291 Spk glosses sattaratana (seven cubits) as sattahatthappamāṇa (the measurement of seven hands); a hattha (lit. “hand”), which extends from the elbow to the fingertip, is approximately two feet. This is one of the rare texts in the Nikāyas where the word abhiññā is used collectively to designate the six higher knowledges.
292 Spk: After she had censured the disciple who was the Buddha’s counterpart, even while Mahākassapa was roaring his lion’s roar about the six abhiññās, her saffron robes began to irritate her body like thorny branches or a prickly plant. As soon as she removed them and put on the white clothes (of a lay woman) she felt at ease.
293 A BHS parallel of this sutta is at Mvu III 47-56. Spk: Dakkhiṇāgiri was a country in the southern region of the hills surrounding Rājagaha. After the Buddha’s parinibbāna Ānanda had gone to Sāvatthī to inform the multitude; then he left for Rājagaha and along the way was walking on tour in Dakkhiṇāgiri.
294 This is said with reference to Pācittiya 32. See Vin IV 71-75.
295 See Vin II 196, which relates the original background story to the rule, namely, Devadatta’s attempt to create a schism in the Saṅgha (also at Vin IV 71). Spk alludes to this in its gloss of the expression mā pāpicchā pakkhaṃ nissāya saṅghaṃ bhindeyyuṃ: “It was laid down for this reason: ‘As Devadatta along with his retinue ate after informing families and, by relying on those of evil wishes, divided the Saṅgha, so let it not come to pass that others of evil wishes—by collecting a group, eating among families after informing them, and enlarging their group—divide the Saṅgha in reliance on their faction.’”Spk seems to interpret dummaṅkūnaṃ puggalānaṃ niggahāya and pesalānaṃ bhikkhūnaṃ phāsuvihārāya as complementary sides of a single reason, a view explicitly endorsed by Spk-pṭ: dummaṅkūnaṃ niggaho eva pesalānaṃ phāsuvihāro ti idaṃ ekaṃ aṅgaṃ. Thus on this interpretation “mā pāpicchā …” would become a second, independent reason. But I follow Horner (at BD 5:275) and C.Rh.D (at KS 2:147), both of whom take the restraint of ill-behaved persons and the comforting of well-behaved bhikkhus as two distinct reasons, to which “mā pāpicchā …” is subordinate. This seems to be corroborated by the list of ten reasons for the laying down of the training rules (at Vin III 21, etc.), where these two factors are counted as separate reasons. As to the third reason, “out of sympathy for families” (kulānuddayatāya), Spk says: “When the Bhikkhu Saṅgha is living in harmony and performing the Uposatha and Pavāraṇā, people who give ticket-meals, etc., become destined for heaven.” A more plausible explanation is that families are spared the burden of having to support too many bhikkhus at one time. In the Mvu version (at III 48) only two reasons are mentioned, “the protection, safeguarding, and comfort of families” and “the breaking up of cliques of wicked men.”
296 Kumārakavādā na muccāma. Commentarial tradition holds that Ānanda was born on the same day as the Bodhisatta (see Sv II 425, Ap-a 58, 358, Ja I 63 (Be, but not in the Se or Ee versions)). If this were true, however, he would now be over eighty years of age and thus would hardly have to point to a few grey hairs to prove he is no longer a youngster. Other facts recorded in the canon suggest that Ānanda must have been considerably younger than the Buddha, perhaps by as much as thirty years. On the different opinions about his age held by the early Buddhist schools, see C. Witanachchi’s article “Ānanda,” in the Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, Vol. I, fasc. 4, p. 529.Spk paraphrases in a way that supports the traditional view: “Since you wander around with newly ordained bhikkhus devoid of sense restraint, you wander around with youngsters and thus you yourself deserve to be called a youngster.”
297 The name means “Fat Nandā.” She is frequently mentioned in the Bhikkhunī Vibhaṅga as a troublemaker in the Bhikkhunī Saṅgha; see e.g. Vin IV 216, 218, 223-24, etc. KS 2:148 mistakenly calls this nun “Fat Tissā,” confusing her with the petulant nun of the preceding sutta.
298 Aññatitthiyapubbo samāno. Spk: Since the elder was not known to have any teacher or preceptor in this Dispensation, and he had put on the saffron robes himself when he renounced the world, out of indignation she depicts him as having been formerly a member of another sect. On Ānanda as the “Videhan sage” see above n. 288.
299 Paṭapilotikānaṃ. See n. 60 above.
300 Spk relates here the entire biographical background of Mahākassapa, including several past lives, culminating in his meeting with the Buddha. For a paraphrase, see Hecker, “Mahākassapa: Father of the Saṅgha,” in Nyanaponika and Hecker, Great Disciples of the Buddha, pp. 109-19.
301 I translate Kassapa’s thought just above following Spk, which paraphrases each sentence as a conditional: “‘If I should see the Teacher, it is just the Blessed One that I would see; there cannot be any other Teacher than him. If I should see the Fortunate One—called sugata because he has gone well by the right practice—it is just this Blessed One that I would see; there cannot be any other Fortunate One than him. If I should see the Perfectly Enlightened One—so called because he awakened fully to the truths by himself—it is just the Blessed One that I would see; there cannot be any other Perfectly Enlightened One than him.’ By this he shows, ‘Merely by seeing him, I had no doubt that this is the Teacher, this is the Fortunate One, this is the Perfectly Enlightened One.’”The repetition of Kassapa’s declaration of discipleship is in Be and Se though not in Ee. Spk confirms the repetition, explaining that although the utterance is recorded twice we should understand that it was actually spoken three times.
302 Spk: If a disciple so single-minded (evaṃ sabbacetasā samannāgato)—so confident in mind (pasannacitto)—should perform such an act of supreme humility towards an outside teacher who, without knowing, claims to know (i.e., to be enlightened), that teacher’s head would fall off from the neck like a palm fruit broken at the stalk; the meaning is, it would split into seven pieces. But when such an act of humility is done at the Master’s golden feet, it cannot stir even a hair on his body. The following “Therefore” implies: “Since knowing, I say ‘I know,’ therefore you should train thus.”
303 Here Spk explains sabbacetasā differently than above: “attending with a completely attentive mind (sabbena samannāhāracittena), without allowing the mind to stray even a little.”
304 Sātasahagatā ca me kāyagatā sati. Spk: This is mindfulness of the body associated with pleasure by way of the first jhāna in the foulness meditation and mindfulness of breathing. This threefold exhortation was itself the elder’s going forth and higher ordination.
305 Spk (Se): Sāṇo ti sakileso sa-iṇo hutvā. Be (text and Spk) reads saraṇo instead of sāṇo, which is less satisfactory. The line is also at MN III 127, 7-8, with sāṇo.Spk: There are four modes of using the requisites: (i) by theft (theyyaparibhoga), the use made by a morally depraved monk; (ii) as a debtor (iṇaparibhoga), the unreflective use made by a virtuous monk; (iii) as an heir (dāyajjaparibhoga), the use made by the seven trainees; (iv) as an owner (sāmiparibhoga), the use made by an arahant. Thus only an arahant uses the requisites as an owner, without debt. The elder speaks of his use of the requisites when he was still a worldling as use by a debtor.
306 Spk: This took place on the day of their first meeting. The attainment of arahantship was mentioned beforehand because of the sequence of the teaching, but it actually took place afterwards. The Buddha descended from the road with the intention of making Kassapa a forest dweller, a rag-robe wearer, and a one-meal eater from his very birth (as a monk).
307 Spk: The Blessed One wanted to exchange robes with Kassapa because he wished to appoint the elder to his own position (theraṃ attano ṭhāne ṭhapetukāmatāya). When he asked whether the elder could wear his rag-robes he was not referring to his bodily strength but to the fulfilment of the practice (paṭipattipūraṇa). The Buddha had made this robe from a shroud that had covered a slave woman named Puṇṇā, which had been cast away in a cremation ground. When he picked it up, brushed away the creatures crawling over it, and established himself
in the great lineage of the nobles ones, the earth quaked and sounded a roar and the devas applauded. In offering the robe, the Buddha implied: “This robe should be worn by a bhikkhu who is from birth an observer of the ascetic practices. Will you be able to make proper use of it?” And Kassapa’s assent signifies, “I will fulfil this practice.” At the moment they exchanged robes the great earth resounded and shook to its ocean boundaries.
308 Cp. the Buddha’s praise of Sāriputta at MN III 29,8-13. Spk: By this statement the elder has absolved his going forth from the charge of Thullanandā. This is the purport: “Does one without teacher or preceptor, who takes the saffron robe himself, and who leaves another sect, receive the honour of having the Buddha go out to welcome him, or take ordination by a triple exhortation, or get to exchange robes with the Buddha in person? See how offensive the bhikkhunī Thullanandā’s utterance was!”
