Oral Dimensions
Oral Dimensions
Oral Dimensions
, Anlayo
Bhikkhu Anlayo
Abstract:
The present paper examines the form and function of
Pli discourses as orally transmitted material. The
first part takes up formal elements, such as "sound
similarities", the "principle of waxing syllables", the
frequent use of "repetition", and "pericopes". The
second part turns to functional aspects of the Pli
oral tradition, examining its "purposes" and the
"reciters" responsible for its performance.
eka! samaya!
e(k)a!
(ek)a! (samay)a!
s(amaya!)
Pli terms:
ji&&o vuddho mahallako addhagato vayo-anuppatto
vuddhi! vir(hi! vepulla!
bhto sa!viggo lomaha**hajto
jhyanti pajjhyanti nijjhyanti apajjhyanti
nikmalbh akicchalbh akasiralbh
daliddo assako an(hiyo
a++ho mahaddhano mahbhogo
Syllable count:
2+2+4+4+6
2+3+3
2+3+6
3+4+4+5
5+5+6
3+3+4
2+4+4
The crescendo effect that results from the application of this principle is
a typical stylistic feature of the early discourses, further enhanced when
word sequences arranged according to the waxing syllable principle also
share sound similarities. If a sequence of words becomes relatively long,
this principle is not applied to the sequence as a whole, but to subunits
within the sequence. Such subunits can share a similar nuance of meaning or belong to the same category, and the division into subunits may
have the function to set a rhythm that allows the reciter to take a breath
before continuing recitation. An example in case is the description of
various types of talks that are unbefitting and should better be avoided,
presented in figure 3 below.8
Figure 3: Subunits in the description of irrelevant types of talk
1st subunit, syllable-count 4+4+6:
rjakatha!, corakatha!, mahmattakatha!,
talk on men to be reckoned with: "kings, robbers, ministers".
2nd subunit, syllable-count 4+4+4:
senkatha!, bhayakatha!, yuddhakatha!,
talk on war: "armies, dangers, battles".
3rd subunit, syllable-count 4+4+4+5:
annakatha!, pnakatha!, vatthakatha!, sayanakatha!,
talk on requisites: "food, drink, clothing, beds".
4th subunit, syllable-count: 4+4+4+4:
mlkatha!, gandhakatha!, tikatha!, ynakatha!,
talk on household life: "garlands, perfumes, relatives, vehicles".
5th subunit, syllable-count: 4+5+5+6:
gmakatha!, nigamakatha!, nagarakatha!, janapadakatha!,
talk on geographical localities: "villages, towns, cities, counties".
The same principle can also be responsible for the order of terms in
dvanda compounds. An example would be the pcittiya regulation according to which a monk should not teach more than "six or five" words
in particular circumstances, cha-paca, where the sequence of the numerals seems to follow the principle of waxing syllables against the
natural ascending order of the numbers five and six.9 Another case is the
expression Dhamma-vinaya, where the reason for Vinaya to stand in
second position may well be its syllable count of three against the two
syllables of Dhamma. The application of the principle of waxing syllables to dvanda compounds is in fact a rule recognized by P;ini.10
1.3 Formal Elements Repetition
The oral nature of the early discourses also easily impresses itself on the
reader or perhaps better on its audience due to the frequent occurrence of repetition. When treating a particular topic in its positive and
negative manifestations, for example, it is standard procedure in the discourses to repeat the same passage with precisely the same words and
formulations used for the positive case, making only the most minimal
changes required in order to adjust these to the negative case. The same
procedure becomes even more prominent when a series of different perspectives on a particular topic are explored. Thus a treatment of, for example, four types of persons or modes of acting, will use four times
nearly the same text in order to achieve its aim.
In addition to the frequent occurrence of repetition within a single discourse, the early discourses also make recurrent use of pericopes, formulaic expressions or phrases that depict a recurrent situation or event
and whose purpose is to facilitate memorization.11 Whether it is a description of how someone approaches the Buddha or of how someone
attains liberation, pericopes will be employed with a fixed set of phrases
and expressions, with only the most minimal changes introduced to adapt
these pericopes to the individual occasion. These two features, the repetition of passages within a discourse and the use of pericopes throughout
10
11
proached the Buddha. The A/guttara-nikya version does not record any
approach at all.
a) Not long after venerable nanda had left, Mra the Evil One approached the Blessed One; having approached he stood on one side;
standing on one side, Mra the Evil One said this to the Blessed One ...
Mro ppim acirapakkante yasmante nande yena bhagav ten
upasa/kami, upasa/kamitv ekamanta! a**hsi; ekamanta! *hito
kho Mro ppim bhagavanta! etad avoca ...25
b) Not long after venerable nanda had left, Mra the Evil One approached the Blessed One; having approached he said this ...
Mro ppim acrapakkante yasmante nande26 yena bhagav ten
upasa/kami,27 upasa/kamitv28 etad avoca ...29
c) Not long after venerable nanda had left, Mra the Evil One said
this to the Blessed One ...
