Nibbana and Verse No. 1074 of the Upasīvamāṇavapucchā in the Suttanipāta
Abstract This paper discusses verse 1074 of the Suttanipāta’s (Sn v. 1074) Upasīvamāṇavapucchā. While various interpretations of the verse are possible due to a lack of textual sources to draw from for interpretation, I attempt to understand this verse—which describes the state of nibbāna using the metaphor of an extinguished fire—through a philological examination of the text itself and other contemporary ones. Specifically, I focus on whether the verse implies that nibbāna takes place in the present life or at and after the end of life by examining the compound nāmakāya and the phrase atthaṃ paleti that appear in it. Arguing that the former term is a dvandva meaning “name-and-body” and that the latter means “goes down” (implying the end of life), I conclude that in this verse the Buddha is discussing nibbāna at and after the end of life. However, I do not deny that different interpretations are possible. When dealing with an ancient verse, the interpretation of one word can affect one’s understanding of the verse itself or the sutta overall, possibly leading to perspectives on early Buddhist thought completely different from the original meaning or original intention of the author of the sutta. Taking this into consideration, this paper adopts a meticulous approach to philologically examining early Pa¯li texts.
Introduction
When studying nibbāna in the early tradition of the Pa¯li canon it is important to ask whether the state of nibbāna in the text in question indicates liberation in the present life or at and after the end of life.2 However, this viewpoint has often been lacking in previous research. Furthermore, the meaning of the text and the terminology in question must be carefully determined through a careful examination of the text itself, contemporaneous texts, and its terminology usage while avoiding arbitrary judgments as much as possible. Such a meticulous approach, helps to elucidate the original meaning of the text or the terminology in question, especially when studying of old verses in the Pa¯li canon. This is because the interpretation of one word or one compound in a verse could affect one’s understanding of the verse or the sutta, possibly leading to perspectives on early Buddhist thought completely different from the original meaning or original intention of the author of the sutta. The metaphor of an extinguished fire is often used to describe the state of nibbāna. And when this metaphor is used, it is often difficult to determine which state of nibbāna is being described. Verse no. 1074 of the Upasīvamāṇavapucchā8 in the Suttanipāta (Sn v. 1074) is a case in point. Using the metaphor of “a flame which is put out” (accī khitto), this verse describes the state of muni (the sage of few words) as “gone out” (atthaṃ paleti). The verse has been interpreted both as referring to liberation in this life as well as liberation at and after the end of life
For example, Wynne (2007, p. 91)9 sees it as describing the transformed mental state of the sage in life. On the other hand, its commentary (Pj II, pp. 593–595) and other scholars such as Norman, Hata, Nakamura and Collins see the Buddha as referring to the state of muni at and after the end of his life
This paper re-examines Sn v. 1074 by exploring and sorting through issues surrounding its view of nibbāna while presenting a meticulous philological approach for use in textual studies. In this approach, I will first consider possible understandings of the verse, focusing on the compound nāmakāya and the phrase atthaṃ paleti, narrow down possible interpretations to determine the probable meaning of the verse, and finally conclude that the Buddha most likely is discussing the state of nibbāna at and after the end of life.
Texts and the Terms
Sn v. 1074 appears as follows in the PTS text: Sn v. 1074 “accī yathā vātavegena khitto11 Upasīvā ti Bhagavā atthaṃ paleti na upeti saṃkhaṃ, evaṃ munī nāmakāyā vimutto atthaṃ paleti na upeti saṃkhaṃ.”
Below is my translation: The Blessed One (Buddha) says, “Just as a flame which was put out by the force of wind, Upası¯va, goes out (disappears) and can no longer be reckoned (is no longer expressible in words), just like so, in case that the sage of few words is released from name-andbody, he goes out (disappears) and can no longer be reckoned (is no longer expressible in words).”
The commentary (p. 594) states in its explanation of v. 1074 that the Buddha then uttered the phrase “acci yathā” without adopting either the doctrine of annihilation or eternity in reference to the complete nibbāna without fuel (attachments). (Atha Bhagavā ucchedasassataṃ anupagamma …… anupādāya parinibbānaṃ dassento acci yathā ti gātham āha.)
The commentary (p. 593) also explains that Upasıva is a brahman (brāhmaṇo) who has attained the meditative state of having nothing (ākiñcaññāyatanalābhī) and that the Buddha showed him the upper path, namely, the final liberation of nibbāna. It goes on to state (p. 594) that this muni has been released from rūpakāya (the group of material aspects, in other words, the physical body), one of the five aggregates (pañca khandhā), and nāmakāya (the group of non-material aspects,13 in other words, the other four mental aggregates, which Norman (p. 130) calls “mental body”). Accordingly, the muni is considered to be still in the state of meditation at this point
The commentary continues (p. 594) by stating that after the muni becomes khīṇāsava he goes out, reaching the state called nibbāna without attachments (khīṇāsavo hutvā anupādā-nibbānasaṃkhātaṃ atthaṃ paleti). In the explanation of the final verse 1076, it (p. 595) again emphasizes that one who has gone out is one who has achieved final liberation without attachments (atthaṅ gatassā ti anupādā parinibbutassa), which implies the end of life. Thus, it is clear that the commentary saw atthaṃ paleti in Sn v. 1074 as being the state of nibbāna at and after the end of life. This is further supported by the commentary’s discussion of pa¯da c in Sn v. 1076, which states that all things are completely removed (sabbesu dhammesu samūhatesu). The commentary says that “all things” refers to “all things including substances and so forth” (sabbesu dhammesū ti sabbesu khandhādidhammesu). In this verse, the compound nāmakāya and the phrase atthaṃ paleti can be interpreted in multiple ways. The commentary seems to regard the compound nāmakāya as a dependent determinative (tatpuruṣa) meaning a group of nonmaterial aspects that indicates the mental state of the muni under meditation. With regard to atthaṃ paleti, the commentary glosses the phrase as parinibbāna. The commentary is a good reference for understanding the text. Nevertheless, what texts themselves literally say should be prioritized when interpreting the Pa¯li canon before incorporating commentaries’ explanations. Through a careful textual analysis, in this paper I conclude that nāmakāya and atthaṃ paleti in Sn v. 1074 are, respectively, a co-ordinative compound (dvandva) that means “name-and-body”14 and a phrase that means “go down,” and that together they refer to a state of the muni at and after the end of his life
