Venerable @Vimala also tried an analysis on the age of texts, via the length of words:
All these are just initial steps to check out the terrain, before definitive conclusions can be drawn. But we have to start somewhere!
2 Likes
It’s a good point. Sometimes you learn the most from the people you disagree with.
Also a valid activity!
2 Likes
This is funny, I tried that (just divided the number of characters by the number of words in each file) but I couldn’t see a striking difference (the scope was much narrower than in Ven. Vimala’s study though). Also, I found the AWL to be around 10, but I didn’t try to remove all the headers, and there can be a lot of them in DN.
I will have a closer look at Ven. Vimala’s work.
3 Likes
What I found is that the AWL can be used as an indicator, but no more than an indicator, of the relative age of entire collections. It does not work well on individual suttas because there are also other factors involved; it needs to have a considerable large sample of text for it to be more reliable.
Next to the PDF and charts as Sabbamitta mentioned above, here are some of the raw outputdata if you want to have a look at it yourself:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WwmdSCC9SHwDN--LYK5r4wTB_iYJxjll/view?usp=sharing
2 Likes
Regarding DN/DA (長阿含), Ven. Yin Shun states it was developed and expanded from the Geya (祇夜) anga portion of SA/SN. The following is the quotation, in Chapter 10, Section 4, from the book The Formation of Early Buddhist Texts by Ven. Yin Shun:
第四節 結說
經上來的比對研究，「四阿含」（「四部」）的成立，可得到幾點明確的認識。1.佛法的結集，起初是「修多羅」，次為「祇夜」、「記說」——「弟子所說」、「如來所說」。這三部分，為組成「雜阿含」（起初應泛稱「相應教」）的組成部分。「弟子所說」與「如來所說」，是附編於「蘊」、「處」、「因緣」、「菩提分法」——四類以下的。這是第一結集階段。
在「雜阿含」三部分的集成過程中，集成以後，都可能因經文的傳出而編入，文句也逐漸長起來了。
佛教界稟承佛法的宗本——「修多羅」，經「弟子所說」的學風，而展開法義的分別、抉擇、闡發、論定，形成了好多經典。結集者結集起來，就是「中阿含」；這是以僧伽、比丘為重的，對內的。
將分別抉擇的成果，對外道、婆羅門，而表揚佛是正等覺者，法是善說者，適應天、魔、梵——世俗的宗教意識，與「祇夜」精神相呼應的，集為「長阿含」。
「雜」、「中」、「長」，依文句的長短而得名。
以（弟子所說）「如來所說」為主，以增一法而進行類集，《如是語》與《本事經》的形成，成為「九分教」之一，還在「中」、「長」——二部成立以前。
但為了便於誦持，著重於一般信眾的教化，廢去「傳說」及「重頌」的形式，而進行擴大的「增壹阿含」的編集，應該比「長阿含」更遲一些。
以「雜阿含」為本而次第形成四部阿含，《瑜伽師地論》的傳說，不失為正確的說明！近代的研究者，過分重視巴利文（Pāli）；依巴利文聖典，不能發見四部阿含集成的真相。
即使以「雜阿含」的原形為最古，而不能理解為三部分（「修多羅」、「祇夜」、「記說」）的合成；不知三部分的特性，與三部阿含形成的關係，也就不能理解依「雜阿含」而次第形成四部的過程。
2 Likes
In this statement, Ven. Yin Shun suggests:
Even if the original form of SA/SN is being considered the most ancient/earliest, it does not mean one is able to understand SA/SN is a synthesis of the three parts/aṅgas (sūtra, geya, vyākaraṇa). Without knowing the characteristics of the three aṅgas and their connection with the formation of the other three Agamas/Nikayas (MA/MN, DA/DN, EA/AN), it is impossible to understand the process of forming the four Agamas/Nikayas according to SA/SN.
1 Like
Hi @silence ! you may be interested in some patterns I have come across in looking for ways to provoke @sujato in relation to his Gist theory 
the Nikayas are approximately
DN: 173,906
MN: 294,643
SN: 357,384
AN: 388,889
words long.
comparing the Nikayas for doctrinal terms in the Digital Pali Dictionary’s frequency tool gives:
arahant vs ariya:
arahant
DN: 367
MN: 336
SN: 255
AN: 340
ariya
DN: 109
MN: 282
SN: 589
AN: 265
So as a taster we have DN mentioning arahant more than 3 times as frequently as it mentions ariya, and mentioning arahant more often than the almost twice as long SN, while SN mentions ariya twice as often as it does arahant, mentioning ariya almost six times as often as the half as long DN.
In fact SN is the only Nikaya to mention arahants less than 300 times.
SN mentions ariya well over 200 times more often than the similarly long AN.
