Return to text.
(41) Owing to the different
locations, the two Pāli discourses differ also in the way they introduce
the Brahmin householders: MN 41 at MN I 285,4 speaks of the "Brahmin
householders from Sālā," Sāleyyaka brāhmaṇagahapatikā,
while MN 42 at MN I 290,14 speaks of the "Brahmin householders from Verañjā,"
Verañjakā brāhmaṇagahapatikā, a difference that
also affects their respective titles. Return to text.
(42) SĀ 1042 at T II 272c18
and SĀ 1043 at T II 273a28. Return to text.
(43) MN 41 at MN I 285,2. Another
minor difference is a matter of formulation found in the introductory section
of the exposition of the ten types of action, where MN 41 at MN I 286,10 reads adhammacariyā
visamacariyā hoti, whereas the corresponding part in MN 42 at MN I
291,25 reads adhammacārī visamacārī hoti, so that MN
41 speaks of "conduct," but MN 42 of "one who undertakes
conduct." Return to text.
(45) SĀ 1043 at T II 273b2.
This passage in SĀ 1043 thus parallels a standard pericope used also in
other Pāli discourses to describe how someone approaches the Buddha by
vehicle, see for example MN 89 at MN II 119,13. Return to text.
(46) MĀ 107 and MĀ 108 at
T I 596c-598b, parallels to MN 17 at MN I 104-108. Return to text.
(48) SĀ 810 at T II 208a-c. SN
54:13-14 are followed by another two versions of the same discourse, SN
54:15-16 at SN V 334-340, addressed by the Buddha to an unspecified group of
monks either at their request or without a request. In this case, the Pāli
discourse pair has a parallel in the discourse pair SĀ 811-812 at T II
208c10. As the Pāli versions do not give the names of this group of monks,
it could be assumed that the same discourse was given to two different groups of
monks (or to two different single monks in the Chinese versions). Return to text.
(49) This account can be found in
the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya in T 1428 at T XXII 968b15, in the Mahāsāṅghika
Vinaya in T 1425 at XXII 491c2, in the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya in
T 1421 at T XXII 191a19, in the (Mūla-)sarvāstivāda Vinaya in
T 1451 at T XXIV 407a3, in the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya in T 1435
at T XXIII 449a20, and in the Theravāda Vinaya at Vin II 287,12.
According to Th 1024, Ānanda had mastered 80,000 teachings, caturāsīti
sahassāni ye me dhammā pavattino, andAN 1:14 at AN I
24,32 reckons Ānanda an outstanding monk disciple for his learning and
memory, etad aggaṃ mama sāvakānaṃ bhikkhūnaṃ
bahussutānaṃ . . . satimantānaṃ, yadidaṃ Ānando,
qualities of Ānanda similarly highlighted in its counterpart EĀ 4.7
at T II 558a26: 所憶不忘, 多聞廣遠 (suo yi
bu wang, duo-wen guang-yuan).According to
the Saṅghabhedavastu in Gnoli (1978:54,18), already before Ānanda
went forth it was predicted that he would win eminence in remembering what he
had heard, anena kumāreṇa śrutidharāṇām agreṇa
bhavitavyam iti, a quality that was the outcome of an aspiration made by
him in a former life to win such eminence in the future, see Gnoli (1978:66,15,
and 67,14). Return to text.
Abbreviations
(Quotations
are according to the PTS and Taishō editions, giving first the discourse
by number, and then its location by volume, page and line.)
AN
Aṅguttara-nikāya
Be
Burmese edition
EĀ
Ekottarika-āgama (T 125)
D
Derge edition
DN
Dīgha-nikāya
MĀ
Madhyama-āgama (T 26)
MN
Majjhima-nikāya
Mp
Manorathapūraṇī
Ps
Papañcasūdanī
Q
Pekingedition
SĀ
Saṃyukta-āgama (T 99)
SĀ2 (partial) Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100)
SĀ3
(partial)
Saṃyukta-āgama (T 101)
Se Siamese
edition
SN Saṃyutta-nikāya
Sn Sutta-nipāta
T Taishō
Th
Theragāthā
Vin
Vinaya
Bibliography
Akanuma, Chizen. The Comparative
Catalogue of Chinese Āgamas and Pāli Nikāyas. Delhi: Sri Satguru, 1990
(first published 1929).
Allon, Mark. Style and Function: A Study of the Dominant Stylistic
Features of the Prose Portions of Pāli Canonical Sutta Texts and
their Mnemonic Function. Tokyo: International Institute for Buddhist Studies, 1997.
Anālayo. "Some Pāli
Discourses in the Light of Their Chinese Parallels," Buddhist Studies
Review 22, no. 1, 1-14 and no. 2, 93-105 (2005).
Anesaki, Masaharu. "The Four
Buddhist Āgamas in Chinese," Transactions of the Asiatic Society
of Japan 35 (1908), part 3, 1-149.
Bagchi,
Prabodh Chandra. Le Canon Bouddhique en Chine, vol. 1. Paris: Geuthner,
1927.
Bechert,
Heinz (ed.). Sanskrit-Wörterbuch der buddhistischen Texte aus den Turfan-Funden,
vol. 2. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 2003.
Bucknell, Roderick S. "Saṃyukta-āgama,"
Encyclopedia of Buddhism 7 (2006), 684-687.
Choong, Mun-Keat. The
Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2000.
Cousins, L. S. "Pāli Oral
Literature." In Buddhist Studies, edited by P. Denwood et al.,
1-11. London:
Curzon, 1983.
de Jong, J. W. "Fa-Hsien and
Buddhist Texts in Ceylon,"
Journal of the Pāli Text Society 9 (1981), 105-116.
Enomoto, Fumio. "'Mūlasarvāstivādin'
and 'Sarvāstivādin'" In Vividharatnakaraṇḍaka, Festgabe für Adelheid Mette, edited by
C. Chojnacki et al., 239-250. Swisstal-Odendorf: Indica et Tibetica, 2000.
Glass, Andrew. Connected
Discourses in Gandhāra: A Study, Edition, and Translation of Four Saṃyuktāgama-Type
Sūtras from the Senior Collection. Published in 2006 at http://www.andrewglass.org/phd.php (accessed on August 4 2006).
Gnoli, Raniero. The Gilgit
Manuscript of the Saṅghabhedavastu, vol. 2. Roma: Istituto Italiano
per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1978.
Hirakawa, Akira. Buddhist Chinese-Sanskrit Dictionary. Tokyo: Reiyukai, 1997.
Keown, Damien. The Nature of
Buddhist Ethics. Wiltshire: Palgrave, 2001.
Kudo, Noriyuki. The Karmavibhaṅga. Tokyo: Soka University, 2004.
Law, Bimala Churn. Geography of
Early Buddhism. Delhi:
Munshiram Manoharlal, 1979.
Legge,
James. A Record of Buddhistic Kingdoms. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1998.
Lü Cheng.
"Āgama," Encyclopedia of Buddhism 1 (1963), 241-244.
Malalasekera,
G. P. Dictionary of Pāli Proper Names, vol. 1. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1995.
Mayeda, Egaku. "Japanese
Studies on the Schools of the Chinese Āgamas." In Zur
Schulzugehörigkeit von Werken der Hīnayāna-Literatur, vol. 1,
edited by H. Bechert, 94-103. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985.
Pulleyblank,
Edwin G. Lexicon of Reconstructed Pronunciation in Early Middle Chinese,
Late Middle Chinese and Early Mandarin. Vancouver: UBC Press, 1991.
Ñāṇamoli,
Bhikkhu. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha. Boston: Wisdom, 2005.
Rosenberg,
Bruce A. "The Complexity of Oral Tradition," Oral Tradition 2
(1987), part 1, 73-90.
Schlingloff, Dieter. Dogmatische
Begriffsreihen im älteren Buddhismus. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1962.
Schmithausen, Lambert.
"Beiträge zur Schulzugehörigkeit und Textgeschichte kanonischer und
postkanonischer buddhistischer Materialien." In Zur Schulzugehörigkeit
von Werken der Hīnayāna-Literatur, vol. 2, edited by H. Bechert,
304-406. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1987.
Senart,
Emile. Le Mahāvastu, vol. 2. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1890.
Waldschmidt, Ernst. Das Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra, vol 1.
Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1950.
Yin-shun (印順). 原始佛教聖典之集成 [The Compilation
of the Early Buddhist Canon]. Taipei:
正聞出版社, 1962.
I am indebted to Marcus
Bingenheimer and Rod Bucknell for comments made in regard to an earlier draft
of this article.