Mro ppim acirapakkante yasmante nande bhagavantam etad
avoca.30
Pericopes also differ when it comes to describing the respectful attitude
with which someone listens to a sermon given after a meal by the Buddha or by a monk. For such occasions, the Dgha-nikya, the Majjhimanikya, the Udna, and the Sutta-nipta employ a pericope that describes
how the listener(s) take(s) a low seat, an obvious expression of respect.31
Similar situations in the Vinaya and in the A/guttara-nikya, however,
do not mention a low seat.32 This difference is particularly notable in the
case of a meal given by Prince Bodhi, as the same meal is recorded in
the Majjhima-nikya and the Vinaya, so that in this case the same event
is described once with and once without the taking of the low seat.
a) When the Blessed One had eaten and had removed [his] hands from
the bowl, Prince Bodhi took a low seat and sat down on one side.
Bodhi rjakumro ... bhagavanta! bhuttvi! ontapattap&i! aatara! nca! sana! gahetv ekamanta! nisdi.33
12
b) When the Blessed One had eaten and had removed [his] hands from
the bowl, Prince Bodhi sat down on one side.
Bodhi rjakumro ... bhagavanta! bhuttvi! ontapattap&i! ekamanta! nisdi.34
The application of a pericope can at times result in inconsistencies within
a discourse. An example is the pericope that describes how the Buddha
or a monk gets ready to beg alms. Since food has to be taken before
noon, such preparations are usually made in the early morning, so that
this pericope describes how "in the morning" the Buddha or a monk
dresses and takes his bowl and robe in order to approach the next village
or town.35 The frequent occurrence of this pericope has caused it to be
also applied to a passage in the Vinaya and the Udna where it does not
fit its context. This passage records how the Buddha was travelling and
arrived in a particular place where he was invited to come to the local
hall. The villagers then approached the same hall and listened to a discourse by the Buddha that went on well into the night. Even though the
circumstances make it clear that the invitation to come to the local hall
must have taken place in the late afternoon or evening, the Vinaya and
the Udna nevertheless report that it was "in the morning" that the Buddha followed the invitation by dressing and taking his bowl and robe in
order to approach the local hall.36
The relatively circumstantial differences noted so far may seem negligible, since they do not affect essential matters. Not all such errors, however, are of such circumstantial character. A somewhat more significant
variation in the use of the pericopes employed at the conclusion of a discourse can be found between the Sa!yutta-nikya and the Sutta-nipta
versions of the Kasibhradvja-sutta. These two discourses treat the
same event but differ in their conclusion, as according to the Sa!yuttanikya account Kasibhradvja took refuge and declared himself to be a
lay follower, while according to the Sutta-nipta version he took refuge,
requested ordination and became an arahant.
a) I go for refuge to venerable Gotama, to the Dhamma and to the community of monks, may venerable Gotama remember me as a lay follower who from today on has gone for refuge for life.
esha! bhavanta!37 Gotama! sara&a! gacchmi dhamma ca
bhikkhusa/gha ca, upsaka! ma! bhava! Gotamo dhretu ajjatagge p&upeta! sara&a! gatanti.38
13
b) I go for refuge to venerable Gotama, to the Dhamma and to the community of monks, may I receive the going forth in the presence of venerable Gotama and the full admission ... and venerable Bhradvja became one of the arahats.
esha! bhavanta! Gotama! sara&a! gacchmi dhamma ca bhikkhusa/gha ca,39 labheyyha! bhoto Gotamassa santike pabbajja!
labheyya! upasampadanti ... aataro ca kho40 panyasm Bhradvjo arahata! ahosi. 41
In regard to variations in the use of pericopes, it is also of interest to
compare their use in Pli discourses to the usage in discourses from the
Chinese gamas. Taking as an example the Madhyama-gama collection preserved in Chinese, discourses found in this collection regularly
describe how a monk fans the Buddha,42 a circumstance noted only
rarely in discourses found in its Pli counterpart, the Majjhima-nikya.43
On frequent occasions Madhyama-gama discourses also mention the
sitting mat,44 one of the standard requisites of a monk, while their Pli
counterparts tend to refer to the same accessory only on very few occasions.45 Another standard pericope in the Madhyama-gama describes
how a visitor or a monk will depart from the presence of the Buddha by
performing three circumambulations, a circumstance not mentioned in
Majjhima-nikya discourses.46 The two collections also differ in their descriptions of how listeners will express their appreciation of the teachings, since whereas in a Majjhima-nikya discourse they exclaim "wonderful, wonderful", in a Madhyama-gama discourse they rather inform
the Buddha: "I understood, I realized".47 Again, when someone asks the
Buddha or a monk a question in the Madhyama-gama, the actual question will be preceded by a request to be given permission to put a question,48 a pericope found only rarely in the Majjhima-nikya.49
Other pericopes, found in the Majjhima-nikya, are absent from the
Madhyama-gama. One example is the pericope employed regularly at
the beginning of a Majjhima-nikya discourse, in which the Buddha addresses his disciples with "monks", and the monks reply "venerable sir",
after which the Buddha announces his topic and proceeds to deliver the
discourse, an exchange not found in Madhyama-gama discourses.50 A
closer inspection shows that this pericope does not fit too well with the
remainder of the Pli discourses in which it occurs, in as much as the
vocative "monks", bhikkhavo, used in this passage, differs from the
vocative address "monks", bhikkhave, used in the remainder of the dis-
14
15
points well in mind. This need is reflected in a discourse in the A/guttara-nikya. This discourse highlights that, even though listeners may be
paying attention when the Dhamma is being taught, once they leave
some might quickly forget what they have heard.58 Hence, in order to
satisfy the requirements of the expanding early Buddhist community, a
to some degree formalized body of oral material may have already come
into existence during the Buddhas lifetime.
