Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and scriptures.
Post Reply
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by Pulsar »

Has anyone noticed a fundamental difference between the Pali canon version and Chinese agama version of Ahara sutta, SN 12.63 and SA 373? In the sutta Buddha explains how consciousness comes into play.
Vibajjavadin or theravadin exegesis presents the first nutrient of the four nutrients as literary food like edible food?? eaten by the mouth. Does this make sense? The wording of the first nutrient is confusing in the Pali version, error is common to Thanissaro, Bodhi, and Sujato translations? So far, I have not seen anyone address this issue.
The metaphor of eating the son's flesh, when interpreted literally,
leads to a misrepresentation of The Buddha's teaching?
To me, it looks like Buddha is referring to the pervasive hunger of the six senses, and the drawbacks of giving into that hunger.
  • Feeding that hunger is like eating one's own son's flesh.
Sensual restraint is the key here.
Does not the so-called 'edible food' in this sutta, involve any sensual desire such as desire for sounds, sights, etc or desire to engage in frivolous thinking? Latter is sometimes called Papanca. Any thoughts? Subtle differences in the understanding of the doctrine, could alter Buddha's original message misleading the curious seeker.
Any thoughts?
With Love :candle:
Last edited by Pulsar on Mon Mar 13, 2023 9:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by mjaviem »

Pulsar wrote: Mon Mar 13, 2023 9:11 pm ... Sensual restraint is the key here.
Does not the so-called 'edible food' in this sutta, involve any sensual desire such as desire for sounds, sights, etc...
From MN 36, it seems development of body means restrain of sensual desire. You say sensual pleasures as the nutriment or the edible food for the body? I'd rather say it's food for thought.
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by Pulsar »

mjaviem wrote
From MN 36, it seems development of body means restrain of sensual desire.
one can say development of sensual restraint is indeed a spiritual development. What does the word body mean here?
Can we stick to the Ahara sutta? Pali canon uses the word body/kaya in different contexts.
Sometimes it refers to the physical body. To me when approaching a discussion on consciousness (think of dependent origination) kaya/body all refer to the form of Nama-rupa. Form of Nama-rupa is the images that arise in the mind. For the abhidhamma followers the story is different.
You wrote
You say sensual pleasures as the nutriment or the edible food for the body? I'd rather say it's food for thought.
I don't get what you are saying here. Let me rephrase what I said, "sensual pleasures are the nutriment for the six senses". What the sutta says is sound is the edible food for the ear. Think about what feeds the ear? It is sounds that feed the ear.
Examples 1.thought of sights seen, activate the sight consciousness. 2.Remebering a voice heard activates auditory consciousness, or even currently hearing a sound activates auditory consciousness in the puthujjana.
Puthujjanas feed their senses. Arahant does not.
This sutta was taught to further explain Dependent origination by the Buddha.
For those who believe that Consciousness arises due to the contact of eye with a physically solid form, my post will not be of any use.
In the original teaching eye consciousness arises when eye makes contact with a mental image of a thing seen, currently or previously.
Arahant does not have a hunger, so feeding in the sense of Ahara sutta, does not apply to him/her.
Puthujjana is incessantly hungry, hence feeds on the son's flesh, to please the eye, ear, nose, smell, touch, or imagination.
With love :candle:
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17191
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by DNS »

Pulsar wrote: Mon Mar 13, 2023 10:02 pm Arahant does not have a hunger, so feeding in the sense of Ahara sutta, does not apply to him/her.
Puthujjana is incessantly hungry, hence feeds on the son's flesh, to please the eye, ear, nose, smell, touch, or imagination.
I like your interpretation. Most appear to take it as a teaching on just eating anything, without thoughts of playfully eating (delicious?), beautification, putting on bulk, etc.

The First Precept is not to kill. And human flesh is prohibited from eating for monks and nuns and by implication, since they cannot offer it, laypeople as well. I would hope the correct interpretation is metaphorical, warning of the desires of the senses. I'm pretty sure most parents would rather die of starvation than kill and eat their son.