309 As at 16:10.
310 Spk glosses “Tathāgata” here as satta, a being, on which Spk-pṭ comments: “As in past aeons, in past births, one has come into being by way of kamma and defilements, so one has also come now (tathā etarahi pi āgato); hence it is said ‘tathāgata.’ Or else, according to the kamma one has done and accumulated, just so has one come, arrived, been reborn in this or that form of individual existence (tathā taṃ taṃ attabhāvaṃ āgato upagato upapanno).”This explanation seems implausible, especially when other texts clearly show that the philosophical problem over the Tathāgata’s post-mortem state concerns “the Tathāgata, the highest type of person, the supreme person, the one who has attained the supreme attainment (tathāgato uttamapuriso paramapuriso paramapattipatto)” (22:86 (III 116,13-14) = 44:2 (IV 380,14-15)).
311 The same question, but with a different reply, is at MN I 444,36-445,25. Possibly Mahākassapa’s concern with the preservation of the true Dhamma, demonstrated in this sutta, presages his role as the convener of the First Buddhist Council soon after the Buddha’s parinibbāna (described at Vin II 284-85). There we see, in the ebullient reaction of the old bhikkhu Subhadda to the report of the Buddha’s death, the first stirring towards the emergence of a “counterfeit” Dhamma. Mahākassapa convenes the First Council precisely to ensure that the true Dhamma and Discipline will endure long and will not be driven out by counterfeit versions devised by unscrupulous monks.
312 Spk: There are two counterfeits of the true Dhamma (saddhammapaṭirūpaka ): one with respect to attainment (adhigama ), the other with respect to learning (pariyatti). The former is the ten corruptions of insight knowledge (see Vism 633-38; Ppn 20:105-28). The latter consists of texts other than the authentic Word of the Buddha authorized at the three Buddhist councils, exception made of these five topics of discussion (kathāvatthu): discussion of elements, discussion of objects, discussion of foulness, discussion of the bases of knowledge, the casket of true knowledge. [The counterfeit texts include] the Secret Vinaya (guḷhavinaya), the Secret Vessantara, the Secret Mahosadha, the Vaṇṇa Piṭaka, the Aṅgulimāla Piṭaka, the Raṭṭhapāla-gajjita, the Āḷavaka-gajjita, and the Vedalla Piṭaka.Spk-pṭ: The “Vedalla Piṭaka” is the Vetulla Piṭaka, which they say had been brought from the abode of the nāgas; others say it consists of what was spoken in debates (vādabhāsita). “Other than the authentic Word of the Buddha” (abuddhavacana), because of contradicting the Word of the Buddha; for the Enlightened One does not speak anything internally inconsistent (pubbāparaviruddha). They apply a dart to it; the removal of defilements is not seen there, so it is inevitably a condition for the arising of defilements.
An attempt to identify the texts cited by Spk is made in the fourteenth century work, Nikāyasaṅgraha, discussed by Adikaram, Early History of Buddhism in Ceylon, pp. 99-100. The Nikāyasaṅgraha assigns each text to a different non-Theravādin school. The late date of this work casts doubt on its reliability, and its method of identification is just too neat to be convincing. Spk-pṭ’s comment on the Vedalla Piṭaka suggests it may be a collection of Mahāyāna sūtras. The Mahāyāna is referred to in the Sri Lankan chronicles as the Vetullavāda (Skt Vaitulyavāda); see Rahula, History of Buddhism in Ceylon, pp. 87-90. Spk-pṭ is apparently alluding to the belief that Nāgārjuna had brought the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras from the nāga realm. The five types of “topics of discussion” (kathāvatthu), accepted by the Theravādins though not authorized as canonical, were probably philosophical treatises recording the opinions of famous teachers on important points of doctrine. Spk describes at length the gradual disappearance of the Buddha’s Dispensation as a threefold disappearance of achievement, practice, and learning (adhigama-, paṭipatti-, pariyatti-saddhamma).