There are four possible ways to interpret the compound nāmakāya: as a dependent determinative (tatpuruṣa), descriptive determinative (karmadhāraya), co-ordinative (dvandva), and possessive (bahuvrīhi).15 These multiple interpretations allow for this verse to be understood as referring to nibbāna in life as well as at and after the end of life. Below, I will first provide a summary of various understandings of the verse and then present my own
Interpretations of nāmakāya
The commentary: tatpuruṣa “the group of non-material (i.e. mental) aspects”
Norman: tatpuruṣa “mental body” (tatpuruṣa because Norman adopts the same understanding as the commentary)
Hata:karmadhāraya “body as a name”
Nakamura: dvandva “name-and-body” → “mind-and-body”
Collins: dvandva “name-and-form”
Wynne: karmadhāraya “the category name” (also could be tatpuruṣa because his interpretation is similar to the commentary and Norman)
The author: dvandva “name-and-body”
Cf: DN II 62: tatpuruṣa “the group of names”
Understandings of atthaṃ paleti
The commentary and all of the above scholars except for Wynne understand the phrase atthaṃ paleti as referring to nibbāna at and after the end of his life. Wynne alone interprets it as a mental state in life
Nāmakāya in DN (Mahā-Nidāna Suttanta II p. 62)
The only other instance of the compound nāmakāya in the Suttapiṭaka appears in a passage expounding upon dependent origination and causality (DN II p. 62). Unlike in Sn v. 1074 where it is a dvandva meaning “name-and-body,” here it is a tatpuruṣa meaning “the group of names.” The passage in which the compound appears is as follows:
‘‘‘nāmarūpa-paccayā phasso ti’’ iti kho pan’ etaṃ vuttaṃ, tad Ānanda iminā p’ etaṃ pariyāyena veditabbaṃ, yathā nāmarūpa-paccayā phasso. Yehi, Ānanda ākārehi yehi liṅgehi yehi nimittehi yehi uddesehi nāma-kāyassa paññatti hoti, tesu ākāresu tesu liṅgesu tesu nimittesu tesu uddesesu asati, api nu kho rūpakāye adhivacana-samphasso paññāyethāti?’ ‘no h’ etaṃ, bhante.’ ‘yehi, Ānanda ākārehi yehi liṅgehi yehi nimittehi yehi uddesehi rūpa-kāyassa paññatti hoti, tesū ākāresu tesu liṅgesu tesu nimittesu tesu uddesesu asati, api nu kho nāma-kāye paṭigha-samphasso paññāyethāti?’ ‘no h’ etaṃ, bhante.’ ‘yehi, Ānanda, ākārehi yehi liṅgehi yehi nimittehi yehi uddesehi nāma-kāyassaca rūpa-kāyassa ca paññatti hoti, tesu ākāresu tesu liṅgesu tesu nimittesu tesu uddesesu asati, api nu kho adhivacana-samphasso vā paṭigha-samphasso vā paññāyethāti?’ ‘no h’ etaṃ, bhante.’ ‘yehi, Ānanda, ākārehi yehi liṅgehi yehi nimittehi yehi uddesehi nāma-rūpassa paññatti hoti, tesu ākāresu tesu liṅgesu tesu nimittesu tesu uddesesu asati, api nu kho phasso paññāyethāti?’ ‘no h’ etaṃ, bhante.’ ‘tasmāt ih’ Ānanda es’ eva hetu etaṃ nidānaṃ esa samudayo esa paccayo phassassa, yadidaṃ nāma-rūpaṃ.’
My translation:
“It is said in this way, ‘with name-and-form as a condition, there is contact.’ Ananda, by this reason it should be known in this way that with name-andform as a condition, there is contact. Ananda, by appearances, by characteristics, by signs, and by indications the description of the group of names is made, and so when those appearances, those characteristics, those signs, and those indications are non-existent, can contact with an appellation be known in the group of forms?” “Certainly not, venerable sir.” “Ananda, by appearances, by characteristics, by signs, and by indications the description of the group of forms is made, and so when those appearances, those characteristics, those signs, and those indications are non-existent, can contact with repulsion be known in the group of names?” “Certainly not, venerable sir.” “Ananda, by appearances, by characteristics, by signs, and by indications the description of the group of names and the group of forms is made, and so when those appearances, those characteristics, those signs, and those indications are non-existent, can contact with an appellation or contact with repulsion be known?” “Certainly not, venerable sir.” “Ananda, by appearances, by characteristics, by signs, and by indications the description of name-and-form is made, and so when those appearances, those characteristics, those signs, and those indications are non-existent, can contact be known?” “Certainly not, venerable sir.” “Therefore, Ananda, here, this is indeed the cause, source, origin, and condition for contact, namely, name-and-form.
In this sutta, since nāmakāya is used with rūpakāya as a pair, -kāya in the former means not “a physical body” (as is the case in Sn v. 1074) but “group” or “aggregate.” The compound nāmakāya means “the group of names,” in contrast to rūpakāya, the group of forms. The meaning of this set of terms is the same as that of “nāma” and “rūpa” and the compound nāmarūpa (dvandva). In Pa¯li texts, the compound nāmarūpa and the pair nāma / rūpa have primarily two meanings: nameand-form and the mental and physical aspects of individual
In DN II p. 62, since adhivacana (appellation) is used synonymously with nāmakāya, it appears that nāma- in nāmakāya means “name” or “appellation”24 and does not mean the “mental aspects” of an individual, as it often does in the commentary. Thus, this passage is unrelated to the five aggregates of an individual, and therefore nāmakāya in DN II p. 62 should be understood not as “the group of non-material (i.e. mental) aspects” but as “the group of names.”
This understanding contrasts with that of Wynne (2007, p. 91), who assumes that nāmakāya is used in the same way in DN II p. 62 and Sn v. 1074, and cites the former to rule out the possibility that the compound is a co-ordinative (dvandva) in the latter. Since nāmakāya appears alone in Sn v. 1074, it is inappropriate to understand nāmakāya in this verse based on its meaning in DN II p. 62 (where it is used along with rūpakāya). When the usage of the compound is different, its meaning could be different, too
In this context, attention must be paid to the fact that the text says nāmakāya, not nāmarūpa. Below, based on this, I will argue that it is highly likely nāmakāya is a dvandva compound (that does not refer to the five aggregates) meaning “name-andbody,” with nāma- meaning “name” and -ka¯ya meaning “a physical body.”
My Understanding of Sn v. 1074
My translation of Sn v. 1074 is as follows: The Blessed One (Buddha) says, “Just as a flame which was put out by the force of wind, Upası¯va, goes out (disappears) and can no longer be reckoned (is no longer expressible in words), just like so, in case that the sage of few words is released from name-andbody, he goes out (disappears) and can no longer be reckoned (is no longer expressible in words).”
