Assaji wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2017 10:45 am
Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote:
Sakkāya is a term for the five aggregates as a collective whole (III 159,10–13). The word is derived from sat + kāya, and literally means “the existing body,” the assemblage of existent phenomena that serve as the objective basis of clinging.
The interpretation of
sat +
kāya as “the existing body” most probably stems from the 1953 "Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Dictionary" by Franklin Edgerton:
Satkāya (सत्काय).—m. (= Pali sakkāya), real, existent, body; individuality, personality: mā…imaṃ…satkāyaṃ kāyaṃ manyadhvam (Aṣṭasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā 94.12), don't think this existent (physical) body (of Tathāgatas) is their body (but rather regard the dharmakāya as such); virtually = ātman, once at least in neutral or even favorable sense, prītibhakṣā bhaviṣyāmo satkāyenopaniḥśritāḥ (read °niśritāḥ) (Udānavarga xxx.50), we shall feed on joy, relying on our selves (alone, not dependent on anything outside); but commonly in unfavorable sense, of the personality to believe in which is a heresy (dṛṣṭi, see next); satkāyasaṃjñīkṛtaṃ (sc. śarīraṃ) (Lalitavistara 208.13) (verse), formed thru the false notion of the personality; nārāyaṇa-bhūtaṃ satkāya-dharma-nistāḍana-tayā (Gaṇḍavyūha 495.6),…because it puts down the qualities of the individuality. There seems little doubt of the [etymology] and fundamental meaning of this word (probably no one now agrees with Childers that it was orig. sva-kāya); and the scholastic fantasies of various schools listed by LaV-P. in Abhidharmakośa v.15—17 need not be recorded here, tho they evidently influenced Tibetan and Chin. interpretations.
https://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/BHSScan/2020/web/webtc/indexcaller.php
Here, in his pioneering work on Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, Franklin Edgerton sketches in broad strokes the overall meaning of this word. This sketch requires further clarification - why "real", why "existent", and is it in fact "real" or "existent"? It seems that Edgerton browsed the meanings of "sat" in the 1851 Monier-Williams Sanskrit dictionary and chose those that fit the context, namely:
sat mf(sat/ī-)n. real, actual, as any one or anything ought to be, true, good, right (tan na sat-,"that is not right"), beautiful, wise, venerable, honest (often in compound See below) etc.
sat mf(sat/ī-)n. (pr. p. of1. as-) being, existing, occurring, happening, being present (sato me-,"when I was present";often connected with other participles or with an adverb exempli gratia, 'for example' nāmni kṛte sati-,"when the name has been given"; tathā sati-,"if it be so";also in the beginning of a compound,where sometimes =possessed of"see sat-kalpavṛkṣa-)
https://sanskritdictionary.com/?q=sat
Sat means "existing" when it stands on its own. In numerous noun compounds (and
sakkāya/
satkāya is a noun), given in Pāḷi and Sanskrit dictionaries,
sat as the first part of a compound means "true, good", - as in
sappurisa/satpuruṣa - lit. worthy or true man. Therefore,
sakkāya/
satkāya must also literally mean "true body", implying "what one truly is", "what one really is". In English, there's a remotely similar word "somebody".
This is why in the Udānavarga quote given above by Edgerton,
satkāya is used in the sense of "self":
prītibhakṣā bhaviṣyāmo satkāyenopaniḥśritāḥ (read °niśritāḥ) (Udānavarga xxx.50), we shall feed on joy, relying on our selves (alone, not dependent on anything outside)
and therefore Edgerton equates
satkāya with
ātman.
When Edgerton gives above a quote from Aṣṭasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā:
mā…imaṃ…satkāyaṃ kāyaṃ manyadhvam (Aṣṭasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā 94.12), don't think this existent (physical) body (of Tathāgatas) is their body (but rather regard the dharmakāya as such)
his translation contradicts his conclusions in another article of his dictionary as to which word in this passage,
satkāyaṃ or
kāyaṃ, refers to the physical body (
rūpa-kāya):
Dharmakāya ... na hi tathāgato rūpakāyato draṣṭavyaḥ, dharmakāyās tathāgatāḥ (Aṣṭasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā 513.15); instead of rūpakāya, simply kāya may be used in contrast, dharmakāyā buddhā bhagavantaḥ, mā khalu punar imaṃ bhikṣavaḥ satkāyaṃ kāyaṃ manyadhvaṃ, dharmakāya-pariniṣpattito māṃ bhikṣavo drakṣyanty (Aṣṭasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā 94.11—13)
https://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/BHSScan/2020/web/webtc/indexcaller.php
If we take in account this Edgerton's
dharmakāya article, and resolve the contradiction, the passage in question makes more sense:
uktaṃ hy etad bhagavatā - dharmakāyā buddhā bhagavantaḥ | mā khalu punar imaṃ bhikṣavaḥ satkāyaṃ kāyaṃ manyadhvam | dharmakāyapariniṣpattito māṃ bhikṣavo drakṣyatha |
As the Blessed One has said: “The Dharma-bodies are the Buddhas, the Blessed Ones. Again, monks, you definitely should not think that this satkāya is my (physical) body (rūpakāya). Monks, you should see Me from the accomplishment of the Dharma-body.”
"Existent body" for
satkāya doesn't fit here, but "identity" (literally "true-body") fits the context quite well.
When in several suttas, including MN 44, but also SN 22.105,
satkāya is equated with
panc'upādānakkhandhā, the question is what the compound
panc'upādānakkhandhā means and how it differs from
pancakkhandhā. The standard translation of
upādāna as 'clinging' may miss another important aspect of this word, "taking up" or "appropriation". According to the Margaret Cone's Pāli dictionary:
upādiyati, pr. 3 sg. [S. upādatte; BHS upādiyati], appropriates to oneself, takes as one’s own, adopts; lays hold of, grasps; uses; takes as material source, derives, evolves (from); …
– absol. … (b) upādāya [ts], 1. taking for oneself, taking as one’s own, adopting; making use of, having as material support or cause; being evolved or deriving (from, gen.);…
– pp (a) upādinna, upādiṇṇa, mfn., 1. taken hold of, taken for one’s own; grasped; used; …
– 2. evolved, derived, esp. evolved by the influence of previous kamma (usually explained by cts as meaning 1.); animate; …
– 3. evolved from, being the basis for derivation; ? …
upādāna, n. [S., BHS id.], 1. taking as one’s own, laying hold of, grasping;
– 2. material support or cause, fuel; – (it is often difficult to determine which meaning is intended; both reinforce each other: previous grasping produces fuel, which is itself then grasped); …
So
upādānakkhandhā may be better translated as "aggregates taken up as one's own", or "aggregates appropriated to oneself" - and thus becoming
satkāya, literally "true body" - what one considers to be the real self.
As explained in SN 22.155, “identity view” (
sakkāyadiṭṭhi) arises through taking up (
upādāya) of five aggregates - i.e. when five aggregates become "aggregates taken up as one's own" (
upādānakkhandhā). This doesn't exclude the meaning of
upādāna as
chandarāgo (e.g. in SN 22.121), but underlines its primary meaning as "taking up as one's own".