Besides facilitating teaching and preaching, such a formalized body of
oral material would also have had the function of creating a sense of
unity and communal concord through group recital. In fact, the Sa/gtisutta and its parallels explicitly take their occasion from the need to ensure harmony in the face of the strife that according to these discourses
had occurred among the Jains after the death of their leader.59 The fortnightly recitation of the code of rules (ptimokkha) was another important manifestation of communal harmony, and a discourse reports that
even monks who otherwise lived in complete seclusion would come to
join the nearest monastic community for such occasions.60 The relevance
of group recitation to communal harmony can also be seen in the accounts of the later councils, where success in establishing communal
harmony finds expression in the performance of communal recital.61
In addition to functioning as a tool for the preservation of the teachings
and for expressing communal harmony, some discourses indicate that
oral recitation in early Buddhism had still other functions. A discourse in
the Sa!yutta-nikya and its parallels in two Sa!yukta-gama translations report that on one occasion, just before dawn, Anuruddha was reciting texts by himself. 62 A woman overheard him and told her child to
be quiet, in order to avoid disturbing Anuruddhas recitation.
According to another discourse in the Sa!yutta-nikya, on a different
occasion the Buddha similarly recited a discourse to himself while being
alone and in seclusion.63 A monk chanced by and overheard the recitation. The circumstances make it clear that in both cases the recitation
was undertaken merely for its own sake, without any teaching purpose in
mind. Whereas one might suppose that Anuruddha was privately rehearsing, the Buddha would not have needed to rehearse his own discourses. In fact, what he recited on this occasion was a treatment of the
six senses from the perspective of dependent arising (pa*icca samuppda), a treatment that would have been familiar enough to him not to
require any private rehearsing. This suggests that his recitation was simply a recollection of the truth he had discovered, perhaps similar to the
16
inspired utterances that according to the Udna he made soon after his
awakening, a time when he was also alone and in seclusion.64
The above passages suggest that the early Buddhist oral tradition also
served as a way of meditating or reflecting on the Dhamma. This impression is confirmed by a list of five possible occasions for reaching liberation, given in several discourses, according to which recitation can even
issue in awakening.65 These discourses explain that during recitation a
deeper understanding can arise that eventually culminates in the breakthrough to liberation. Thus, recitation undertaken for its own sake does
seem to function as a means of mental development (bhvan) in a wider
sense, and as such could become a tool for progress on the path to liberation.
Another occasion for reaching liberation, according to the same discourses, is when listening to someone else expounding the teachings.
Other discourses indicate that the oral delivery of a discourse can also
help the listener to overcome a physical disease. One such instance is the
Girimnanda-sutta. According to the Pli and Tibetan versions of this
discourse, the Buddha had told nanda to recite a teaching on ten types
of perception to a sick monk. The monk recovered from his illness as
soon as he had heard this teaching.66
In this case one might assume that the sick monk found solace in hearing
teachings that were new to him. However, three discourses in the Sa!yutta-nikya indicate that the salutary effect of listing to a recitation can
involve teachings that are quite familiar to the respective hearers. In two
of these discourses, the Buddha recites the awakening factors to his disciples Mahkassapa and Mahmoggallna, respectively, who on hearing
this recitation recover their health.67 In the third discourse, the Buddha is
sick himself and asks another monk to recite the awakening factors for
him. On hearing the recitation, the Buddha recovers his health.68
Accomplished senior disciples like Mahkassapa and Mahmoggallna
would have had no need to be informed about the seven awakening factors, not to mention the Buddha himself. Thus on these occasions the
recitation of the awakening factors cannot have served merely to convey
information.
The discourse that reports how the Buddha recovered through hearing a
recitation of the awakening factors has a Chinese and a Sanskrit parallel.
Unlike the Pli discourse, these two parallel versions follow the account
17
of this event with a set of verses spoken by another monk, who apparently was also present on this occasion. According to these verses, during the recitation the Buddha experienced the taste of liberation (according to the Chinese version) or the taste of the awakening factors (according to the Sanskrit version).69 In this way, the Chinese and Sanskrit versions make it clear that the recitation acted as a support for meditative
practice.