Do you have the link to the Agama SA 373?
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by Pulsar »

DNS wrote
Do you have the link to the Agama SA 373?
I found this translation on Stack Exchange, broke it up to separate paragraphs for clarity.
Thus have I heard. At one time, the Buddha was in Śrāvastī, in the Jeta Grove, in Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park.At that time, the Bhagavān said to the bhikṣus, “There are four nutriments which benefit sentient beings, causing them to abide in the world and received nourishment. What are these four?

That is to say,
the first is coarse, rolled food. The second is the subtle food of sensations. The third is the food of thought. The fourth is the food of consciousness.“How are these four nutriments conditioned, accumulated, produced, and experienced?
That is to say, the nutriments are conditioned by desire, accumulated by desire, produced by desire, and experienced by desire.
How are these desires conditioned, accumulated, produced, and experienced? That is to say, desires are conditioned by sensation, accumulated by sensation, produced by sensation, and experienced by sensation.
How are these sensations conditioned, accumulated, produced, and experienced? That is to say, sensations are conditioned by contact, accumulated by contact, produced by contact, and experienced by contact.
How is this contact conditioned, accumulated, produced, and experienced? That is to say, contact is conditioned by the Six Entrances, accumulated by the Six Entrances, produced by the Six Entrances, and experienced by the Six Entrances.“The accumulation of Six Entrances is the accumulation of contact. The accumulation of contact is the accumulation of sensation. The accumulation of sensation is the accumulation of desires.
The accumulation of desires is the accumulation of nutriments.
The accumulation of nutriment is the cause of future accumulation of worldly birth, old age, sickness, death, sorrow, misery, affliction, and suffering.
It is also such as this for the accumulation of the pure mass of suffering.“Just so, with the cessation of the Six Entrances, comes the cessation of contact. With the cessation of contact, comes the cessation of sensation. With the cessation of sensation, comes the cessation of desire. With the cessation of desire, comes the cessation of nutriment. The cessation of nutriment causes the cessation of future worldly birth, old age, sickness, death, sorrow, misery, vexation, and suffering. It is also such as this for the cessation of the pure mass of suffering.”After the Buddha had spoken this sūtra, the bhikṣus heard what the Buddha had said, and joyfully practiced in accordance.
The way the Pali compilers treated Ahara is a bit dubious. But at this point we will stick to the fundamental point that I like to discuss, the real Ahara. Ie what feeds our consciousness?
The above is a translation of SA 371 from Stack Exchange. The metaphor of Son's flesh is found in SA 373. What SA 373 does is insert the metaphor of son's flesh to the above sutta and repeat it.
As I find time I will explain how Ahara/Nutriment is treated in the agama suttas.
I will bring my own translation of SA 373 when I find time. In the agama SA 371, SA 372, SA 373 SA 374, SA 375, SA 376, SA 377, SA 378, address the same issue.
In the Pali compilations, the order of presentation is lost. Understanding of this very important teaching would have been easier, if the Pali compilers stuck to the original sequence found in SA.
With love :candle:
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by Pulsar »

Dear DNS: An addition to my previous comment.
Here is the sequence of suttas on Ahara in the agama, with a little more detail

The topic begins around SA 371.
SA 371 corresponds to Sutta on Nutriments found at SN 12.11.
SA 372 is the Moliyphagguna sutta in the Pali canon SN 12.12.
Pali compilers placed these next to each other, but created a gap between these and Ahara sutta, Son's Flesh, i.e. SN 12.63. Why the gap? I will look into that, when I find the time.
In SA 372, Moliyaphagguna, Buddha basically says Consciousness survives by feeding on itself, makes sense, in a teaching of DO.

A sensible compiler should have placed Son's flesh SA 373 right next to SA 272. We won't find a reason for the gap created in the Pali canon. Perhaps someone here can show us a reason.
Getting back to the sequence..
SA 373 corresponds to Son's Flesh i.e. SN 12.63.
It is a repeat of SA 371, with similes added, for further clarification(one more English translation of SA 371 is available on SC).