In this section, I will consider the compound nāmakāya and the phrase atthaṃ paleti by examining nāma, nāmarūpa, and kāya in the Suttanipāta (Sn) as well as another example (It 69) of the phrase atthaṃ paleti in the Suttapiṭaka. In Sn, the compound nāmakāya appears only in Sn v. 1074. In the Suttapiṭaka, the only other occurrence of it is in above-mentioned DN II p. 62, where nāmakāya is used along with rūpakāya in a difference sense.26 There appears to be no instances of both nāma and kāya appearing together in the Suttapiṭaka. Therefore, I will examine individual occurrences of them in Sn to see if they are used in a similar way, as well as to determine whether or not a similar notion to Sn v. 1074’s “nameand-body being released” can be found in other Sn verses.
Nāma and nāmarūpa in the Suttanipāta
Nāma appears 14 times in Sn: 12 times alone and twice with rūpa. In the former instances, it means “name” or “appellation.” In the latter (Sn vv. 872 and 1037), nāma and rūpa are used in a parallel fashion. In these cases, nāma could mean either “appellation” or “non-material [mental] aspects.” Sn v. 872 in the Kalahavivādasutta (Sn vv. 862–877) explains dependent origination. There, the Buddha states that on account of nāma and rūpa (name-andform), phassā (contacts) occur, and that contacts do not occur when rūpa (form) is non-existent (rūpe vibhūte). Here nāma appears together with rūpa. In this case, nāma can be interpreted to mean “appellation” or “mental aspects.” However, the context of and terms in Sn v. 872 correspond to the above-mentioned DN II p. 62. In both cases, terms such as nāma, rūpa and phassā are used, and the term ṣaḍ- āyatana, part of the twelve-linked chain of dependent origination, is missing. In DN II p. 62, “appellation” (adhivacana) and “repulsion” (paṭigha) are respectively used as synonyms for nāma and rūpa in relation to phassā. Accordingly, nāma in Sn v. 872 probably means “appellation.” In Sn v. 1037 of the Ajitamāṇavapucchā sutta, (Sn. vv. 1032–1039), the term viññāṇa (consciousness) appears, and the notion that nāma and rūpa (name and form) as well as viññāṇa cease without remainder is introduced
Sn v. 1037 “yam etaṃ pañhaṃ apucchi, Ajita taṃ vadāmi te, yattha nāmañ ca rūpañ ca asesaṃ uparujjhati; viññāṇassa nirodhena etth’etaṃ uparujjhati
Regarding the question which you asked, [I] expound this to you, Ajita, wherein name-and-form is stopped without remaining, With the ceasing of consciousness, therein this (name-and-form) is stopped.
This is the Buddha’s reply to Ajita’s question regarding when nāmarūpa ceases (Sn v. 1036). The Buddha answers that name-and-form completely stops when consciousness ceases. The notion of nāma being stopped (upa √rudh) could be considered analogous to the release (vi √muc) from nāma in Sn v. 1074. This above verse also implies that an arhat’s life ends by its use of the phrase viññāṇassa nirodhena
The dvandva compound nāmarūpa appears in Ajita’s question (Sn v. 1036). There are a total 8 occurrences of this compound in Sn.Out of the other instances of the compound nāmarūpa, only in Sn v. 537 is it used similarly, in relation to the release or the stoppage of nāma and rūpa. This verse describes “a wanderer who has obtained what can be obtained” (paribbājakam … pattipattam), namely, nibbāna in life, as the one who “has put an end to name-and-form” (pariyantam akāsī nāmarūpaṃ). While in this example it is difficult to discern whether nāma- in nāmarūpa indicates “appellation” or the “mental aspects” of the wanderer, it is clear that nāma- of nāmarūpa appears as part of a dvandva compound.
In summary, in the above-discussed instances of nāma and nāmarūpa that appear outside of v. 1074 in Sn, nāma appears alone, with rūpa in a parallel fashion, and also as an element of the dvandva compound nāmarūpa. When nāma appears alone, it means “name” or “appellation,” and does not appear to refer to the mental aspects of a person. On the other hand, nāmarūpa can mean either “appellation” or “mental aspects.” This all lends support to the idea that nāmakāya in Sn v. 1074 is a dvandva compound in which nāma- means “name” or “appellation.”
Kāya in Suttanipāta
A similar notion of stopping or release is also applicable to kāya as found in the term sabbakāyapahāyino (Sn. v. 1113) of the Posālamāṇavapucchā sutta (Sn vv. 1112–1115), which means a person who has abandoned his/her whole body
Sn v. 1113
vibhūtarūpasaññissa sabbakāyapahāyino
ajjhattañ ca bahiddhā ca ‘n’ atthi kiñci’ ti passato
ñāṇaṃ Sakkānupucchāmi, kathaṃ neyyo tathāvidho
I continue to ask, Sakka, about the knowledge [of the one]
whose apperception of form has vanished and whose whole body has been abandoned, and who sees that “nothing exists” within himself or outside.
How should such a person be led?
This is a question posed to the Buddha by Posala about the mental state of a living practitioner who is in a higher level of meditation. In reply (Sn vv. 1114 and 1115), the Buddha explains the mental state of a tathāgata
Kāya appears a total of 16 times in Sn, always meaning a physical body. There is one verse (Sn v. 1144) that discusses a physical body heading somewhere else: kāyo na paleti tattha (“[my] body does not go there”). In this example, kāya is contrasted with mind (mano), and tattha indicates where the Buddha is.
Since all instances of kāya in Sn refer to a physical body, it is highly likely that -kāya in nāmakāya in Sn v. 1074 also means the physical body and that nāmakāya is a dvandva compound meaning “name-and-body.” Moreover, the notion of abandoning kāya also appears in the text in a way similar to Sn v. 1074’s description of a physical body being released.
In the above-mentioned Sn v. 1113, kāya and rūpa appear together, and in this verse kāya means the physical body. Here rūpa (form) and kāya (the physical body) are clearly distinguished. This usage of rūpa and kāya in Sn v. 1113 suggests that -kāya in Sn v. 1074 cannot be replaced by -rūpa. There are no other verses in Sn where rūpa and kāya appear together.
The Ajitamāṇavapucchā, which contains nāmarūpa (Sn v. 1036) and nāma and rūpa (Sn. v. 1037), and the Upasīvamāṇavapucchā, which contains nāmakāya (Sn v. 1074), both belong to Sn Chapter 5, Pārāyanavagga, which is considered to be part of the oldest stratum of the Buddhist scriptures in Sn. In this oldest stratum, nāmarūpa and nāmakāya compounds are both used; in other words, they had different meanings. While the former is a more common term, the author chose to use latter in 1074, which also indicates that it had a distinct meaning
Based on the above observations, it appears that nāmakāya in Sn v. 1074 should be understood as a dvandva meaning “name-and-body,” with “body” referring to the physical body of the muni. Nāma- in nāmakāya probably means “name” or “appellation,” and nāmakāyā vimutto (meaning “release from what can be considered names and the physical body [of the muni]”) in Sn v. 1074 could be referring to either a mental state under meditation or the state of nibbāna at and after the end of life. This conclusion is supported by the other verses in this sutta. Since the muni has already reached the state of ākiñcana (v. 1070) and is freed from saññā (v. 1072), which is regarded as an element of nāma (mental aspects) in later developments of the tradition, what is left in him in nāmakāya (v. 1074) would be just the names (appellations) and physical body that are to be released.
