MN 1 variations in texts

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and texts.

MN 1 variations in texts

Postby nathan » Wed Sep 01, 2010 2:15 am

I have been studying and researching the Mulapariyaya Sutta (MN 1) and was recently informed about variations in different versions. Apparently in the PTS version the sutta concludes with the Bhikkhus pleased, as does the German translation by K.E.Neumann. It was also mentioned that the Siamese version has a variant reading, although it was not specified what kind of variation.

I understand that there are also Chinese and Tibetan versions of this sutta.

My questions are about variations in the texst of this sutta, what those variations specifically are, how far back these variations can be traced, any variations in the oldest known texts and which of the older texts have been used in the preparation of different translations, past and present, into other languages.

Any information that anyone can offer would be greatly appreciated.
:anjali:
Thanks
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
nathan
 
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby Paññāsikhara » Wed Sep 01, 2010 7:33 am

In the PTS edition of this sutta, it has:

Idamavoca bhagavā.4 Na te bhikkhū bhagavato bhāsitaṃ abhinandunti.5

4. Na attamanā te bhikkhū syā. Attamanā te bhikkhū [PTS]
5. Nābhinandunti katthaci

---

And the Chatthasangayana digital edition has:

Idamavoca bhagavā. Na te bhikkhū [na attamanā tebhikkhū (syā.), te bhikkhū (pī. ka.)] bhagavato bhāsitaṃ abhinandunti.

"attamanā" means "mentally enraptured", or "delighted", or whatever term you may wish to use. "na" is a negation.
My recently moved Blog, containing some of my writings on the Buddha Dhamma, as well as a number of translations from classical Buddhist texts and modern authors, liturgy, etc.: Huifeng's Prajnacara Blog.
Paññāsikhara
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 5:27 am

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby nathan » Wed Sep 01, 2010 2:49 pm

Paññāsikhara wrote:In the PTS edition of this sutta, it has:

Idamavoca bhagavā.4 Na te bhikkhū bhagavato bhāsitaṃ abhinandunti.5

4. Na attamanā te bhikkhū syā. Attamanā te bhikkhū [PTS]
5. Nābhinandunti katthaci

---

And the Chatthasangayana digital edition has:

Idamavoca bhagavā. Na te bhikkhū [na attamanā tebhikkhū (syā.), te bhikkhū (pī. ka.)] bhagavato bhāsitaṃ abhinandunti.

"attamanā" means "mentally enraptured", or "delighted", or whatever term you may wish to use. "na" is a negation.


I take this to mean then that I was misinformed. Thank you Venerable Paññāsikhara, I shall pass this information back along.
:anjali:
Can anyone similarly verify or correct the information about the German translation?
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
nathan
 
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby Moggalana » Wed Sep 01, 2010 3:16 pm

The German version (KEN) ends with the bhikkhus being pleased.

However, another German translation (Kay Zumwinkel/Mettiko Bhikkhu) ends with the monks not being pleased.

As far as I know, Mettiko's translation is mainly a translation of Bhikkhu Bodhi's work, whereas KEN translated directly from Pali.
Let it come. Let it be. Let it go.
Moggalana
 
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:31 am
Location: Germany

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Sep 01, 2010 4:17 pm

Horner's footnote to the delighted sentence:
According to MA, i.56 the five hundred monks to whom this Discourse was addressed were not delighted and did not rejoiced. They were ignorant and did not understand the meaning. Moreover they had thought that they were as learned as the Buddha and said so. He then preached the Mulapariyayajataka to them, and their pride was humbled . . . .
Of course, they later became arahants.

Are you using Ven Bodhi's THE DISCOURSE ON THE ROOTS OF EXISTENCE, whicxh includes the commentary?

in the case of the variation to the ending of the sutta, it may be that some are reading the commentary into the sutta.

If you read Pali and comparte the PTS version with the CSCD version there is a difference in an important word used to describe the Tathagata. The CSCD uses the commentarial word, which differs from the PTS version where the word in question is the same as in the description of the arahant. Now as to what that word is, I do not remember and since I am now using my consufer in safe-mode, I am not going to be able to get at this info easily.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19175
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Paradise

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Sep 01, 2010 5:29 pm

Just to note that the Ven Bodhi translation ends with the monks note being pleased.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19175
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Paradise

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby nathan » Wed Sep 01, 2010 5:31 pm

tiltbillings wrote:Are you using Ven Bodhi's THE DISCOURSE ON THE ROOTS OF EXISTENCE, whicxh includes the commentary?
I have mainly relied on Bodhi's book and his translation of the sutta, commentaries and his notes but I have also read Thanissaro's abridged version at ATI. I've looked at the online Thai version of the Pali text but I am not qualified to make determinations about what is in the Pali or how versions differ. I don't read German either, don't presently have access to either the PTS pali text or the PTS translation. I have also never seen the Chinese or Tibetan texts or translations of either of these.