SA 374, SA 375 SA 376 SA 377, SA 378 suttas that follow Son's Flesh are presented as corresponding to one Pali suttaSN 12.64Atthiraga. I am not sure why the Pali compilers gathered these into one Pali sutta.
SA 376 and SA 378 have two added similes, not found in Atthiraga sutta.
If you still want a translation of SA 373, I will spend some time and gather a decent translation, since on the web so far, I cannot find one intact.
However if you insert the four similes found in the Son's flesh SA 373 into Sutta on Nutrients, SA 371, the translation that I brought in, you will end up with the same result.
I am glad you asked the question, it makes me look into where Pali deviated from the message in the Agama suttas, where Ahara is concerned.
With love :candle:
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by Pulsar »

There are two agama suttas that Pali compilers left out, In SA 376 Buddha uses the following simile to explain the importance of understanding Ahara.
"If there is no greed and no joy in the four foods ......" as it is said before, and even "pure suffering is destroyed. For example, bhikkhus! Where should the sun rise in the east?"

The bhikkhu said to the Buddha, "It should shine on the west wall.

The Buddha said to the bhikkhu, "If there is no west wall, where should it shine?

The bhikkhu said to the Buddha, "It should shine in the void, without any climbing edge.

"Thus, bhikkhus! In these four foods, there is no greed, there is no joy, there is no dwelling of consciousness, and even such pure and great suffering is destroyed.
Regards :candle:
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by Ceisiwr »

Pulsar wrote: Mon Mar 13, 2023 9:11 pm Has anyone noticed a fundamental difference between the Pali canon version and Chinese agama version of Ahara sutta, SN 12.63 and SA 373? In the sutta Buddha explains how consciousness comes into play.
Vibajjavadin or theravadin exegesis presents the first nutrient of the four nutrients as literary food like edible food?? eaten by the mouth. Does this make sense? The wording of the first nutrient is confusing in the Pali version, error is common to Thanissaro, Bodhi, and Sujato translations? So far, I have not seen anyone address this issue.
The metaphor of eating the son's flesh, when interpreted literally,
leads to a misrepresentation of The Buddha's teaching?
To me, it looks like Buddha is referring to the pervasive hunger of the six senses, and the drawbacks of giving into that hunger.
  • Feeding that hunger is like eating one's own son's flesh.
Sensual restraint is the key here.
Does not the so-called 'edible food' in this sutta, involve any sensual desire such as desire for sounds, sights, etc or desire to engage in frivolous thinking? Latter is sometimes called Papanca. Any thoughts? Subtle differences in the understanding of the doctrine, could alter Buddha's original message misleading the curious seeker.
Any thoughts?
With Love :candle:
Well part of insight is in seeing how conciousness depends upon the body.

“When his mind is thus concentrated, pure and bright, unblemished, free from defects, malleable, wieldy, steady and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge and vision. He understands thus: ‘This is my body, having material form, composed of the four primary elements, originating from father and mother, built up out of rice and gruel, impermanent, subject to rubbing and pressing, to dissolution and dispersion. And this is my consciousness, supported by it and bound up with it.’ - DN 2
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by Pulsar »

Ceisiwr wrote
Well part of insight is in seeing how conciousness depends upon the body.
I had mentioned in the OP that "my post will only make sense to those, that believe Consciousness depends on Name and form. Buddha in the original teaching considered form as those images arising in the 6 consciousness due to craving.
Abhidhamma considered form as physical and mental. I have no comments regarding that.

You are wasting your time here, if you continue to insist that the Abhidhamma notion of name and form in DO applies to Son's Flesh. The post is about Son's Flesh, SN 12.63, not DN 2.
SN 12.63 is a sutta about feeding the consciousness with consciousness, not a sutta about feeding
the body with Son's flesh.
You may start another thread with the title: "Abhidhamma response to Pulsar's claim regarding the teaching of Dependent origination in Son's Flesh, Sn 12.63"

Please let this thread be, without intrusion of abhidhamma influenced suttas, or ideas.
Regards :candle:
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by Ceisiwr »

Pulsar wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 7:10 pm Ceisiwr wrote
Well part of insight is in seeing how conciousness depends upon the body.
I had mentioned in the OP that "my post will only make sense to those, that believe Consciousness depends on Name and form. Buddha in the original teaching considered form as those images arising in the 6 consciousness due to craving.
Abhidhamma considered form as physical and mental. I have no comments regarding that.