The phrase atthaṃ paleti
The phrase atthaṃ paleti has a similar meaning to atthaṃ √gam (go down or out). As I discussed above, unlike Wynne, the commentary, Norman, Hata, Nakamura, Collins and I all consider the phrase atthaṃ paleti as referring to the end of life. Let us review Wynne’s interpretation again. He regards atthaṃ paleti in Sn v. 1074 as the state of liberated sage in meditation, equaling to sītisiyā vimutto (pa¯da c, v. 1073), which is the mental state of the Buddha himself. His reasoning is understandable, because this sutta begins with the Buddha’s explanation of ākiñcaññāyatana and is followed by a discussion of meditation, such as satimant, saññāvimokha and so on. Wynne (2007, p. 98) thinks that the Buddha did not answer Upasıva, stating, “For the Buddha, the issue is not in question because the state of living liberated person cannot be reckoned.”
Padas c + d in v. 1073 state, “in that very state he can be cool as being liberated, but does consciousness of such a person emerge?” (tatth’ eva so sītisiyā vimutto, bhavetha viññāṇaṃ tathāvidhassa.) Pj II and Nidd use cavetha (√cyu) in place of bhavetha (√bhū). In either case, this statement concerns transmigration, which implies life and death. Therefore, the Buddha can be seen as answering Upasıva’s question in the verses that follow his questions regarding the post-mortem state of the viññāṇa (pada d, v. 1073).
However, the Buddha’s answer was not a direct answer. He does not mention viññāṇa at all. Instead, he explains that the muni disappears when he is released from name-and-body (Sn v. 1074). Therefore, there is no way of knowing exactly from this sutta if viññāṇa emerges at and after the end of muni’s life. Based on the other example (Sn v. 1037) described above, it can be said that nāma-and-rūpa is stopped (upa √rudh) when viññāṇa ceases (nirodha). Accordingly, it implies the post-mortem state of one who has attained nibbāna.
Although Wynne (Ibid., p. 91) backs up his argument by citing It 6931 as “the only other occurrence of metaphor of ‘going out’ in the Suttapiṭaka (i.e. attham plus a verb meaning ‘to go’),” I cannot agree with his interpretation of atthaṃ paleti as “the state of a person liberated in life.” As shown below, the sutta is most likely describing of the end of life.
It 69 (pp. 57–58)
yassa rāgo ca doso ca avijjā ca virājitā / so-maṃ samuddaṃ sagahaṃ sarakkhasaṃ ūmibhayaṃ duttaraṃ accatāri // saṅgātigo maccujaho nirūpadhi pahāsi dukkhaṃ apunabhavāya / atthaṅgato so na pamāṇam eti amohayi maccurājan-ti brūmīti //
Wynne’s translation (2007, p. 91)
For whomever passion, aversion and ignorance have faded away, he has crossed over this ocean with its crocodiles [and] demons, with its dangerous waves, which is hard to cross over. He has overcome attachment, conquered death, and is without acquisitions; he has abandoned suffering, for the sake of no further rebecoming. ‘Gone out’ (atthaṅgato). He cannot be defined (na pamāṇam eti), and has confused the King of death, I say.
The commentary (It-a, II, p. 38) explains this verse in two ways: one glossing rāga, passion or lust, as the example of what has gone out, and the other explaining that the arhat goes down, which is reckoned as nibbāna without fuel (anupādisesanibbāna-saṃkhātaṃ atthaṃ gato so arahā). In this sense, it is possible to interpret this verse like Wynne claims according to the former gloss of the commentary
However, grammatically speaking, only muni and so (he) can be the subject of Sn v. 1074 and It 69, respectively. In light of the above observation regarding the phrase attha(ṃ)-√gam, the expression that the muni / he goes down most likely connotes his physical disappearance or the breakdown of his physical body, meaning the end of life
It is much more plausible to regard the last part of this verse as the description of the future of the living sage at and after the end of life, in other words, as meaning, “Once (If or When) he goes down (ends his life), he cannot be measured. He has [already] deluded the king of death.” Based on the presence of the word maccu (death) in the last sentence, it appears that the last part of this verse refers to the end of life
Conclusion
In this paper, I have examined various interpretations of the Suttanipāta’s verse 1074 in the Upasīvamāṇavapucchā in an attempt to understand its original meaning. This verse describes the state of nibbāna using the metaphor of an extinguished fire, and I considered whether this verse refers to a state of nibbāna in the present life or at and after the end of life using a philological approach while focusing on the compound nāmakāya and the phrase atthaṃ paleti. After reviewing the text’s commentary and several scholars’ interpretations of this verse in detail, I explored other usages nāmakāya and atthaṃ paleti.
There are multiple possible interpretations of the former: as dependent determinative (tatpuruṣa), descriptive determinative (karmadhāraya), and coordinative (dvandva). Based on my analysis of the compound in DN II p. 62 (the only other instance of it in Suttapiṭaka), as well as nāma, nāmarūpa, and kāya in Sn, I argued that in Sn v. 1074, nāma- in nāmakāya indicates “name” or “appellation” and -kāya in nāmakāya indicates “the physical body” of the muni. Therefore it appears that nāmakāya in Sn v. 1074 is a dvandva meaning “name-and-body,” and that nāmakāyā vimutto (meaning “release from what can be considered names and the physical body [of the muni]”) in Sn v. 1074 implies either a higher meditative state or nibbāna at and after the end of life. Then, noting that the phrase atthaṃ paleti has a similar meaning to atthaṃ √gam (go down or out), I discussed how the commentary allows for two interpretations: nibbāna in this life and nibbāna at and after the end of life. Most scholars understand this phrase to mean the post-mortem state of muni. In order for the phrase atthaṃ paleti to mean nibbāna in life, the subject in the verse grammatically needs to be part of a person to be calmed down or extinguished, such as rāga, passion or lust. In fact, grammatically speaking, the subject of Sn v. 1074 and that of the other example of this phrase in It 69 are undoubtedly a man. Moreover, based on close textual readings, I argued that this phrase likely is referring to the state of the muni, that is, nibbāna at and after the end of life
Accordingly, the translation of Sn v. 1074 should be as follows:
The Blessed One (Buddha) says, “Just as a flame which was put out by the force of wind, Upasıva, goes out (disappears) and can no longer be reckoned (is no longer expressible in words), just like so, in case that the sage of few words is released from name-andbody, he goes out (disappears) and can no longer be reckoned (is no longer expressible in words).”
This paper has presented an approach for textual studies in which the meaning of a Pali text is carefully considered through the close examination of the text itself as well as other contemporaneous texts while avoiding arbitrary judgments as much as possible. Nevertheless, it is not my intention to offer a definitive conclusion or deny other understandings in their entirety, as the multiple interpretations of Sn v. 1074 are certainly possible.
Introduction
When studying nibbāna in the early tradition of the Pa¯li canon it is important to ask whether the state of nibbāna in the text in question indicates liberation in the present life or at and after the end of life.2 However, this viewpoint has often been lacking in previous research. Furthermore, the meaning of the text and the terminology in question must be carefully determined through a careful examination of the text itself, contemporaneous texts, and its terminology usage while avoiding arbitrary judgments as much as possible. Such a meticulous approach, helps to elucidate the original meaning of the text or the terminology in question, especially when studying of old verses in the Pa¯li canon. This is because the interpretation of one word or one compound in a verse could affect one’s understanding of the verse or the sutta, possibly leading to perspectives on early Buddhist thought completely different from the original meaning or original intention of the author of the sutta. The metaphor of an extinguished fire is often used to describe the state of nibbāna. And when this metaphor is used, it is often difficult to determine which state of nibbāna is being described. Verse no. 1074 of the Upasīvamāṇavapucchā8 in the Suttanipāta (Sn v. 1074) is a case in point. Using the metaphor of “a flame which is put out” (accī khitto), this verse describes the state of muni (the sage of few words) as “gone out” (atthaṃ paleti). The verse has been interpreted both as referring to liberation in this life as well as liberation at and after the end of life
For example, Wynne (2007, p. 91)9 sees it as describing the transformed mental state of the sage in life. On the other hand, its commentary (Pj II, pp. 593–595) and other scholars such as Norman, Hata, Nakamura and Collins see the Buddha as referring to the state of muni at and after the end of his life
This paper re-examines Sn v. 1074 by exploring and sorting through issues surrounding its view of nibbāna while presenting a meticulous philological approach for use in textual studies. In this approach, I will first consider possible understandings of the verse, focusing on the compound nāmakāya and the phrase atthaṃ paleti, narrow down possible interpretations to determine the probable meaning of the verse, and finally conclude that the Buddha most likely is discussing the state of nibbāna at and after the end of life.
Texts and the Terms
Sn v. 1074 appears as follows in the PTS text: Sn v. 1074 “accī yathā vātavegena khitto11 Upasīvā ti Bhagavā atthaṃ paleti na upeti saṃkhaṃ, evaṃ munī nāmakāyā vimutto atthaṃ paleti na upeti saṃkhaṃ.”
Below is my translation: The Blessed One (Buddha) says, “Just as a flame which was put out by the force of wind, Upası¯va, goes out (disappears) and can no longer be reckoned (is no longer expressible in words), just like so, in case that the sage of few words is released from name-andbody, he goes out (disappears) and can no longer be reckoned (is no longer expressible in words).”
The commentary (p. 594) states in its explanation of v. 1074 that the Buddha then uttered the phrase “acci yathā” without adopting either the doctrine of annihilation or eternity in reference to the complete nibbāna without fuel (attachments). (Atha Bhagavā ucchedasassataṃ anupagamma …… anupādāya parinibbānaṃ dassento acci yathā ti gātham āha.)
The commentary (p. 593) also explains that Upasıva is a brahman (brāhmaṇo) who has attained the meditative state of having nothing (ākiñcaññāyatanalābhī) and that the Buddha showed him the upper path, namely, the final liberation of nibbāna. It goes on to state (p. 594) that this muni has been released from rūpakāya (the group of material aspects, in other words, the physical body), one of the five aggregates (pañca khandhā), and nāmakāya (the group of non-material aspects,13 in other words, the other four mental aggregates, which Norman (p. 130) calls “mental body”). Accordingly, the muni is considered to be still in the state of meditation at this point
The commentary continues (p. 594) by stating that after the muni becomes khīṇāsava he goes out, reaching the state called nibbāna without attachments (khīṇāsavo hutvā anupādā-nibbānasaṃkhātaṃ atthaṃ paleti). In the explanation of the final verse 1076, it (p. 595) again emphasizes that one who has gone out is one who has achieved final liberation without attachments (atthaṅ gatassā ti anupādā parinibbutassa), which implies the end of life. Thus, it is clear that the commentary saw atthaṃ paleti in Sn v. 1074 as being the state of nibbāna at and after the end of life. This is further supported by the commentary’s discussion of pa¯da c in Sn v. 1076, which states that all things are completely removed (sabbesu dhammesu samūhatesu). The commentary says that “all things” refers to “all things including substances and so forth” (sabbesu dhammesū ti sabbesu khandhādidhammesu). In this verse, the compound nāmakāya and the phrase atthaṃ paleti can be interpreted in multiple ways. The commentary seems to regard the compound nāmakāya as a dependent determinative (tatpuruṣa) meaning a group of nonmaterial aspects that indicates the mental state of the muni under meditation. With regard to atthaṃ paleti, the commentary glosses the phrase as parinibbāna. The commentary is a good reference for understanding the text. Nevertheless, what texts themselves literally say should be prioritized when interpreting the Pa¯li canon before incorporating commentaries’ explanations. Through a careful textual analysis, in this paper I conclude that nāmakāya and atthaṃ paleti in Sn v. 1074 are, respectively, a co-ordinative compound (dvandva) that means “name-and-body”14 and a phrase that means “go down,” and that together they refer to a state of the muni at and after the end of his life
There are four possible ways to interpret the compound nāmakāya: as a dependent determinative (tatpuruṣa), descriptive determinative (karmadhāraya), co-ordinative (dvandva), and possessive (bahuvrīhi).15 These multiple interpretations allow for this verse to be understood as referring to nibbāna in life as well as at and after the end of life. Below, I will first provide a summary of various understandings of the verse and then present my own
Interpretations of nāmakāya
The commentary: tatpuruṣa “the group of non-material (i.e. mental) aspects”