These instances further support the impression that recitation, whether
performed by oneself or by another, served as a tool for meditation in
early Buddhism.70 A discourse in the A/guttara-nikya and its Chinese
parallels make this point more explicitly, as they advise to practise recitation to overcome sloth-and-torpor.71 According to the Pli commentaries, recitation can not only act as an antidote to sloth-and-torpor, but can
also help to overcome any type of unwholesome thought.72 Thus, the
early Buddhist oral tradition was not only a means to preserve texts, but
also functioned as an integral part of the practice of the path to liberation. In fact, oral recitation continued for a considerable time even after
the writing down of the discourses and is to some degree still practised
today, which shows that it serves a greater purpose than preservation of
the text.73
2.2 Functional Aspects The Reciters
With this range of purposes, it becomes quite probable that oral recitation of at least some key texts would have been part of the general training of monks and nuns.74 The commentaries explain that a monk who
wishes to live a life of seclusion in the forest should memorize at least
the code of rules (ptimokkha) and two or three recitation sections from
a discourse collection.75 Ability at reciting a group of texts from memory
is reflected in a passage that records the first meeting between the Buddha and the recently ordained So;a KoLikanna. During this meeting, the
Buddha asked So;a to recite some Dhamma,76 and So;a complied by reciting the sixteen discourses of the A**hakavagga, a collection now found
in the Sutta-nipta.77 The circumstances make it clear that the Buddha,
who had already been pleased by So;as meditative conduct, wanted to
see if So;a was also able to recite some section of the early Buddhist
oral tradition, which would have been considered a complementary
qualification of a well-trained monk. This particular incident is also noteworthy in so far as it shows that the Buddha himself sometimes checked
to see whether oral recitation was correctly undertaken.
18
Though every monastic disciple might have had to memorize some material, as the years of the Buddhas ministry went by the oral material
would have continued to grow in size, so that its preservation must have
become an increasingly specialized and demanding task. Thus it is no
surprise when the Pli Vinaya reports that the reciter monks would
sometimes pass the whole night busily reciting discourses.78 At times, the
concern with oral recitation appears to have become excessive and some
passages voice criticism of those who neglect seclusion for the sake of
recitation. 79
The recitation of the early Buddhist texts was not only undertaken by
monks, but also by nuns. The Theravda Vinaya records that the nuns
Thullananda and Bhadd Kpiln were well-learned Dhamma preachers
and reciters.80 In a similar vein, the Divyvadna refers to nuns who
were knowledgeable in the tripi*aka,81 and the Dpava!sa records that
nuns in Ceylon were capable at reciting the Vinaya, the five Nikyas and
the seven works of the Abhidhamma.82
In general, the oral transmission of the texts was probably the domain of
the monastic disciples.83 In fact, a regulation found in the different Vinayas prohibits a monk or a nun from teaching recitation "word by
word" to someone who has not received full ordination.84 This would
make it practically impossible to train laity in recitation to such an extent
that they could play a significant role in the preservation of the texts.
Another Vinaya ruling shows that, nevertheless, laity also memorized
discourses. According to the Theravda version of this rule, monks are
allowed to forgo the travelling restrictions during the rains retreat period
for a variety of compelling reasons, one among them being that a lay
disciple asks them to come in order to learn a discourse from him, lest it
be lost.85 The Sarvstivda Vinaya has preserved this rule differently.
According to its report, the reason was not that the monks should come
to learn the discourse from the lay disciple, but rather that the lay disciple had forgotten a discourse and wanted the monks to come to teach it
to him again.86
Whatever may be the final word on the rationale and wording of this Vinaya regulation and on how to harmonize it with the Vinaya prohibition
on teaching recitation "word by word" to those who are fully ordained,
other passages give the impression that, at least to some degree, householders were also involved in memorizing the discourses. An example
19
20
Conclusion
In sum, the formal aspects of the Pli discourses the use of pericopes,
the occurrence of metrical and sound similarities, the application of the
principle of waxing syllables, and the recurrent use of repetition testify
to the nature of these discourses as the final product of a prolonged period of oral transmission whose aim was to preserve texts as accurately
as possible. The present form of the Pli discourses is thus clearly shaped
by the exigencies of oral recitation, something to which the formulaic
beginning of a discourse as eva! me suta! explicitly draws attention.
Such oral recitation in early Buddhism was not only a means for preserving texts for later generations. Oral group performance also functioned as an expression of communal harmony, while individual recitation besides its obvious purposes for teaching and preaching appears
to have been used as a contemplative tool as well. Those involved in the
oral transmission of the texts would have been predominantly monastic
disciples, though lay followers also had memorized sections of the
teachings and at times acted as teachers or, in the case of Khujjuttar,
even performed a rather crucial role in the transmission of a whole collection of discourses.