Thanks to everyone for your kind assistance.
:anjali:
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
nathan
 
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby nathan » Wed Sep 01, 2010 5:32 pm

tiltbillings wrote:Just to note that the Ven Bodhi translation ends with the monks note being pleased.
not?
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
nathan
 
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Sep 01, 2010 5:34 pm

nathan wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Just to note that the Ven Bodhi translation ends with the monks note being pleased.
not?
Not.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19175
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Paradise

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby fig tree » Thu Sep 09, 2010 7:23 am

I seem to remember in Ven. Bodhi's talk about MN 1 that he remarked something to the effect that it would have been a relatively easy mistake to make, to have turned it from "pleased" to "not pleased". I don't want to download it again right now, but it's toward the end of the talk.

Fig Tree
User avatar
fig tree
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:25 am

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby lojong1 » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:50 am

Whether or not the monks really delighted in the Buddha's discourse, the Pali verb is the same as 'delighting' elsewhere in the same sutta.
Buddha had just taught them:
that the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person delights (abhinandati) in earth and[...]nibbaana (because he has not comprehended it);
the trainee should not delight in earth, etc., (so that he may comprehend it);
the arahant does not delight (because he has comprehended);
and the Tathagata does not delight (he has 'comprehended it to the end').

The monks should have at least tried not to delight (abhinandati) at the buddha's words. If they were successful in non-delighting, this would mean the lesson was well received.

Bikkhu Bodhi (or Nanamoli?) notes in MN: "The Bhikkhus did not delight in the Buddha's words, apparently because the discourse probed too deeply into the tender regions of their own conceit, and perhaps their residual Brahmanic views. At a later time, MA tells us, when their pride had been humbled..."

It seems he (and MA) thought that delight would have been a good sign after such a teaching!
lojong1
 
Posts: 579
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 2:59 am

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby beeblebrox » Thu Sep 09, 2010 2:32 pm

lojong1 wrote:Buddha had just taught them:
that the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person delights (abhinandati) in earth and[...]nibbaana (because he has not comprehended it);
the trainee should not delight in earth, etc., (so that he may comprehend it);
the arahant does not delight (because he has comprehended);
and the Tathagata does not delight (he has 'comprehended it to the end').

The monks should have at least tried not to delight (abhinandati) at the buddha's words. If they were successful in non-delighting, this would mean the lesson was well received.


Good point, Lojong:

MN 1:

The Uninstructed Run-of-the-Mill Person:

"He perceives Unbinding as Unbinding. Perceiving Unbinding as Unbinding, he conceives things about Unbinding, he conceives things in Unbinding, he conceives things coming out of Unbinding, he conceives Unbinding as 'mine,' [and] he delights in Unbinding. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you."

The Trainee:

"He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, let him not conceive things about Unbinding, let him not conceive things in Unbinding, let him not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, let him not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' let him not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you.

The Arahant:

"He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' [and] does not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? Because he has comprehended it, I tell you."

and:

"He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? Because, with the ending of passion, he is devoid of passion, I tell you."

and:

"He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? Because, with the ending of aversion, he is devoid of aversion, I tell you."

and:

"He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? Because, with the ending of delusion, he is devoid of delusion, I tell you."

The Tathagata:

"He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has comprehended it to the end, I tell you."

and:

"He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? Because he has known that delight is the root of suffering & stress, that from coming-into-being there is birth, and that for what has come into being there is aging & death. Therefore, with the total ending, fading away, cessation, letting go, relinquishment of craving, the Tathagata has totally awakened to the unexcelled right self-awakening, I tell you."


It would be odd indeed, if the monks delighted at the end of that sermon. :tongue:
User avatar
beeblebrox
 
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby lojong1 » Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:42 pm

beeblebrox wrote: Because he has known that delight is the root of suffering & stress

This delight is 'nandi'; I guess there is no noun 'abhinandi'.

Dhp 18: "Idha nandati, pecca nandati, katapunno ubhayattha nandati. punnam me katan" ti nandati bhiyyo nandatisuggatim gato."
["One who has done good deeds rejoices here and rejoices afterwards too; he rejoices in both places. Thinking "I have done good deeds" he rejoices, he rejoices all the more having gone to a happy existence."]

Is nandati more kusala than abhinandati?
Was the Mulapariyaya Sutta directed at the most advanced bhikkhus, evidenced by their lack of nandi?
lojong1
 
Posts: 579
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 2:59 am

Re: MN 1 variations in texts

Postby Sylvester » Mon Oct 11, 2010 9:03 am

I gather from Piya Tan's essay on this sutta that the Chinese version in the Ekottara Agama, EA 44.6 also portrays the monks as "not accepting" the teaching.
Sylvester
 
Posts: 1500
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am


Return to Early Buddhism

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests