The Related Discourses

2. The Sense Fields

221 (276). Nanda Teaches the Nuns

1. Thus I have heard:[1] One time, the Buddha was staying at Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park in Jeta’s Grove of Śrāvastī.

2. There was then such an assembly of great nun disciples staying in the King’s Park of Śrāvastī that included nuns named Cundā, Meṇḍa, Mārabha, Pālācārā, Āḷavikā, Kṣemā, Namati, Kṛśa Gautamī, Utpalāvarṇā, and Mahāprajāpatī.[2] There were other nuns in addition to these staying at the King’s Park.

3. The nun Mahāprajāpatī paid a visit to the Buddha while surrounded by five hundred nuns. She bowed her head at his feet and withdrew to sit to one side. The Buddha then taught, instructed, edified, and gladdened Mahāprajāpatī with a Dharma talk.[3] Having taught, instructed, edified, and gladdened her with a Dharma talk in various ways, she was dismissed and withdrew. He said, “Nun, this is a good time for you to depart.”

Hearing what the Buddha taught, the nun Mahāprajāpatī rejoiced and felt glad. She then bowed and departed.

4. When he knew Mahāprajāpatī was gone, the Bhagavān told the monks, “Now that I’m advanced in years, I don’t have the ability anymore to teach Dharma to the nuns. Those of you in the assembly of monks who today are senior elders should instruct the nuns.”

5. The monks accepted the Bhagavān’s instruction, and they took turns instructing the nuns until it was Nanda’s turn to do so. When it came to his turn, they would go to Nanda, but he didn’t want to instruct them.[4]

6. The nun Mahāprajāpatī then went to the Bhagavān with five hundred nuns surrounding her. She bowed her head at his feet … up to … having heard the Dharma, she rejoiced and felt glad. She then bowed and departed.

7. Once he knew that Mahāprajāpatī was gone, the Bhagavān asked Venerable Ānanda, “Who’s turn is it to instruct the nuns?”

8. Venerable Ānanda said to the Buddha, “Bhagavān, the senior monks have been taking their turns instructing the nuns. It’s Nanda’s turn, but Nanda doesn’t want to instruct them.”

9. The Bhagavān told Nanda, “You should instruct the nuns and teach the Dharma for them. Why is that? I instructed the nuns myself, and you should do the same as well. I taught the Dharma for the nuns, and you should do the same as well.”

Nanda then silently accepted this instruction.

10. When the night had passed, Nanda put on his robe and took his bowl into Śrāvastī to solicit alms early in the morning. After he had eaten, he returned to the monastery, put away his robe and bowl, and washed his feet. He then went to his room and sat in meditation.

11. When he roused from meditation, he put on his outer robe and led another monk to the King’s Park. When they saw Venerable Nanda coming from a distance, the nuns quickly prepared seats. They invited him to have a seat and bowed to him respectfully once he had sat down. They then withdrew to sit at one side.

12. Venerable Nanda said to the nuns, “Sisters, you should question me as I teach the Dharma for you now. Those of you who understand should say, ‘Understood.’ If you don’t understand, then you should say, ‘I don’t understand.’ If you do understand the meaning of what I say, then you should accept and keep it well. If you don’t understand it, you should question me again, and I will explain it for you.”

13. The nuns said to Venerable Nanda, “Today, we will listen to the venerable’s teaching. To have us ask questions, tell us, ‘If any of you don’t understand yet, you may ask questions now. If you’ve understood, then say, “Understood.” Those of you who don’t yet understand say, “I don’t understand.” Those who’ve understood what I said should accept and keep it. Those who haven’t yet understood should question me again.’ We’ll be very happy to hear this, and those of us who don’t yet understand your meaning will ask questions today.”

14. Venerable Nanda asked the nuns, “How is it, sisters? When you observe the inner sense field of the eye, is it self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda.”

15. “When you observe the inner sense field of the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind, is it self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

16. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? Venerable Nanda, we have truly known and seen about these things: ‘There is no self observed in the six inner sense fields.’ We have come to understand in this way that the six inner sense fields are not self.”[5]

17. Venerable Nanda told the nuns, “Good, sisters! Good! You should understand it in this way, ‘There is no self observed in the six inner sense fields.’ Nuns, is the outer sense field of form self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda.”

18. “Is the outer sense field of sound … odor … flavor … touch … idea self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

19. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? Venerable Nanda, we have truly observed that there is no self in the six outer sense fields.[6] We always come to understand in this way that the six outer sense fields are not self.’”

20. Venerable Nanda praised the nuns, “Good, good! You should observe this subject in this way: ‘There is no self [observed] in the six outer sense fields.’ If visual awareness arises as a result of the eye and forms, is that visual awareness self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda.”

21. “If the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind and ideas produce mental awareness, is that mental awareness self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

22. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? We have truly observed that there is no self in these six groups of awareness. We also always come to understand in this way that the six groups of awareness are truly not self.”

23. Venerable Nanda told the nuns, “Good, sisters! Good! You should observe this subject in this way, ‘There truly is no self [observed] in the six groups of awareness.’ When visual awareness arises as a result of the eye and forms and all three come together to produce a contact, is that contact self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda.”

24. “When the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind and ideas produce mental awareness and all three come together to produce a contact, is that contact self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

25. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? We have truly observed that there is no self in these six groups of contact. We also always come to understand in this way that the six contacts are truly not self.”

26. Venerable Nanda told the nuns, “Good, good! You should observe this subject in this way, ‘There truly is no self [observed] in the six groups of contact.’ When visual awareness arises as a result of the eye and forms and all three come together to produce a contact, a feeling is conditioned by that contact. Is the feeling conditioned by that contact self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda.”

27. “When the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind and ideas produce mental awareness and all three come together to produce a contact, a feeling is conditioned by that contact. Is the feeling conditioned by that contact self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

28. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? We’ve already truly observed that there is no self in these six groups of feeling. We also always come to understand in this way that these six groups of feeling are truly not self.”

29. Venerable Nanda said to the nuns, “Good, good! You should observe this subject in this way: ‘There truly is no self [observed] in these six groups of feeling.’ When visual awareness arises as a result of the eye and forms and all three come together to produce a contact, that contact conditions a conception. Is that conception self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda.”

30. “When the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind and ideas produce mental awareness and all three come together to produce a contact, that contact conditions a conception. Is that conception self, other than self, or either present in the other?”

31. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? We have already truly observed that there is no self in these six groups of conception. We also always come to understand in this way that the six groups of conception truly are not self.”

32. Venerable Nanda said to the nuns, “Good, good! You should observe this subject in this way: ‘There truly is no self [observed] in these six groups of conception.’ When visual awareness arises as a result of the eye and forms and all three come together to produce a contact, that contact conditions an intention. Is that intention self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda.”

33. “When the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind and ideas produce mental awareness and all three come together to produce a contact, that contact conditions an intention. Is that intention self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

34. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? We have already truly observed that there is no self in these six groups of intention. We also always come to understand in this way that these six groups of intention truly are not self.”

35. Venerable Nanda said to the nuns, “Good, good! You should observe this subject in this way: ‘There truly is no self [observed] in these six groups of intention.’ When visual awareness arises as a result of the eye and forms and all three come together to produce a contact, that contact conditions a craving. Is that craving self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda.”

36. “When the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind and ideas produce mental awareness and all three come together to produce a contact, that contact conditions a craving. Is that craving self, other than self, or are either present in the other?”

37. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? We have already truly observed that there is no self in these six groups of craving. We also always come to understand in this way that these six groups of craving truly are not self.”

38. Venerable Nanda said to the nuns, “Good, good! You should observe this subject in this way: ‘There truly is no self [observed] in these six groups of craving.’ Sisters, it’s just as oil and a wick are the reasons that a lamp can be lit. That oil is impermanent. The wick, flame, and container are impermanent, too. Suppose someone says, ‘Without the oil, wick, flame, or container, there is a basis that produces the lamp’s light, which is permanent, eternal, lasting, and unchanging’? Would that speaker be speaking correctly?”[7]

39. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? The oil, wick, and container are conditions for the burning lamp. That oil, wick, and container are all impermanent. If there were no oil, wick, or container, the basis for the lamp’s light would as a result cease, stop, disappear, and cool in truth.”

40. “So it is, sisters. These six inner sense fields are impermanent. Suppose someone says, ‘These six inner sense fields are conditions that give rise to joy and happiness, which are permanent, eternal, lasting, unchanging, and secure.’ Would they be speaking correctly?”

41. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? We have already truly observed how this or that thing is a condition that produces this or that other thing. When this or that condition ceases, then this or that thing it produced also would as a result cease, stop, disappear, and cool in truth.”

42. Venerable Nanda said to the nuns, “Good, good! Nuns, you should examine this subject in this way: ‘This or that thing is a condition that produces this or that other thing. When this or that condition ceases, then this or that thing it produced also would as a result cease, stop, disappear, and cool in truth.’ Sisters, take the example of a large tree with impermanent branches, limbs, leaves, and roots. All of its branches, limbs, and leaves are impermanent. Suppose someone says, ‘Without that tree’s branches, limbs, and leaves, its shadow is permanent, eternal, unchanging, and secure.’ Would they be speaking correctly?”

43. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? That large tree’s branches, limbs, leaves, and roots are impermanent. Given that its branches, limbs, and leaves are impermanent, the basis for the tree’s shadow doesn’t exist at all without those roots, branches, limbs, or leaves.”

44. “Sisters, the conditions of the six outer senses are impermanent. Suppose someone says, ‘These six outer sense fields are conditions that give rise to joy and happiness, which are permanent, eternal, lasting, unchanging, and secure.’ Would they be speaking correctly?”

45. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? We have already truly observed this subject: ‘This or that thing is a condition that produces this or that other thing. When this or that condition ceases, then this or that thing it produced also would as a result cease, stop, disappear, and cool in truth.’”

46. Venerable Nanda said to the nuns, “Good, good! Nuns, you should observe this subject in this way: ‘This or that thing is a condition that produces this or that other thing. When this or that condition ceases, then this or that thing it produced also would as a result cease, stop, disappear, and cool in truth.’

47. “Sisters, listen and I will tell a parable. Wise people use parables to understand things. Suppose a skilled cattle butcher or butcher’s apprentice takes a sharp knife in hand and slaughters a cow. He takes the opportunity to skin it without damaging the flesh inside or the skin on the outside. He then cuts apart its limbs, joints, tendons, and bones. Afterward, he covers it with the hide again. Suppose someone says, ‘Both the hide and meat of this cow are whole and not separated.’ Would they be speaking correctly?”

48. They answered, “No, Venerable Nanda. Why is that? That skilled cattle butcher or butcher’s apprentice took a sharp knife in hand … took the opportunity to skin it without damaging its hide or flesh. He cuts all its limbs, joints, tendons, and bones. Afterward, he puts the hide back over it. The hide and meat has been separated. It’s not unseparated.”

49. “Sisters, now I will explain the meaning of this parable that I’ve told. The cow is a metaphor for the crude form of a person’s body … and so on as in the Serpent’s Basket Sūtra …”[8]

50. “The meat refers to the six inner sense fields. The outer hide refers to the six outer sense fields. The cow butcher refers to the training and seeing the path. The tendons and bones inside the hide and meat refer to both greed and delight. The sharp knife refers to sharp wisdom. A well-versed noble disciple cuts out all the bonds, fetters, tendencies, afflictions, higher afflictions, and obstructions with this sharp knife of wisdom.

51. “Therefore, sisters, you should train in this way: ‘I should not feel attached to pleasurable things to eliminate greed. I should not feel dislike for unlikable things to eliminate dislike. I should not be deluded by deluding things to eliminate delusion. I will observe the arising and ceasing of the five acquired aggregates. I will observe the formation and destruction of the six contacts of the sense fields. I will fix my mind well to the four abodes of mindfulness. I will abide in the seven factors of awakening. Having cultivated the seven factors of awakening, my mind won’t be conditioned by attachment to the contaminants of desire, and then my mind will be liberated … my mind won’t be conditioned by attachment to the contaminants of existence, and then my mind will be liberated … my mind won’t be conditioned by attachment to the contaminants of ignorance, and then my mind will be liberated.’ Sisters, you should train in this way.

52. Venerable Nanda then taught, instructed, edified, and gladdened the nuns with a Dharma talk. After teaching, instructing, edifying, and gladdening them, he got up from his seat and departed. The nun Mahāprajāpatī then went to the Buddha while surrounded by those five hundred nuns. She bowed her head at his feet and withdrew to stand to one side … She then bowed to the Buddha and departed.

53. Once he knew that the nun Mahāprajāpatī was gone, the Bhagavān told the monks, “Suppose a group of people were looking at the moon shining on the fourteenth day of the month. Someone asks, ‘Is it full, or is it not full yet?’ They should know that the moon isn’t completely full yet. In the same way, that good man Nanda has properly instructed and taught those five hundred nuns, but their liberation is not yet complete. Still, when these nuns reach the end of their lives, they’ll be reborn in this world again without cutting a single bond.”

54. The Bhagavān then told Nanda, “Teach the Dharma to the nuns again.”

55. Venerable Nanda silently accepted this instruction. Early in the morning, he [put on his robe and] took his bowl to the city to solicit alms … He went to the King’s Park, prepared a seat, and sat down. He then taught, instructed, edified, and gladdened the nuns with a Dharma talk. After teaching, instructing, edifying, and gladdening them, he got up from his seat and departed. The nun Mahāprajāpatī at another time went to the Buddha while surrounded by five hundred nuns. She bowed her head at his feet … She then bowed to him and departed.

56. When he knew that the nun Mahāprajāpatī was gone, the Bhagavān told the monks, “Just as no one doubts that the moon is full on the fifteenth of the month, the moon is still completely full. In this way, that good man Nanda properly instructed and taught the nuns, and they are completely liberated now. When their lives end, no one will say that they have traveled to another destination. It should be known that their suffering will end.” This was the Bhagavān’s prediction that those five hundred nuns would receive the best fruit.

57. After he spoke this sūtra, the monks who heard what the Buddha taught rejoiced and approved.

Notes

1. This is sūtra no. 276 in the Taisho edition and no. 399 in Yinshun (T99.2.73c9-5c17). It’s parallels are found in the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya (T1442.23.792a17-794a17) and at MN 146.
   The Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya version is clearly the same sūtra as we find here in SĀ and provides a peice of evidence that SĀ is from the same canon. However, it also provides evidence of how Buddhist texts, even Āgama sūtras, grew in size gradually through the addition of details and more verbose descriptions. The present text was translated ca. 440 CE, while the Mūlasarvāstivāda Bhikṣu Vinaya was translated ca. 700 CE. The latter was also translated from a Sanskritized original as evidenced by its transliterations, while SĀ was still in Prakrit.
   When we compare this SĀ version to MN 146, we find that the Pali version is less verbose in terms of the background story but more so in terms of what Nandaka teaches the nuns. It, for instance, doesn’t include the backstory of the Buddha telling the monks to teach the nuns before the issue of Nandaka refusing to take his turn arose. But when Nandaka teaches the selfless nature of the sense fields, he walks the nuns through a lengthier rationale that begins with their impermanence.
   On the other hand, MN 146 only treats the inner and outer sense fields and six groups of awareness before moving on to the parables of the oil lamp, tree shadow, and butcher. The overall outline of MN 146 is more concise than SĀ 2.221, but it has been made more verbose and Nandaka’s second teaching is not abbreviated away. The result is that it is a longer sutta than SĀ 2.221 in terms of total word count, but SĀ 2.221 has been expanded to cover additional topics more concisely.
   Despite these differences, the content of these three versions are remarkably equiv., and we can clearly see that there was an original that hasn’t been changed drastically by any one of them. [back]
2. This list of names is reminescent of the disciple lists that became common in the introductions of later Buddhist scriptures, especially among Mahāyānists. It is not found in MN 146, but T1442 has a slightly larger list of nuns. Notes on each name can be found below:
   Cundā. C. 純陀 (EMC. tʃɪuĕn-da). This is a well-known translit. of P/S. cunda. Presumably, it was in a feminine form: Cundā. The parallel in T1442 is an alt. form of the same translit. (准陀, EMC. tʃɪuĕn-da).
   Meṇḍikā. C. 民陀 (EMC. miĕn-da). Meṇḍaka was the name of a prominent lay disciple of the Buddha. My tentative guess is that this was a feminine form of the same in Prakrit. Again, T1442 has the same translit.
   Mārabhā. C. 摩羅婆 (EMC. mua-la-bua). The 翻梵語 has an entry for 摩羅娑 immediately after the entry for 波羅遮羅 (the next name in this list), suggesting that 娑 was a typo for 婆, which was fairly common for these two characters. The interpretation there reinforces this conclusion: 譯曰莫懶 (T2130.54.1002a16), which presumably describes mā (“no”) + rabha (“negligence”). The corresponding translit. in T1442 (末臘婆) also adds support for taking 娑 in 翻梵語 as a typo. Thus, I arrive at Mārabhā as this nun’s name.
   Pālācārā. C. 波羅遮羅 (EMC. pua-la-tʃɪă-la). The 翻梵語 says for this translit.: 譯曰波羅者守遮羅者行 (T2130.54.1002a15), which suggests pāla (守, “guard”) + ācāra (行, “conduct”). There was a nun in P. sources named Paṭācārā. The alternation between -ṭ- and -ḷ- in Indic dialects was not so uncommon, so I suspect this is the same nun. As an added bit of evidence, T1442 has a nun named “great robe” (大衣), which was an ironic name for the mendicant’s patchwork robes. A synonym for this could well be S. paṭaccara (“worn-out garment”), which is very similar in pronunciation to P. Paṭācārā. It would seem that this nun’s name has suffered some confusion as it traveled between Indic dialects. I have retained the Pr. version found in this text given the uncertainties.
   Āḷavikā. C. 阿羅毘迦 (EMC. •a-la-bii-kă). This was also the translit. of the monk Āḷavakā’s name found in the Sudarśana Vinaya Vibhāṣā (善見律毘婆沙, cf. T1462.24.764b16). His name was sometimes written Āḷavikā in P. sources. Buddhaghoṣa and the 善見律毘婆沙 both agree that he was named for the village where he was born. Buddhaghoṣa also says that all children born there were so named. The 翻梵語 has entries for this translit. at T2130.54.998b16 and 1002a17. It says: 阿羅毘迦 譯曰小語. This suggests a word like S. ālāpika, which is also plausible. I’ve opted for the reading Āḷavikā here, especially since T1442 appears to include a translation of S. Aṭavī (曠野, “wilderness”), which is equiv. to Pr. Āḷavi, the name of the village.
   Kṣemā. C. 差摩 (EMC. ṭṣ‘ïĕ-mua). This was a well-known translit. of S. kṣema (P. khema), and Khemā was the name of a prominent nun in P. sources. T1442 lists a nun named “Security” (安隱) which matches the meaning of S. kṣema.
   Namati. C. 難摩 (EMC. nan-mua). This would translit. P/S. nama- or nāma-, and presumably a final syllable has been dropped. In G., there would have been no differentiation between these two possibilities because the language lacked long vowels. The final syllable, though, could have been -da or -di, which would transl. to S. -ta or -ti. My guess that the name was Namati is based on it being the name of a divinity. S. namati is a verb that means “bow” or “bend,” and S. namada is an adj. with meanings such as “crooked, master, felt, cloud.” It’s also not impossible that the C. is a corruption of Nandā, the name of a prominent nun in P. sources that was a common name for women in general.
   Kṛśa Gautamī. C. 吉離舍瞿曇彌 (EMC. kiĕt-lɪĕ-ʃɪă gɪu-dəm-miĕ), G. *kiriṣa gotami, P. kisā gotamī, S. kṛśa gautamī. The C. translit. matches the G. equiv. of this nun’s name, which means “the thin Gautamī,” though kṛśa is translated as “weak” (少力) in T1442. There is also an (apparent) error in T1442 that separated Kṛśa and Gautamī as two different names when they should be together as one.
