SN45.170 , Does Craving sutta is missing?

Does Craving sutta is missing?

1 Like

It’s there for me:

When you say “missing” what exactly do you experience when you click on the link.

One thing that often works is clearing your browser cache by Ctrl Shift R.

Thanks for your reply but in the book and a translation of Bhante Sujato on SuttaCentral show 2 suttas (Craving and Thirst)

1 Like

Oh, sorry. I forgot about that. It’s a strange problem with numbering, I think. Only about 1/3 of Bhante Bodhi’s translations are on SuttaCentral, so that probably wasn’t included. Bhante @Sujato?

1 Like

It’s strange that under one number SN 45.170, two Suttas are indeed shown in Bhante Sujato’s translation.

1 Like

This is a dubiously doubled sutta. Ven Bodhi notes:

This sutta is not found in Se or in SS. Be numbers it separately, Ee does not. I here follow the latter. Both connect the “based upon seclusion” refrain with §170 (10) and the other three refrains with §170 (11). This suggests the two are actually one sutta elaborated by way of alternative forms of the same word, both taṇhā and tasinā being Pāli equivalents of Skt tṛṣṇā.

When it comes to the tasina variant, it’s a very confusing situation!

  • PTS includes it, noting that it is found in Burmese but not Sinhalese manuscripts. However it does not assign it a separate number, treating it as a mere appendix to the previous.
  • The Burmese editions, including the Mahasangiti upon which SuttaCentral is based, include it and assign it a separate number.
  • The Sinhalese manuscripts do not include it.
  • However the Buddha Jayanthi spells out the tanha version in no less than sixteen variants.
  • The commentary is silent, merely saying that “the rest is clear”, which is absolutely not the case!
  • The uddanas that summarize the contents of each vagga follow the respective editions: PTS and Burmese editions mention tasina, the BJT does not.

The Burmese has the most rational arrangement: include it as a separate sutta. However we follow Ven Bodhi and the PTS for the sake of consistency with them.

As to whether this should be regarded as an original text, I don’t think so.

  • It is the eleventh sutta of the vagga, and vaggas usually have ten suttas.
  • The use of the word tasinā is unusual, and I believe unique, in a doctrinal context. Elsewhere it is only found in Dhp 342–3, where it is spelled differently (tasiṇā). Of course we expect unusual usages in poetry. But the peyyala sections stick very rigidly to stock terms.
  • Further, if it were in the edition before the commentator, it would likely have occasioned a mention.

I think that most likely it began life as a marginal note or some-such, and became included in the text by a careless copyist. The uddanas were adapted to follow suit. Note that in the Mahasangiti edition, the uddanas of the following samyuttas, which instantiate the same pattern of repetitions, include tasina, even though it is not in the text. Presumably it was mechanically copied once the mistake was introduced.


Thanks very much Bhante but my English is not good, I will try.


Please feel free to ask anything! :pray:

1 Like

Sādhu Sādhu Sādhu, may I ask in Thai?

1 Like

Yes you can, but I’ll have to rely on Google translate to help, as my Thai is very rusty! And I won’t be able to reply in Thai.

1 Like