Norman: tatpuruṣa “mental body” (tatpuruṣa because Norman adopts the same understanding as the commentary)
Hata:karmadhāraya “body as a name”
Nakamura: dvandva “name-and-body” → “mind-and-body”
Collins: dvandva “name-and-form”
Wynne: karmadhāraya “the category name” (also could be tatpuruṣa because his interpretation is similar to the commentary and Norman)
The author: dvandva “name-and-body”
Cf: DN II 62: tatpuruṣa “the group of names”
Understandings of atthaṃ paleti
The commentary and all of the above scholars except for Wynne understand the phrase atthaṃ paleti as referring to nibbāna at and after the end of his life. Wynne alone interprets it as a mental state in life
Nāmakāya in DN (Mahā-Nidāna Suttanta II p. 62)
The only other instance of the compound nāmakāya in the Suttapiṭaka appears in a passage expounding upon dependent origination and causality (DN II p. 62). Unlike in Sn v. 1074 where it is a dvandva meaning “name-and-body,” here it is a tatpuruṣa meaning “the group of names.” The passage in which the compound appears is as follows:
‘‘‘nāmarūpa-paccayā phasso ti’’ iti kho pan’ etaṃ vuttaṃ, tad Ānanda iminā p’ etaṃ pariyāyena veditabbaṃ, yathā nāmarūpa-paccayā phasso. Yehi, Ānanda ākārehi yehi liṅgehi yehi nimittehi yehi uddesehi nāma-kāyassa paññatti hoti, tesu ākāresu tesu liṅgesu tesu nimittesu tesu uddesesu asati, api nu kho rūpakāye adhivacana-samphasso paññāyethāti?’ ‘no h’ etaṃ, bhante.’ ‘yehi, Ānanda ākārehi yehi liṅgehi yehi nimittehi yehi uddesehi rūpa-kāyassa paññatti hoti, tesū ākāresu tesu liṅgesu tesu nimittesu tesu uddesesu asati, api nu kho nāma-kāye paṭigha-samphasso paññāyethāti?’ ‘no h’ etaṃ, bhante.’ ‘yehi, Ānanda, ākārehi yehi liṅgehi yehi nimittehi yehi uddesehi nāma-kāyassaca rūpa-kāyassa ca paññatti hoti, tesu ākāresu tesu liṅgesu tesu nimittesu tesu uddesesu asati, api nu kho adhivacana-samphasso vā paṭigha-samphasso vā paññāyethāti?’ ‘no h’ etaṃ, bhante.’ ‘yehi, Ānanda, ākārehi yehi liṅgehi yehi nimittehi yehi uddesehi nāma-rūpassa paññatti hoti, tesu ākāresu tesu liṅgesu tesu nimittesu tesu uddesesu asati, api nu kho phasso paññāyethāti?’ ‘no h’ etaṃ, bhante.’ ‘tasmāt ih’ Ānanda es’ eva hetu etaṃ nidānaṃ esa samudayo esa paccayo phassassa, yadidaṃ nāma-rūpaṃ.’
My translation:
“It is said in this way, ‘with name-and-form as a condition, there is contact.’ Ananda, by this reason it should be known in this way that with name-andform as a condition, there is contact. Ananda, by appearances, by characteristics, by signs, and by indications the description of the group of names is made, and so when those appearances, those characteristics, those signs, and those indications are non-existent, can contact with an appellation be known in the group of forms?” “Certainly not, venerable sir.” “Ananda, by appearances, by characteristics, by signs, and by indications the description of the group of forms is made, and so when those appearances, those characteristics, those signs, and those indications are non-existent, can contact with repulsion be known in the group of names?” “Certainly not, venerable sir.” “Ananda, by appearances, by characteristics, by signs, and by indications the description of the group of names and the group of forms is made, and so when those appearances, those characteristics, those signs, and those indications are non-existent, can contact with an appellation or contact with repulsion be known?” “Certainly not, venerable sir.” “Ananda, by appearances, by characteristics, by signs, and by indications the description of name-and-form is made, and so when those appearances, those characteristics, those signs, and those indications are non-existent, can contact be known?” “Certainly not, venerable sir.” “Therefore, Ananda, here, this is indeed the cause, source, origin, and condition for contact, namely, name-and-form.
In this sutta, since nāmakāya is used with rūpakāya as a pair, -kāya in the former means not “a physical body” (as is the case in Sn v. 1074) but “group” or “aggregate.” The compound nāmakāya means “the group of names,” in contrast to rūpakāya, the group of forms. The meaning of this set of terms is the same as that of “nāma” and “rūpa” and the compound nāmarūpa (dvandva). In Pa¯li texts, the compound nāmarūpa and the pair nāma / rūpa have primarily two meanings: nameand-form and the mental and physical aspects of individual
In DN II p. 62, since adhivacana (appellation) is used synonymously with nāmakāya, it appears that nāma- in nāmakāya means “name” or “appellation”24 and does not mean the “mental aspects” of an individual, as it often does in the commentary. Thus, this passage is unrelated to the five aggregates of an individual, and therefore nāmakāya in DN II p. 62 should be understood not as “the group of non-material (i.e. mental) aspects” but as “the group of names.”
This understanding contrasts with that of Wynne (2007, p. 91), who assumes that nāmakāya is used in the same way in DN II p. 62 and Sn v. 1074, and cites the former to rule out the possibility that the compound is a co-ordinative (dvandva) in the latter. Since nāmakāya appears alone in Sn v. 1074, it is inappropriate to understand nāmakāya in this verse based on its meaning in DN II p. 62 (where it is used along with rūpakāya). When the usage of the compound is different, its meaning could be different, too
In this context, attention must be paid to the fact that the text says nāmakāya, not nāmarūpa. Below, based on this, I will argue that it is highly likely nāmakāya is a dvandva compound (that does not refer to the five aggregates) meaning “name-andbody,” with nāma- meaning “name” and -ka¯ya meaning “a physical body.”
My Understanding of Sn v. 1074
My translation of Sn v. 1074 is as follows: The Blessed One (Buddha) says, “Just as a flame which was put out by the force of wind, Upası¯va, goes out (disappears) and can no longer be reckoned (is no longer expressible in words), just like so, in case that the sage of few words is released from name-andbody, he goes out (disappears) and can no longer be reckoned (is no longer expressible in words).”
In this section, I will consider the compound nāmakāya and the phrase atthaṃ paleti by examining nāma, nāmarūpa, and kāya in the Suttanipāta (Sn) as well as another example (It 69) of the phrase atthaṃ paleti in the Suttapiṭaka. In Sn, the compound nāmakāya appears only in Sn v. 1074. In the Suttapiṭaka, the only other occurrence of it is in above-mentioned DN II p. 62, where nāmakāya is used along with rūpakāya in a difference sense.26 There appears to be no instances of both nāma and kāya appearing together in the Suttapiṭaka. Therefore, I will examine individual occurrences of them in Sn to see if they are used in a similar way, as well as to determine whether or not a similar notion to Sn v. 1074’s “nameand-body being released” can be found in other Sn verses.