You are wasting your time here, if you continue to insist that the Abhidhamma notion of name and form in DO applies to Son's Flesh. The post is about Son's Flesh, SN 12.63, not DN 2.
SN 12.63 is a sutta about feeding the consciousness with consciousness, not a sutta about feeding
the body with Son's flesh.
You may start another thread with the title: "Abhidhamma response to Pulsar's claim regarding the teaching of Dependent origination in Son's Flesh, Sn 12.63"

Please let this thread be, without intrusion of abhidhamma influenced suttas, or ideas.
Regards :candle:
I haven’t even mentioned Abhidhamma.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Dhamma Chameleon
Posts: 584
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:55 am

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by Dhamma Chameleon »

“It is in such a way, bhikkhus, that I say the nutriment edible food should be seen
This sutta is saying that if you see things correctly, you will have the same attitude towards food as parents would towards the flesh of their own son. It is about physical food.

The sutta then describes the correct attitude towards the other nutriments, again using literal (and vivid!) examples.
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by mjaviem »

Dhamma Chameleon wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 8:19 pm This sutta is saying that if you see things correctly, you will have the same attitude towards food as parents would towards the flesh of their own son. It is about physical food.

The sutta then describes the correct attitude towards the other nutriments, again using literal (and vivid!) examples.
You are right. But our friend Pulsar has raised an interesting point: Hunger of the senses.

The body is hungry, and we could understand the body as the five senses.

In SN 12.63 we read edible food is nutriment for maintaining beings. And what happens when food is seen correctly, dismissing its good look, delicious aroma, superb taste, and smooth sensation in the tongue? It seems it's no more nutriment for the maintenance of beings. The twitching of the stomach does nothing for the maintainance of beings here. It's just the way it is when there are no nutrients in the stomach for some time. That's not the hunger that maintains beings. But seeking delight in sensual pleasures does. Seeing food incorrectly does.
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
User avatar
Dhamma Chameleon
Posts: 584
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:55 am

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by Dhamma Chameleon »

mjaviem wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 9:20 pm You are right. But our friend Pulsar has raised an interesting point: Hunger of the senses.

The body is hungry, and we could understand the body as the five senses.
Absolutely, and these are covered by the nutriments of contact and consciousness - there are six types of each, corresponding to the six senses (including mind).
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by mjaviem »

Dhamma Chameleon wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 9:26 pm Absolutely, and these are covered by the nutriments of contact and consciousness - there are six types of each, corresponding to the six senses (including mind).
I think that edible food directly relates to lust for the five cords of sensual pleasure. While the others directly relate with the three feelings, the three cravings, and nama-rupa respectively as explained in the same sutta. I don't see it as "covered" by the other ones. But, yes, I don't know, one of the three craving sis craving for sensual pleasures...
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
User avatar
Dhamma Chameleon
Posts: 584
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:55 am

Re: Ahara Sutta, Son's Flesh

Post by Dhamma Chameleon »

Contact and consciousness relate directly to the six senses, they are specific components of our body and experience. Food relates to a physical reality and need of the body as a whole.

Think of less intelligent life forms - they are driven largely by their physical need for food, and not for pleasure or taste as such. Those are more refined. It is said that the higher the life form, the less need for physical food. Beings without a physical body don't require the nutriment of food anymore, they subsist on the other three. And a being that is blind, deaf, can't smell, taste or feel touch, while alive will still require food.

Our senses are involved in all four of the nutriments because that is how we experience the world. The four nutriments more or less relate to the khandas. Contact and consciousness are specifically about the six senses. The others are about form (food here is physical only so not nama-rupa) and volition. Food is physical, the other three are mental.
Post Reply