   Utpalāvarṇā. C. 優鉢羅色 (EMC. ɪəu-puat-la + “color”), G. upalavaṃna, P. uppalavaṇṇā, S. utpalāvarṇā. The C. translit. of S. utpala is well-known. This was the blue lotus flower, so the meaning of this famous nun’s name is “color of the blue lotus.” T1442 translates her name fully as “color of a lotus flower” (蓮花色).
   Mahāprajāpatī. C. 摩訶波闍波提 (EMC. mua-ha-pua-ʒɪă-pua-dei), G. mahapajapadi, P. mahāpajāpatī, S. mahāprajāpatī. The C. translit. matches the G. pronunciation, though the difference is only in the final -di instead of -tī. T1442 translates this nun’s name as “Great Lord of the World” (大世主), interpreting Prajāpatī as the name of the Vedic creator god. She was the Buddha’s aunt and adoptive mother (being also married to his father) before becoming a nun. She was the leader of the early nun assembly after convincing the Buddha to allow women to ordain under his teaching. [back]
3. taught, instructed, edified, and gladdened … with a Dharma talk. C. 說法，示、教、照、喜, P. dhammiyā kathāya sandassesi samādapesi samuttejesi sampahaṁsesi. This expression with four verbs is found around a hundred times in other SĀ sūtras. An alternate version that substitutes 利 (“to benefit”) for 照 (“to clearly understand”) occurs once in SĀ and many times in DĀ and the alternate Chinese SĀ (i.e., T100).
   An equiv. expression in MĀ is a little more elaborate and quite frequent: “taught the Dharma for them, encouraging, inspiring, and making them glad in measureless ways” (為彼說法，勸發渴仰，成就歡喜，無量方便). It appears to only have the last three verbs that is found in the P. version.
   Finally, EĀ also has a few instances of a simpler version: “gave a talk on the profound Dharma, encouraging, delighting, and making them glad.” (與說深法，勸樂令喜).
   Clearly, this way of describing the Buddha’s effect on his students when teaching Dharma must be quite old. Like many old expressions, it may have grew in elaborateness and proliferated in frequency with time but maintained its basic meaning. [back]
4. This background is missing from MN 146, which picks up with the next paragraph and depicts an awkward conversation between the Buddha and Ānanda about Nanda while the nuns were still present. This is a somewhat common situation when comparing Theravāda with other Āgama background stories. It makes one wonder if Theravāda redactors didn’t purposely condense these stories to make room for more verbose doctrinal passages, moving the narrative details into commentaries. Alternatively, one might also wonder whether the old sūtras were originally sparse on details, which motivated redactors in each tradition to fill them out independently of each other. [back]
5. Where MN 146 is more concise in the initial background story, here it becomes much more verbose. Nanda walks the nuns through the entire argument for the selfless nature of the sense fields: That they are impermanent, painful, and subject to change, which makes it impossible for them to be self. What is curious, however, is that when the nuns confirm this conclusion for Nanda, they only state that the sense fields are impermanent. This pattern is repeated for each of the topics that Nanda raises below. Both this version and the one in T1442 omit the extended argument that impermanent things cannot be a self. On the other hand, we might say this section of MN 146 is simpler than this version because it doesn’t cover the sextet of awareness, contact, feeling, conception, intention, and craving. [back]
6. we have truly observed that there is no self in the six outer sense fields. This is a more concise form of the previous conclusion given by the nuns. This abbreviation was likely the result of Chinese editing to remove what was considered excessive repetition.
   There are a few other irregularities that take place: Nanda’s restatement of the what the nuns say loses the verb “to observe,” and then gains the adverb “truly.” The nuns also begin saying they “always” come to this understanding rather than having already done so.
   These examples of instability in the C. translation probably don’t reflect the exact wording of the original. Usu. the initial trans. of standardized passages is the most complete and accurate one, and then repetitions become abbrev. or paraphrased in C. Āgama translations (the Madhyama Āgama being the conspicuous exception to this pattern). It’s unclear how much the translators, editors, and/or later copyists were responsible for this, but it appears to be a feature of translations from the era. [back]
7. Would that speaker be explaining it correctly? C. 作是說者，為等說不？, P. sammā nu kho so, bhaginiyo, vadamāno vadeyyā”ti?, T1442: 如是說時，可說此人為實語不？ The expression 等說 lit. means “equally” or “fully speaking,” which likely translated G. sama vadadi. However, the P. equiv. is sammā … vadeyyā (“correctly … speaking”), and T1442 reads 實語 (“truly speaking”). So, I assume that this is another case of confusion between G. sama (“equal”) and saṃma (“correct”). I’ve amended the passage to read 正說 instead of 等說 in my translation. [back]
8. Basket Serpents Sūtra. Presumably this refers to SĀ 2.212 (1172). Briefly, the parable involves a chest of four dangerous vipers, five sword-wielding enemies, six bandits, an empty village, a village with bandits, a raging torrent, a river, being afraid on the near shore, and being refreshed and happy on the other shore.
   The chest represents a person’s body of crude form, the four vipers represent the four basic elements, the five enemies represent the five acquired aggregates, and the six bandits represent the six delightful cravings. The empty village represents the six inner sense fields, and the bandits in the village represent the six outer sense fields. The raging torrent represents the four floods, and the river represents the three cravings for existence. The near shore represents being embodied, and the far shore represents Nirvāṇa.
   It’s not clear what part of this parable we are to apply to the present passage. The next paragraph supplies its interpretation without the need for this other sūtra. [back]

Translator: Charles Patton

Last Revised: 1 February 2024