ABBREVIATIONS93
AN
Be
Ce
D
D
DN
E
It
It-a
M
MN
Pj
Ps
S
S2
S3
Se
A/guttara-nikya
Burmese edition
Ceylonese edition
Derge edition
Dirgha-gama (at T 1)
Dgha-nikya
Ekottarika-gama (at T 125)
Itivuttaka
Itivuttaka-a**hakath
Madhyama-gama (at T 26)
Majjhima-nikya
Paramatthajotik
Papacasdan
Sa!yukta-gama (at T 99)
partial Sa!yukta-gama (at T 100)
partial Sa!yukta-gama (at T 101)
Siamese edition
SHT
SN
SN2 I
Sn
T
Ud
Vin
21
REFERENCES
Allon, Mark 1997a: Style and Function: A Study of the Dominant Stylistic Features of the Prose Portions of Pli Canonical Sutta Texts
and Their Mnemonic Function, Tokyo: International Institute for
Buddhist Studies.
Allon, Mark 1997b: "The Oral Composition and Transmission of Early
Buddhist Texts", in Indian insights: Buddhism, Brahmanism and
Bhakti, P. Connoly et al. (ed.), London: Luzac Oriental, pp. 3961.
Banerjee, Anukul Chandra (ed.) 1977: Two Buddhist Vinaya Texts in
Sanskrit, Prtimok@a Stra and Bhik@ukarmavkya, Calcutta:
World Press.
Bareau, Andr 1955: Le Premiers Conciles Bouddhiques, Paris: Presses
Universitaires de France.
Bechert, Heinz 1985: "Einleitung", in Zur Schulzugehrigkeit von Werken der Hnayna-Literatur, H. Bechert (ed.), Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, vol. 1 pp. 20-54.
Bechert, Heinz 1991: "Methodological considerations concerning the
language of the earliest Buddhist tradition", in Buddhist Studies
Review, vol. 8 pp. 3-19.
Bechert, Heinz 1992: "The Writing Down of the TripiLaka in Pli", in
Wiener Zeitschrift fr die Kunde Sdasiens, vol. 36 pp. 45-53.
Bongard-Levin, Grigorij Maksimovic et al. (ed.) 1996: "The Nagaropamastra: An Apotropaic Text from the SaTyuktgama, A Transliteration, Reconstruction, and Translation of the Central Asian
Sanskrit Manuscripts", in Sanskrit-Texte aus dem buddhistischen
Kanon, Folge 3, Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, pp. 7103.
Brough, John 1950: "Thus Have I Heard ...", in Bulletin of the School of
Oriental and African Studies, vol. 13 pp. 416-426.
22
23
24
25
NOTES
1
26
27
involves some form or other of repetition. He concludes (p. 360) that "repetition
thus thoroughly permeates every dimension of this class of Buddhist literature".
13
Allon 1997a: 252 explains that "it is surely easier to remember a sequence of
words arranged ... according to syllable length", just as "it is easier to remember
two different words when they share sound similarities and have the same metrical pattern"; cf. also Wynne 2004: 108-112.
14
According to Lord 1987: 71, such oral transmission involves "never merely
memorizing a fixed entity, but ... ever re-creating a new version of older forms
and stories".
15
Bechert 1985: 21 points out that oral tradition in India had achieved a remarkable degree of precision. Hence, as Graham 1987: 138 explains, the "oral transmission of scripture should not be confused with folk oral tradition in which
verbatim accuracy is not aspired to".
16
Allon 1997b: 42 notes that "communal or group recitation or performance requires fixed wording" and would not allow for improvisation. Coward 1986:
300 points out that "group listening to check for errors is still an accepted
method of verification in rural India today".
17
Von Simson 1965: 137-138 gives the following examples: brahmujjuggatto bRhadRjugtro; muducitta! - muditacitta!; aataro - jtavn; sammodi
sammodanya! - sammukha! sammodan!.
18
Cf. Frauwallner 1956: 173-175 and von Hinber 1989: 67-68.
19
Allon 1997a: 39.
20
Be and Se read yojetv, bhadda! bhadda!.
21
DN 16 at DN II 73,4.
22
Be reads pa*issutv, Ce reads pa*issutv utthysan.
23
AN 7:20 at AN IV 18,4. Allon 1997a: 39 notes that a description of how
someone approaches by chariot can, however, be found elsewhere in the A/guttara-nikya collection, cf. e.g. AN 5:50 at AN III 59,27 (King Mu;[a approaches the monk Nrada); AN 8:12 at AN IV 181,23 (General Sha approaches the Buddha); and AN 10:30 at AN V 65,9 (King Pasenadi approaches
the Buddha); though the description given in these discourses is shorter than the
"chariot approach" pericope employed in the Dgha-nikya.
24
Allon 1997a: 62.
25
DN 16 at DN II 104,12 and Ud 6:1 at Ud 63,13.
26
Ce does not have acrapakkante yasmante nande.
27 e
S adds (ekamanta! a**hsi. ekamanta! *hito kho Mro ppim) in brackets.
28
Be and Se add bhagavanta!.
29
SN 51:10 at SN V 260,25.
30
AN 8:70 at AN IV 310,11.
31
The pericope of "taking of a low seat", aatara! nca! sana! gahetv,
leads from the pericope that describes the giving of a meal to a sermon e.g. in
DN 3 at DN I 109,36 (for further reference and a discussion of this variation cf.
Allon 1997a: 122). The same pericope can also be found regularly in the Madhyama-gama, cf. e.g. M 132 at T I 625b17:
, in which case it is also
found in the Tibetan counterpart at D dul ba kha 105b3: stan ches dma ba zhig
28
blangs te, whereas in the Pli version MN 82 at MN II 64,23 the whole episode
is not found. Sanskrit occurrences are e.g. ncataram sana! gRhtv in Dutt
1984: 265,15, being a counterpart to Sn 3:7 at Sn p. 111,9: aatara! nca!
sana! gahetv; or (ncata)[r](a)[k](a)m-sana! gRhtv in the Mahparinirv&a-stra fragment S 360 folio 187 V5 in Waldschmidt 1950: 26, being a
counterpart to DN 16 at DN II 126,26, where the low seat is not mentioned; or
ncataram sana! gRhtv in the Sa/ghabhedavastu in Gnoli 1977: 145,14, being a counterpart to Vin I 18,9, where the low seat is not mentioned.
32
Instead of the pericope of "taking a low seat" after the pericope that describes
the giving of a meal, only the pericope "sat down at one side", ekamanta! nisdi, leads over to a sermon e.g. in AN 4:57 at AN II 63,4 (for further references
cf. Allon 1997a: 123).
33
MN 85 at MN II 93,9.
34
Vin II 128,36.
35
E.g. MN 5 at MN I 31,29: pubbanhasamaya! nivsetv pattacvara! dya.
36
Vin I 227,10 = Ud 8:6 at Ud 86,13: bhagav pubba&hasamaya! nivsetv pattacvara! dya saddhi! bhikkhusa/ghena yena vasathgra! ten upasankami, followed by describing that the laity heard a discourse from the Buddha
and were then dismissed, bhagav ... upsake bahud eva ratti! dhammiy
kathya sandassetv samdapetv samuttejetv sampaha!setv uyyojesi, where
the reference to bahud eva ratti! makes it clear that the discourse was given at
night time, so that the earlier reference to "the morning", pubbanhasamaya!,
does not fit the context. Allon 1997a: 141 notes this error and also draws attention to instances where the pericope is properly adjusted to its context e.g. in
MN 53 at MN I 354,12 or in SN 35:202 at SN IV 183,16, which introduce a
similar situation only with nivsetv pattacvara! dya, without the specification pubbanhasamaya!.
37
Following bhavanta! in Ce against PTS bhagavanta!, Be and Se abbreviate.
38
SN2 197 at SN2 I 372,20 (SN 7:11 at SN I 173,23 reads dharetu).
39
Se adds upsaka! ma! bhava! Gotamo dhretu ajjatagge p&upeta! sara&a! gata! before labheyyha! etc.
40
Be does not have kho, Se does not have ca.
41
Sn 1:4 at Sn p. 15,23. The Chinese parallels S 98 at T II 27b26, S2 264 at T
II 466c10, and S3 1 at T II 493b8 agree with Sn 1:4, as according to them he
went forth and became an arahant.
42
E.g. M 33 at T I 474a19:
.
43
MN 12 at MN I 83,20 and MN 74 at MN I 501,1 report that a monk was fanning the Buddha.
44
E.g. M 9 at T I 430b10:
(with a ,
and variant reading
);
cf. also Minh Chau 1991: 29.
45
MN 24 at MN I 147,5 and MN 147 at MN III 277,30.
46
E.g. M 132 at T I 623b23:
and its parallel MN 82 at MN II 56,22:
padakkhi&a! katv. A reference to three circumambulations can be found in
DN 16 at D II 163,27, according to which Mahkassapa performed three circum-
29
ambulations of the Buddhas funeral pyre. Part of this pericope has also been
preserved in a Sanskrit fragment parallel to an occurrence of this pericope in
M 161 at T I 686a18, cf. SHT V 1148 R4 in Waldschmidt 1985: 147: triprada(k@i&kRtv).
47
E.g. MN 7 at MN I 39,27: abhikkanta! ... abhikkanta!, and its counterpart in
M 93 at T I 576a10:
...
.
48
E.g. M 29 at T I 461b27:
.
49
MN 35 at MN I 229,35; MN 109 at MN III 15,23; and MN 144 at MN III
264,30. Notably, though none of these three Pli discourses has a parallel in the
Madhyama-gama, each has a parallel in the Sa!yukta-gama, where in each
case this pericope is not found, cf. S 110 at T II 35c11 (parallel to MN 35); S
58 at T II 14b17 (parallel to MN 109); and S 1266 at T II 347c23 (parallel to
MN 144). A Tibetan version of this pericope can be found in the parallel to MN
90, D dul ba kha 88a1, in which case this particular pericope is also found in
the Madhyama-gama parallel to the same discourse, M 212 at T I 793b15, but
not in the Pli version.