Nāma and nāmarūpa in the Suttanipāta
Nāma appears 14 times in Sn: 12 times alone and twice with rūpa. In the former instances, it means “name” or “appellation.” In the latter (Sn vv. 872 and 1037), nāma and rūpa are used in a parallel fashion. In these cases, nāma could mean either “appellation” or “non-material [mental] aspects.” Sn v. 872 in the Kalahavivādasutta (Sn vv. 862–877) explains dependent origination. There, the Buddha states that on account of nāma and rūpa (name-andform), phassā (contacts) occur, and that contacts do not occur when rūpa (form) is non-existent (rūpe vibhūte). Here nāma appears together with rūpa. In this case, nāma can be interpreted to mean “appellation” or “mental aspects.” However, the context of and terms in Sn v. 872 correspond to the above-mentioned DN II p. 62. In both cases, terms such as nāma, rūpa and phassā are used, and the term ṣaḍ- āyatana, part of the twelve-linked chain of dependent origination, is missing. In DN II p. 62, “appellation” (adhivacana) and “repulsion” (paṭigha) are respectively used as synonyms for nāma and rūpa in relation to phassā. Accordingly, nāma in Sn v. 872 probably means “appellation.” In Sn v. 1037 of the Ajitamāṇavapucchā sutta, (Sn. vv. 1032–1039), the term viññāṇa (consciousness) appears, and the notion that nāma and rūpa (name and form) as well as viññāṇa cease without remainder is introduced
Sn v. 1037 “yam etaṃ pañhaṃ apucchi, Ajita taṃ vadāmi te, yattha nāmañ ca rūpañ ca asesaṃ uparujjhati; viññāṇassa nirodhena etth’etaṃ uparujjhati
Regarding the question which you asked, [I] expound this to you, Ajita, wherein name-and-form is stopped without remaining, With the ceasing of consciousness, therein this (name-and-form) is stopped.
This is the Buddha’s reply to Ajita’s question regarding when nāmarūpa ceases (Sn v. 1036). The Buddha answers that name-and-form completely stops when consciousness ceases. The notion of nāma being stopped (upa √rudh) could be considered analogous to the release (vi √muc) from nāma in Sn v. 1074. This above verse also implies that an arhat’s life ends by its use of the phrase viññāṇassa nirodhena
The dvandva compound nāmarūpa appears in Ajita’s question (Sn v. 1036). There are a total 8 occurrences of this compound in Sn.Out of the other instances of the compound nāmarūpa, only in Sn v. 537 is it used similarly, in relation to the release or the stoppage of nāma and rūpa. This verse describes “a wanderer who has obtained what can be obtained” (paribbājakam … pattipattam), namely, nibbāna in life, as the one who “has put an end to name-and-form” (pariyantam akāsī nāmarūpaṃ). While in this example it is difficult to discern whether nāma- in nāmarūpa indicates “appellation” or the “mental aspects” of the wanderer, it is clear that nāma- of nāmarūpa appears as part of a dvandva compound.
In summary, in the above-discussed instances of nāma and nāmarūpa that appear outside of v. 1074 in Sn, nāma appears alone, with rūpa in a parallel fashion, and also as an element of the dvandva compound nāmarūpa. When nāma appears alone, it means “name” or “appellation,” and does not appear to refer to the mental aspects of a person. On the other hand, nāmarūpa can mean either “appellation” or “mental aspects.” This all lends support to the idea that nāmakāya in Sn v. 1074 is a dvandva compound in which nāma- means “name” or “appellation.”
Kāya in Suttanipāta
A similar notion of stopping or release is also applicable to kāya as found in the term sabbakāyapahāyino (Sn. v. 1113) of the Posālamāṇavapucchā sutta (Sn vv. 1112–1115), which means a person who has abandoned his/her whole body
Sn v. 1113
vibhūtarūpasaññissa sabbakāyapahāyino
ajjhattañ ca bahiddhā ca ‘n’ atthi kiñci’ ti passato
ñāṇaṃ Sakkānupucchāmi, kathaṃ neyyo tathāvidho
I continue to ask, Sakka, about the knowledge [of the one]
whose apperception of form has vanished and whose whole body has been abandoned, and who sees that “nothing exists” within himself or outside.
How should such a person be led?
This is a question posed to the Buddha by Posala about the mental state of a living practitioner who is in a higher level of meditation. In reply (Sn vv. 1114 and 1115), the Buddha explains the mental state of a tathāgata
Kāya appears a total of 16 times in Sn, always meaning a physical body. There is one verse (Sn v. 1144) that discusses a physical body heading somewhere else: kāyo na paleti tattha (“[my] body does not go there”). In this example, kāya is contrasted with mind (mano), and tattha indicates where the Buddha is.
Since all instances of kāya in Sn refer to a physical body, it is highly likely that -kāya in nāmakāya in Sn v. 1074 also means the physical body and that nāmakāya is a dvandva compound meaning “name-and-body.” Moreover, the notion of abandoning kāya also appears in the text in a way similar to Sn v. 1074’s description of a physical body being released.
In the above-mentioned Sn v. 1113, kāya and rūpa appear together, and in this verse kāya means the physical body. Here rūpa (form) and kāya (the physical body) are clearly distinguished. This usage of rūpa and kāya in Sn v. 1113 suggests that -kāya in Sn v. 1074 cannot be replaced by -rūpa. There are no other verses in Sn where rūpa and kāya appear together.
The Ajitamāṇavapucchā, which contains nāmarūpa (Sn v. 1036) and nāma and rūpa (Sn. v. 1037), and the Upasīvamāṇavapucchā, which contains nāmakāya (Sn v. 1074), both belong to Sn Chapter 5, Pārāyanavagga, which is considered to be part of the oldest stratum of the Buddhist scriptures in Sn. In this oldest stratum, nāmarūpa and nāmakāya compounds are both used; in other words, they had different meanings. While the former is a more common term, the author chose to use latter in 1074, which also indicates that it had a distinct meaning
Based on the above observations, it appears that nāmakāya in Sn v. 1074 should be understood as a dvandva meaning “name-and-body,” with “body” referring to the physical body of the muni. Nāma- in nāmakāya probably means “name” or “appellation,” and nāmakāyā vimutto (meaning “release from what can be considered names and the physical body [of the muni]”) in Sn v. 1074 could be referring to either a mental state under meditation or the state of nibbāna at and after the end of life. This conclusion is supported by the other verses in this sutta. Since the muni has already reached the state of ākiñcana (v. 1070) and is freed from saññā (v. 1072), which is regarded as an element of nāma (mental aspects) in later developments of the tradition, what is left in him in nāmakāya (v. 1074) would be just the names (appellations) and physical body that are to be released.
