The translation of the Buddha's doctrine in MN 18
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:38 pm
Greetings!
MN 18 is the first discourse in MN teaching Dependent Origination (DO), and I think that the "honey ball" refers to DO. The more I study this sutta, the deeper it becomes, the more "sweet, delectable flavor" of the Dhamma I tastes, and the less attached to the worldly things I become after seeing their emptiness. While I appreciate various available translations of the Buddha's doctrine declared in this discourse, I'd like to propose a different translation of this important teaching after comparing the English translations of the Pali sutta with the Chinese Agama equivalents (MA 115 and EA 40.10) and study the following declared doctrine in its context.
“Yathāvādī kho, āvuso, sadevake loke samārake sabrahmake sassamaṇabrāhmaṇiyā pajāya sadevamanussāya na kenaci loke viggayha tiṭṭhati, yathā ca pana kāmehi visaṃyuttaṃ viharantaṃ taṃ brāhmaṇaṃ akathaṅkathiṃ chinnakukkuccaṃ bhavābhave vītataṇhaṃ saññā nānusenti– evaṃvādī kho ahaṃ, āvuso, evamakkhāyī”ti.
Ven. Thanissaro's translation:
"The sort of doctrine, friend, where one does not keep quarreling with anyone in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & brahmans, its royalty & commonfolk; the sort [of doctrine] where perceptions no longer obsess the brahman who remains dissociated from sensuality, free from perplexity, his uncertainty cut away, devoid of craving for becoming & non-becoming. Such is my doctrine, such is what I proclaim."
Ven. Bodhi's translation:
"Friend, I assert and proclaim [my teaching] in such a way that one does not quarrel with anyone in the world with its gods, its Maras, and its Brahmas, in this generation with its recluses and brahmins, its princes and its people; in such a way that perceptions no more underlie that brahmin who abides detached from sensual pleasures, without perplexity, shorn of worry, free from craving for any kind of being."
My personal understanding:
Friend, I proclaim [my doctrine] as such that makes one not quarrel with anyone in the world with its gods, its Maras, and its Brahmas, in this generation with its recluses and brahmins, its princes and its people, and as such that makes one cultivate detachment from lust/craving and become the brahmin who is free from doubt, free from worry/remorse, without craving for being and non-being, and (whose) perception/thoughts becomes free from (seven) underlying tendencies/drives.
I agree with Ven.Thanissaro's translation of "Bhavābhave" as being and non-being instead of "any kind of being", because "being and non-being" is also the translation in MA 115.
I don't quite agree with the English MN translations ("perceptions no more underlie" or "obsess" ...) or Chinese Agama translations ("has no perceptions") of "saññā nānusenti". I believe that the modern Chinese translator Mr. Chunjiang Zhuang's translation ["想沒有煩惱潛在趨勢", perception is free from (seven) underlying tendencies", see http://agama.buddhason.org/MA/MA115.htm] is closer to the original meaning, considering the context of the teaching.
In MA 115, there are such conversations between a monk and the Buddha for the clarification of the above-declared doctrine:
"于是。有一比丘即从坐起。偏袒著衣。叉手向佛。白曰。世尊。云何一切世间。天及魔.梵.沙门.梵志。从人至天。使不斗诤。云何修习离欲。得清净梵志。云何舍离谄曲。除悔。不著有.非有。亦无想耶。[This is the monk's questioning about the Buddha's declaration; see my above personal understanding for the translation]
世尊告曰。比丘。若人所因念。出家学道。思想修习。及过去.未来.今现在法。不爱.不乐.不著.不住。是说苦边。欲使.恚使.有使.慢使.无明使.见使.疑使.斗诤.憎嫉.谀谄.欺诳.妄言.两舌及无量恶不善之法。是说苦边。"
[This is the Buddha's explanation in brief: as one due to faith becomes a monk to learn the Dhamma, meditate and cultivate, detached from lust, enjoyment, attachment, and clinging from the past, future and present things, and reaches the end of suffering. The underlying drive for sensual desire (kāma-rāgānusaya), the underlying drive for aversion (paṭighānusaya), the underlying drive for notions (diṭṭhānusaya), the underlying drive for doubt (vicikicchānusaya), the underlying drive for conceit (mānānusaya), the underlying drive for desire to exist (bhava-rāgānusaya), and the underlying drive for ignorance (avijjānusaya), quarrels, hatred/jealousy, ... and countless evil unwholesome states ends without remainder.]
In MN 18, there are also similar conversations (the translation is based on my personal understanding):
"When this was said, a certain monk said to the Blessed One, "Lord, how does it [the doctrine] make one not quarrel with anyone in the cosmos with its deities, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & brahmans, its royalty & commonfolk; how does it make one cultivate detachment from lust/craving and become the brahmin who is free from doubt, free from worry/remorse, without craving for being and non-being, and (whose) perception becomes free from (seven) underlying tendencies/drives?"
"If, monk, with regard to the cause whereby papañcasaññāsaṅkhā assail a person, if there is nothing there to delight in, welcome, or remain fastened to, then that is the end of the underlying drive for sensual desire (kāma-rāgānusaya), the underlying drive for aversion (paṭighānusaya), the underlying drive/tendency for notions (diṭṭhānusaya), the underlying drive for doubt (vicikicchānusaya), the underlying drive for conceit (mānānusaya), the underlying drive for desire to exist (bhava-rāgānusaya), and the underlying drive for ignorance (avijjānusaya). That is the end of taking up rods & bladed weapons, of arguments, quarrels, disputes, accusations, divisive tale-bearing, & false speech. That is where these evil, unskillful things cease without remainder."
Ven. Bodhi translated "papañcasaññāsaṅkhā" as "perceptions and notions [born of] mental proliferation", while in Chinese Agamas it appears to be translated as "諸亂想", "妄想" [distortional, delusive thoughts].
All papañcasaññāsaṅkhā are dependently arising and subjectively construed:
"With eye & forms as condition, eye-consciousness arises. From the meeting of the three arises contact. With contact as condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives. What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one becomes obsessed and deluded. When one is obsessed and deluded, the papañcasaññāsaṅkhā [distortional, delusive thoughts and ideas of obsessions] assail the one with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye...
"Now, when there is the eye, when there are forms, when there is eye-consciousness, it is possible that one will construe a construed contact. When there is a construe of contact, it is possible that one will construe a contrue of feeling. When there is a construe of feeling, it is possible that one will construe a construe of perception. When there is a construe of perception, it is possible that one will construe a construe of thinking. When there is a construe of thinking, it is possible that one will construe a construe of dostorted, delusive thinking."
All papañcasaññāsaṅkhā are also dependently ceasing, and are ultimately empty ["with regard to the cause whereby papañcasaññāsaṅkhā assail a person, there is nothing there to relish, welcome, or remain fastened to"]:
"Now, when there is no eye, when there are no forms, when there is no eye-consciousness, it is impossible that one will construe a construe of contact. When there is no contrue of contact, it is impossible that one will construe a construe of feeling. When there is no construe of feeling, it is impossible that one will construe a construe of perception. When there is no construe of perception, it is impossible that one will construe a construe of thinking. When there is no construe of thinking, it is impossible that one will construe a construe of distorted, delusive thinking."
I'd like to add that in MA 115 there is the sentence of "如是族姓子于我此正法.律。随彼所观而得其味。观眼得味。观耳.鼻.舌.身。观意得味" [Like this in my righteous dhamma... gain the flavor as one contemplate the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind].
Once I heard a teacher interpreting this discourse as teaching us to restrain our six senses to avoid papañca. Now I've realized that it teaches us to apply the teaching of dependent origination to contemplate each of the six sense sets to understand the emptiness of all papañcasaññāsaṅkhā.
Your input has been and will be appreciated. Thanks and metta!
MN 18 is the first discourse in MN teaching Dependent Origination (DO), and I think that the "honey ball" refers to DO. The more I study this sutta, the deeper it becomes, the more "sweet, delectable flavor" of the Dhamma I tastes, and the less attached to the worldly things I become after seeing their emptiness. While I appreciate various available translations of the Buddha's doctrine declared in this discourse, I'd like to propose a different translation of this important teaching after comparing the English translations of the Pali sutta with the Chinese Agama equivalents (MA 115 and EA 40.10) and study the following declared doctrine in its context.
“Yathāvādī kho, āvuso, sadevake loke samārake sabrahmake sassamaṇabrāhmaṇiyā pajāya sadevamanussāya na kenaci loke viggayha tiṭṭhati, yathā ca pana kāmehi visaṃyuttaṃ viharantaṃ taṃ brāhmaṇaṃ akathaṅkathiṃ chinnakukkuccaṃ bhavābhave vītataṇhaṃ saññā nānusenti– evaṃvādī kho ahaṃ, āvuso, evamakkhāyī”ti.
Ven. Thanissaro's translation:
"The sort of doctrine, friend, where one does not keep quarreling with anyone in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & brahmans, its royalty & commonfolk; the sort [of doctrine] where perceptions no longer obsess the brahman who remains dissociated from sensuality, free from perplexity, his uncertainty cut away, devoid of craving for becoming & non-becoming. Such is my doctrine, such is what I proclaim."
Ven. Bodhi's translation:
"Friend, I assert and proclaim [my teaching] in such a way that one does not quarrel with anyone in the world with its gods, its Maras, and its Brahmas, in this generation with its recluses and brahmins, its princes and its people; in such a way that perceptions no more underlie that brahmin who abides detached from sensual pleasures, without perplexity, shorn of worry, free from craving for any kind of being."
My personal understanding:
Friend, I proclaim [my doctrine] as such that makes one not quarrel with anyone in the world with its gods, its Maras, and its Brahmas, in this generation with its recluses and brahmins, its princes and its people, and as such that makes one cultivate detachment from lust/craving and become the brahmin who is free from doubt, free from worry/remorse, without craving for being and non-being, and (whose) perception/thoughts becomes free from (seven) underlying tendencies/drives.
I agree with Ven.Thanissaro's translation of "Bhavābhave" as being and non-being instead of "any kind of being", because "being and non-being" is also the translation in MA 115.
I don't quite agree with the English MN translations ("perceptions no more underlie" or "obsess" ...) or Chinese Agama translations ("has no perceptions") of "saññā nānusenti". I believe that the modern Chinese translator Mr. Chunjiang Zhuang's translation ["想沒有煩惱潛在趨勢", perception is free from (seven) underlying tendencies", see http://agama.buddhason.org/MA/MA115.htm] is closer to the original meaning, considering the context of the teaching.
In MA 115, there are such conversations between a monk and the Buddha for the clarification of the above-declared doctrine:
"于是。有一比丘即从坐起。偏袒著衣。叉手向佛。白曰。世尊。云何一切世间。天及魔.梵.沙门.梵志。从人至天。使不斗诤。云何修习离欲。得清净梵志。云何舍离谄曲。除悔。不著有.非有。亦无想耶。[This is the monk's questioning about the Buddha's declaration; see my above personal understanding for the translation]
世尊告曰。比丘。若人所因念。出家学道。思想修习。及过去.未来.今现在法。不爱.不乐.不著.不住。是说苦边。欲使.恚使.有使.慢使.无明使.见使.疑使.斗诤.憎嫉.谀谄.欺诳.妄言.两舌及无量恶不善之法。是说苦边。"
[This is the Buddha's explanation in brief: as one due to faith becomes a monk to learn the Dhamma, meditate and cultivate, detached from lust, enjoyment, attachment, and clinging from the past, future and present things, and reaches the end of suffering. The underlying drive for sensual desire (kāma-rāgānusaya), the underlying drive for aversion (paṭighānusaya), the underlying drive for notions (diṭṭhānusaya), the underlying drive for doubt (vicikicchānusaya), the underlying drive for conceit (mānānusaya), the underlying drive for desire to exist (bhava-rāgānusaya), and the underlying drive for ignorance (avijjānusaya), quarrels, hatred/jealousy, ... and countless evil unwholesome states ends without remainder.]
In MN 18, there are also similar conversations (the translation is based on my personal understanding):
"When this was said, a certain monk said to the Blessed One, "Lord, how does it [the doctrine] make one not quarrel with anyone in the cosmos with its deities, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & brahmans, its royalty & commonfolk; how does it make one cultivate detachment from lust/craving and become the brahmin who is free from doubt, free from worry/remorse, without craving for being and non-being, and (whose) perception becomes free from (seven) underlying tendencies/drives?"
"If, monk, with regard to the cause whereby papañcasaññāsaṅkhā assail a person, if there is nothing there to delight in, welcome, or remain fastened to, then that is the end of the underlying drive for sensual desire (kāma-rāgānusaya), the underlying drive for aversion (paṭighānusaya), the underlying drive/tendency for notions (diṭṭhānusaya), the underlying drive for doubt (vicikicchānusaya), the underlying drive for conceit (mānānusaya), the underlying drive for desire to exist (bhava-rāgānusaya), and the underlying drive for ignorance (avijjānusaya). That is the end of taking up rods & bladed weapons, of arguments, quarrels, disputes, accusations, divisive tale-bearing, & false speech. That is where these evil, unskillful things cease without remainder."
Ven. Bodhi translated "papañcasaññāsaṅkhā" as "perceptions and notions [born of] mental proliferation", while in Chinese Agamas it appears to be translated as "諸亂想", "妄想" [distortional, delusive thoughts].
All papañcasaññāsaṅkhā are dependently arising and subjectively construed:
"With eye & forms as condition, eye-consciousness arises. From the meeting of the three arises contact. With contact as condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives. What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one becomes obsessed and deluded. When one is obsessed and deluded, the papañcasaññāsaṅkhā [distortional, delusive thoughts and ideas of obsessions] assail the one with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye...
"Now, when there is the eye, when there are forms, when there is eye-consciousness, it is possible that one will construe a construed contact. When there is a construe of contact, it is possible that one will construe a contrue of feeling. When there is a construe of feeling, it is possible that one will construe a construe of perception. When there is a construe of perception, it is possible that one will construe a construe of thinking. When there is a construe of thinking, it is possible that one will construe a construe of dostorted, delusive thinking."
All papañcasaññāsaṅkhā are also dependently ceasing, and are ultimately empty ["with regard to the cause whereby papañcasaññāsaṅkhā assail a person, there is nothing there to relish, welcome, or remain fastened to"]:
"Now, when there is no eye, when there are no forms, when there is no eye-consciousness, it is impossible that one will construe a construe of contact. When there is no contrue of contact, it is impossible that one will construe a construe of feeling. When there is no construe of feeling, it is impossible that one will construe a construe of perception. When there is no construe of perception, it is impossible that one will construe a construe of thinking. When there is no construe of thinking, it is impossible that one will construe a construe of distorted, delusive thinking."
I'd like to add that in MA 115 there is the sentence of "如是族姓子于我此正法.律。随彼所观而得其味。观眼得味。观耳.鼻.舌.身。观意得味" [Like this in my righteous dhamma... gain the flavor as one contemplate the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind].
Once I heard a teacher interpreting this discourse as teaching us to restrain our six senses to avoid papañca. Now I've realized that it teaches us to apply the teaching of dependent origination to contemplate each of the six sense sets to understand the emptiness of all papañcasaññāsaṅkhā.
Your input has been and will be appreciated. Thanks and metta!