50
E.g. in MN 1 at MN I 1,3: bhikkhavo ti. bhadante ti te bhikkh bhagavato
paccassosu!; on the use of this pericope in the Dgha-nikya and the Majjhimanikya cf. also Mann 1990: 33; on its relative lateness Meisig 1987: 225.
51
MN 1 at MN I 1,5 continues with bhikkhave. On the vocative bhikkhave cf.
also Bechert 1991: 11 and Lders 1954: 13.
52
MN 1 at MN I 1,7 continues with bhante.
53
T 48 at T I 837c25: "the Buddha said: monks!; the monks replied: yes, indeed!; the monks listened to the Buddha; the Buddha said ... ";
. According to the introductory remark in T 48 at
T I 837c21, this discourse stems from a Madhyama-gama collection,
.
54
This account can be found in the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, T 1428 at T XXII
793a7; in the Mahvastu of the MahsYghika tradition in Senart 1897: 415,8; in
the Mahsaka Vinaya, T 1421 at T XXII 108a7; in the (Mla-)Sarvstivda
Vinaya, T 1450 at T XXIV 130a20; in the Sarvstivda Vinaya, T 1440 at T
XXIII 511a12; and in the Theravda Vinaya at Vin I 21,1; cf. also SN 4:5 at SN I
105,24 (or SN2 141 at SN2 I 236,10) and its parallel S 1096 at T II 288b3.
55
Cf. also Gombrich 1990: 25.
56
Davidson 1992: 293 comments that the "processes of elaboration and consolidation must have begun during the life of the Buddha".
57
Williams 1970: 166 suggests that "it is possible that the Buddhas teaching
methods included repetition and stylized formulae to aid memorization".
58
This is found in AN 3:30 at AN I 130,29, which illustrates the case of someone who listens but then forgets it all again after leaving with the example of
having different types of seeds on ones lap and then getting up quickly, as a result of which the seeds will all be scattered around.
59
DN 33 at DN III 210,18; D 9 at T I 49c6 and Sanskrit fragment K 484 folio
11 Rc in Stache-Rosen 1968: 17.
60
MN 77 at MN II 8,30 reports that even those disciples who excelled in living
, ,
30
in seclusion would come for the fortnightly recitation of the code of rules, te anvaddhamsa! sa/ghamajjhe osaranti ptimokkhuddesya; and according to
Vin I 105,26 a monk should come for the fortnightly recitation even if he is living apart.
61
Tilakaratne 2000: 175-176 explains that "the fundamental purpose of the act
of sa/gyana and therefore of the events described as sa/gti is the assurance of
the unity of the Buddhist monastic organisation", "in the act of sa/gyana ... the
key activity was to recite together", " memorization or preservation of the
Canon ... was not its main purpose ... the act of sa/gyana, first and foremost,
was meant to be a public expression of ones allegiance to the organisation
which was represented by the Dhamma and the Vinaya"; " the recital of the
Ptimokkha by the members of the SaYgha every fortnight serves virtually the
same purpose"; cf. also Bareau 1955: 134 and Witanachchi 2006: 721, who
points out that "what is relevant in a sa/gti is not so much the reciting of the
text together, but the absence of any discordance".
62
SN 10:6 at SN I 209,19 (or SN2 240 at SN2 I 451,11); S 1321 at T II 362c10
and S2 320 at T II 480c21.
63
SN 12:45 at SN II 74,15: bhagav rahogato pa*isallno imam dhammapariyyam abhsi.
64
Ud 1:1-3 at Ud 1-3; cf. also Vin I 1-2.
65
DN 33 at DN III 241,26; DN 34 at DN III 279,12 (abbr.); AN 5:26 at AN III
22,14; D 9 at T I 51c10; D 10 at T I 53c22; and S 565 at T II 149a6; cf. also
Collins 1992: 126-127. Coward 1986: 300-301 explains that "the mere memorization of the text is not judged to be the most important aspect of the oral tradition ... by chanting or listening to the rhythmic words of a sacred text, the teaching and inspiration in the words becomes renewed and reinforced. In this sense
the oral recitation of a text is a sacramental act".
66
AN 10:60 at AN V 112,16 and D shes ka 279a1; translated in Feer 1883: 150;
a Tibetan discourse that apparently was translated from a Pli original, cf.
Skilling 1993: 84-98 and 123-124.
67
SN 46:14-15 at SN V 79-80. SN 46:14 has a counterpart at D shes ka 281b282a, translated in Feer 1883: 150-152; another Tibetan discourse that appears
to have been translated from a Pli original, cf. Skilling 1993: 127.
68
SN 46:16 at SN V 81,23.