The phrase atthaṃ paleti
The phrase atthaṃ paleti has a similar meaning to atthaṃ √gam (go down or out). As I discussed above, unlike Wynne, the commentary, Norman, Hata, Nakamura, Collins and I all consider the phrase atthaṃ paleti as referring to the end of life. Let us review Wynne’s interpretation again. He regards atthaṃ paleti in Sn v. 1074 as the state of liberated sage in meditation, equaling to sītisiyā vimutto (pa¯da c, v. 1073), which is the mental state of the Buddha himself. His reasoning is understandable, because this sutta begins with the Buddha’s explanation of ākiñcaññāyatana and is followed by a discussion of meditation, such as satimant, saññāvimokha and so on. Wynne (2007, p. 98) thinks that the Buddha did not answer Upasıva, stating, “For the Buddha, the issue is not in question because the state of living liberated person cannot be reckoned.”
Padas c + d in v. 1073 state, “in that very state he can be cool as being liberated, but does consciousness of such a person emerge?” (tatth’ eva so sītisiyā vimutto, bhavetha viññāṇaṃ tathāvidhassa.) Pj II and Nidd use cavetha (√cyu) in place of bhavetha (√bhū). In either case, this statement concerns transmigration, which implies life and death. Therefore, the Buddha can be seen as answering Upasıva’s question in the verses that follow his questions regarding the post-mortem state of the viññāṇa (pada d, v. 1073).
However, the Buddha’s answer was not a direct answer. He does not mention viññāṇa at all. Instead, he explains that the muni disappears when he is released from name-and-body (Sn v. 1074). Therefore, there is no way of knowing exactly from this sutta if viññāṇa emerges at and after the end of muni’s life. Based on the other example (Sn v. 1037) described above, it can be said that nāma-and-rūpa is stopped (upa √rudh) when viññāṇa ceases (nirodha). Accordingly, it implies the post-mortem state of one who has attained nibbāna.
Although Wynne (Ibid., p. 91) backs up his argument by citing It 6931 as “the only other occurrence of metaphor of ‘going out’ in the Suttapiṭaka (i.e. attham plus a verb meaning ‘to go’),” I cannot agree with his interpretation of atthaṃ paleti as “the state of a person liberated in life.” As shown below, the sutta is most likely describing of the end of life.
It 69 (pp. 57–58)
yassa rāgo ca doso ca avijjā ca virājitā / so-maṃ samuddaṃ sagahaṃ sarakkhasaṃ ūmibhayaṃ duttaraṃ accatāri // saṅgātigo maccujaho nirūpadhi pahāsi dukkhaṃ apunabhavāya / atthaṅgato so na pamāṇam eti amohayi maccurājan-ti brūmīti //
Wynne’s translation (2007, p. 91)
For whomever passion, aversion and ignorance have faded away, he has crossed over this ocean with its crocodiles [and] demons, with its dangerous waves, which is hard to cross over. He has overcome attachment, conquered death, and is without acquisitions; he has abandoned suffering, for the sake of no further rebecoming. ‘Gone out’ (atthaṅgato). He cannot be defined (na pamāṇam eti), and has confused the King of death, I say.
The commentary (It-a, II, p. 38) explains this verse in two ways: one glossing rāga, passion or lust, as the example of what has gone out, and the other explaining that the arhat goes down, which is reckoned as nibbāna without fuel (anupādisesanibbāna-saṃkhātaṃ atthaṃ gato so arahā). In this sense, it is possible to interpret this verse like Wynne claims according to the former gloss of the commentary
However, grammatically speaking, only muni and so (he) can be the subject of Sn v. 1074 and It 69, respectively. In light of the above observation regarding the phrase attha(ṃ)-√gam, the expression that the muni / he goes down most likely connotes his physical disappearance or the breakdown of his physical body, meaning the end of life
It is much more plausible to regard the last part of this verse as the description of the future of the living sage at and after the end of life, in other words, as meaning, “Once (If or When) he goes down (ends his life), he cannot be measured. He has [already] deluded the king of death.” Based on the presence of the word maccu (death) in the last sentence, it appears that the last part of this verse refers to the end of life
Conclusion
In this paper, I have examined various interpretations of the Suttanipāta’s verse 1074 in the Upasīvamāṇavapucchā in an attempt to understand its original meaning. This verse describes the state of nibbāna using the metaphor of an extinguished fire, and I considered whether this verse refers to a state of nibbāna in the present life or at and after the end of life using a philological approach while focusing on the compound nāmakāya and the phrase atthaṃ paleti. After reviewing the text’s commentary and several scholars’ interpretations of this verse in detail, I explored other usages nāmakāya and atthaṃ paleti.
There are multiple possible interpretations of the former: as dependent determinative (tatpuruṣa), descriptive determinative (karmadhāraya), and coordinative (dvandva). Based on my analysis of the compound in DN II p. 62 (the only other instance of it in Suttapiṭaka), as well as nāma, nāmarūpa, and kāya in Sn, I argued that in Sn v. 1074, nāma- in nāmakāya indicates “name” or “appellation” and -kāya in nāmakāya indicates “the physical body” of the muni. Therefore it appears that nāmakāya in Sn v. 1074 is a dvandva meaning “name-and-body,” and that nāmakāyā vimutto (meaning “release from what can be considered names and the physical body [of the muni]”) in Sn v. 1074 implies either a higher meditative state or nibbāna at and after the end of life. Then, noting that the phrase atthaṃ paleti has a similar meaning to atthaṃ √gam (go down or out), I discussed how the commentary allows for two interpretations: nibbāna in this life and nibbāna at and after the end of life. Most scholars understand this phrase to mean the post-mortem state of muni. In order for the phrase atthaṃ paleti to mean nibbāna in life, the subject in the verse grammatically needs to be part of a person to be calmed down or extinguished, such as rāga, passion or lust. In fact, grammatically speaking, the subject of Sn v. 1074 and that of the other example of this phrase in It 69 are undoubtedly a man. Moreover, based on close textual readings, I argued that this phrase likely is referring to the state of the muni, that is, nibbāna at and after the end of life
Accordingly, the translation of Sn v. 1074 should be as follows:
The Blessed One (Buddha) says, “Just as a flame which was put out by the force of wind, Upasıva, goes out (disappears) and can no longer be reckoned (is no longer expressible in words), just like so, in case that the sage of few words is released from name-andbody, he goes out (disappears) and can no longer be reckoned (is no longer expressible in words).”
This paper has presented an approach for textual studies in which the meaning of a Pali text is carefully considered through the close examination of the text itself as well as other contemporaneous texts while avoiding arbitrary judgments as much as possible. Nevertheless, it is not my intention to offer a definitive conclusion or deny other understandings in their entirety, as the multiple interpretations of Sn v. 1074 are certainly possible.
Comments
Post a Comment