313 Spk glosses: ādikenā ti ādānena gahaṇena; opilavatī ti nimujjati . Spk-pṭ: ādānaṃ ādi, ādi eva ādikaṃ. Spk explains the simile thus: “Unlike a ship crossing the water, which sinks when receiving goods, there is no disappearance of the true Dhamma by being filled up with learning, etc. For when learning declines the practice declines, and when the practice declines achievement declines. But when learning becomes full, persons rich in learning fill up the practice, and those filling up the practice fill up achievement. Thus when learning, etc., are increasing, my Dispensation increases, just like the new moon.”C.Rh.D, following this explanation, renders the line: “Take the sinking of a ship, Kassapa, by overloading” (KS 2:152). I find dubious, however, Spk’s understanding of ādikena as meaning “taking, grasping.” Elsewhere ādikena has the sense of “all at once, suddenly,” contrasted with anupubbena, “gradually” (see MN I 395,4, 479,35; II 213,4; Ja VI 567,6, 14). This is clearly the meaning required here.
314 Pañca okkamaniyā dhammā. Spk glosses: okkamaniyā ti heṭṭhāgamanīya, “leading downwards.” A parallel passage at AN III 247 repeats the first four causes but replaces the fifth by “lack of mutual respect and deference.”
315 Spk: One dwells without reverence for concentration when one does not attain the eight attainments (aṭṭha samāpattiyo) or make any effort to attain them. 17. Lābhasakkārasaṃyutta
316 Spk: Gain (lābha) is the gain of the four requisites; honour (sakkāra), the gain of (requisites) that are well made and well produced; praise (siloka), acclamation (vaṇṇaghosa).
317 Pāli indiscriminately uses two words, kumma and kacchapa, for both turtle and tortoise. Here kumma refers to the lake-dwelling variety, but at 35:240 kumma kacchapa jointly denote what seems to be a land-dwelling creature, while at 56:47 kacchapa alone refers to the sea-dwelling variety. Spk glosses mahākummakula with mahantaṃ aṭṭhikacchapakula, which further confirms the interchangeability of the two words. I have rendered both terms “turtle” when they denote a predominantly aquatic creature (here and at 56:47), “tortoise” when they refer to a land-dwelling creature.
318 Papatā. Spk explains this as an iron spear shaped like a hooked dart, kept in an iron case. When it is dropped on its target with a certain force, the spear comes out from the case and the rope follows along, still attached to it.
319 Although all three eds. read giddho papatāya, it seems we should read viddho papatāya, proposed by a note in Be.
320 In all three eds. the text as it stands is unintelligible and is likely to be corrupt. Spk does not offer enough help to reconstruct an original reading, while Be appends a long note with a circuitous explanation intended to resolve the difficulties. I would prefer to amend the final verb in Be and Se (and SS) from anupāpuṇātu to anupāpuṇāti so that we read: Kaṃ bhikkhave asanivicakkaṃ āgacchatu? Sekhaṃ appattamānasaṃ lābhasakkārasiloko anupāpuṇāti. Ee does have anupāpuṇāti, and it is possible anupāpuṇātu entered the other eds. under the influence of the preceding āgacchatu and the corresponding sentences in 17:23, 24.Spk paraphrases the question: “Which person should a bright thunderbolt strike, hitting him on the head and crushing him?” and comments on the reply: “The Blessed One does not speak thus because he desires suffering for beings, but in order to show the danger. For a lightning bolt, striking one on the head, destroys only a single in
dividual existence, but one with a mind obsessed by gain, honour, and praise experiences endless suffering in hell, etc.” While he has not yet reached his mind’s ideal (appattamānasa ): while he has not achieved arahantship.
321 Be and Se read: Kaṃ bhikkhave diddhagatena visallena sallena vijjhatu? The reading in Ee is less satisfactory. Spk: Diddhagatenā ti gatadiddhena [Spk-pṭ: acchavisayuttā ti vā diddhe gatena]; visallenā ti visamakkhitena; sallenā ti sattiyā.The rhetorical construction parallels that in the preceding sutta. Visallena is problematic, and we might accept C.Rh.D’s suggestion visa-sallena, though diddha (= Skt digdha) already conveys the idea of poisoned. See Ja IV 435,26: Saro diddho kalāpaṃ va/Alittaṃ upalimpati.
322 Ukkaṇṭaka (so Be and Se; Ee: ukkaṇṇaka). Spk: This is the name of a disease, said to arise in the cold season. The hairs fall off from the entire body, and the entire body, fully exposed, breaks open all over. Struck by the wind, the wounds ooze. Just as a man, bitten by a rabid dog, runs around in circles, so does the jackal when it has contracted this disease, and there is no place where it finds safety.
The Connected Discourses of the Buddha Page 88