69
S 727 at T II 195c23:
, with its counterpart in bodhya/gakath! rutv, bodhya/gn! rasa! sa vijya in Waldschmidt 1967:
244. The verses continue by describing that such listening to the teachings leads
to the arising of joy and to calmness of the body. De Silva 1993: 33 (without
knowing the Chinese and Sanskrit versions) explains that "when one is reminded of the spiritual qualities one has already cultivated ... great joy must be
arising in the mind. Such joy is perhaps capable of altering the bodys chemistry
in a positive manner".
70
Kwella 1978: 173 explains that "the texts repeat very often the same words...
the citta ... comes to the same subtle pictures ever and ever again ... a comparatively high concentration of the mind ... will be the ... result".
31
71
32
heart, "only monks and nuns ... were so organized that they could hand them on
to future generations".
84
These are the pcittiya/ptayantika rule no. 6 in the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya,
T 1428 at T XXII 639a5, which prohibits "reciting together",
; rule no. 6
in the MahsYghika Vinaya, T 1425 at T XXII 336c20, which prohibits "teaching ... to speak the Dharma by sentence",
...
, which in the Sanskrit
version in Tatia 1975: 19,16 reads: padao dharma! vcaya; rule no. 6 in the
Mahsaka Vinaya, T 1421 at T XXII 39c22, which prohibits "teaching ... to recite the discourse(s)", ...
; rule no. 6 in the (Mla-)sarvstivda Vinaya, T
1442 at T XXIII 771c22, which prohibits "teaching the Dharma in sentence and
phrases by joint recitation",
, which in the Sanskrit version in
Banerjee 1977: 32,11 reads: padao dharma! vcayet (the Tibetan version in
Vidyabhusana 1915: 77,3 reads tshig gis chos don na lhung byed do); rule no. 6
in the Sarvstivda Vinaya, T 1435 at T XXIII 71a7, which prohibits "teaching
the Dharma by way of sentence",
, which in the Sanskrit version in von
Simson 2000: 205,3 reads: padao dharma! vcayet; and rule no. 4 in the
Theravda Vinaya at Vin IV 14,30, which enjoins that one should not "make recite the Dhamma sentence by sentence", padaso dhamma! vceyya. For a comparative study of the different Vinaya accounts of this rule cf. Lvi 1915: 422423 and 436-441. Wynne 2004: 109 notes that the wording of this rule shows
that "Sutta portions of the early Buddhist literature were learnt verbatim among
the ordained".
85
Vin I 140,36: gacchantu bhaddant ima! suttanta! pariypu&issanti pur
ya! suttanto palujjati.
86
T 1435 at T XXIII 174b28:
,
.
87
SN 41:3 at SN IV 286,12. The parallel S 570 at T II 151a12 differs, as according to its presentation he formulated his question without referring to any
discourse in particular.
88
In SN 41:1 at SN IV 282,28 and its parallel S 572 at T II 152a12, Citta gives
an exposition on the topic of "fetters" to a group of monks who had been unable
to resolve a discussion on this issue. SN 41:5 at SN IV 292,1 and its parallel S
566 at T II 149b14 report how Citta explains the meaning of a verse (found in
Ud 7:5 at Ud 76,26) to a monk (though in this case it could also be that the monk
only asked in order to test the householders wisdom, not out of ignorance).
89
AN 1:14 at AN I 26,5: etad agga! mama svakna! upsakna! dhammakathikna! yadida! Citto gahapati; while its counterpart E 6.1 at T II 559c10
extols his superior wisdom,
.
90
Iti-a 32. Cf. also AN 1:14 at AN I 26,19, according to which Khujjuttar was
outstanding for "having heard much", bahussuta (the listing of eminent disciples
in E 7.1 at T II 560b1 instead reckons her outstanding for her wisdom,
);
and AN 2:12 at AN I 89,2, which presents Khujjuttar as an exemplary lay disciple, worthy to be emulated by others.
91
It 1:1 at It 1,4, with its counterpart in T 765 at T XVII 662b15: "I, from the
Blessed One, heard these words",
,
,
33
92
The conclusion to a discourse, e.g. in It 1:1 at It 1,16, states that: "this meaning
was also said by the Blessed One, so I have heard it", ayam pi attho vutto bhagavat, iti me suta! (T 765 has not preserved a conclusion to its discourses).
The pericope employed to lead over from the prose section to verse(s), e.g. in It
1:1 at It 1,8, reads: "this is the meaning of what the Blessed One said. In regard
to this, it was said like this", etam attha! bhagav avoca, tatth eta! iti vuccati.
The counterpart to this transition pericope in T 765 at T XVII 662b20 reads: "at
that time the Blessed One, taking up this matter again, spoke in verse",
.
93
In the case of Pli and Chinese sources, quotations are according to the PTS
and Taish editions by giving first the discourse by number and then its location by volume, page and line; in the case of Tibetan sources, quotations are to
the location in the Derge edition.
, ,