SN is the only Nikaya to mention ariya more often than arahant.
kamma/jhāna vs satipaṭṭhāna/upādānakkhandha/anatta:
kamma
DN: 142
MN 279
SN 73
AN 442
Here we see a stark absense of kamma from SN compared to any of the other nikayas, with it mentioning kamma half as often as the half as long DN, and one sixth as often as AN.
jhāna
DN: 119
MN: 235
SN: 180
AN: 307
Here we see SN mentioning jhāna with significantly less frequency than the other 3 Nikayas.
satipaṭṭhāna
DN: 22
MN: 34
SN: 185
AN: 45
Here we see SN mentioning satipaṭṭhāna much more frequently than the other nikayas, 4 times as much as the similarly long AN for example, and if we control for the nearly identical foundations of mindfulness suttas in MN and DN, and the 37 aides list which merely enumerates topics, then the contrast is even higher.
SN is the only Nikaya that mentions satipaṭṭhāna more often than jhāna.
upādānakkhandha
DN: 7
MN: 23
SN: 61
AN: 10
As Pande points out the occurances of upādānakkhandha in DN are all pretty palpably late, so the difference here is again even more stark than the raw numbers indicate.
anatta
DN: 17
MN: 66
SN: 215
AN: 24
Here again, SN mentions anatta almost ten times as often as the similarly long AN.
āsava vs avijjā
āsava
DN: 49
MN: 202
SN: 138
AN: 432
avijjā
DN: 4
MN: 42
SN: 157
AN: 44
Here again we see a remarkable and striking inverse, with DN mentioning āsava ten times more often than it mentions avijjā, and all the other 3 Nikayas mentioning āsava more often than avijjā, but SN the reverse, mentioning avijjā more often than āsava.
I have given just a few doctrinal terms but I am sure more examples of these kinds of distribution could be given.
I also think that dividing MN into 2 sections, perhaps into a section of the first 30 and a section of the last 120 would make the numbers even more glaring.
My impression is that as DN/MN grew, new suttas where added to MN that began to degrade in quality, like the very messy MN102 for example, and DN suttas kept getting re-written with more and more supernatural hyperbole, so a need was felt to “get back to the fundamentals” and thus SN was born, eventually providing the source for the later abbidhamma project.
Anyway, I am slowly working on an essay about it entitled “SN is different”, but thought I would share some of my bits and pieces with you as I am partly inspired by Pande and also aspire to do much more sophisticated statistical analysis of the texts one day when I learn how to use a computer properly
Metta
1 Like
Interesting! It would be great to follow through on some of these correlations, and assess them in context.
It’s probably possible to do something similar with the Agamas, as they tend to translate technical terms reasonably consistently.
Computers are dumb! Something like this should work:
- MN: 43
1 Like
just on kamma, using DPR to separate out the sagatha vagga makes the anti-kamma leaning of the prose portion of the samyutta even stronger, Digital Pali Reader has a different engine to Digital Pali Dictionary so the numbers look a bit different, but the pattern is the same;
Bodhi’s translation’s page numbers for the sections;
sagathavagga 59 - 341 282
nidanavagga 505 - 725 220
khandavagga 827 - 1043 216
salayatanavagga 1109 - 1397 288
mahavagga 1461 - 1882 421
so sagatha vagga is 282 pages out of 1427
and
47 of 185 occurrences of kamma related words in SN in the Digital Pali Reader occur in the Sagathavagga, so more than a quarter of the occurrences in less than a fifth of the book.
So if we break up SN into SSN (for sagatha SN) and PSN (for prose SN) we get:
DN: 195
MN: 365
SSN: 47
PSN: 138
AN: 555
DPR includes all words with kamma in them, DPD tries to just give kamma and its variations, not just any word with the string, so the numbers are different, but it is still a striking disparity, especially considering that it is still very noticeable even when the non-technical uses of kamma, which we might expect to be more or less evenly distributed, are left in.
Anyway, I hope to find some time to go a bit deeper in the next few months when I have some more substantial time off work.
Metta.
Just one more thing, I was attempting to do some research to help explain the Yamaka Sutta raised in this thread:
Before I realised that the OP was perhaps pulling our collective leg a little and was not in fact seeking info on that rather technical sutta but wanting to have a broader conversation about personal practice and comparative religion, but whatever, I wanted to find the actually expanded version of
“So you should truly see …
“Tasmātiha …pe…
Seeing this …
evaṁ passaṁ …pe…
They understand: ‘… there is no return to any state of existence.’
nāparaṁ itthattāyāti pajānāti.
SN22.85
and so I pasted nāparaṃ itthattāyāti pajānātīti into Digital Pāli Reader and got:
DN: 0
MN: 0
SN: 68
AN: 0
So again, my pali is non existent and I am sure there is the phrase “no more coming into any state of being” in the other nikayas, so after scratching my head quite a bit I finally figured out there’s a “double quote” (I don’t know the technical term) of titi at the end of the string, I had copied it from Sn22.82 by mistake, but still, this particular double quote occurs exclusively in SN!
This happens to me a LOT when I use Digital Pāli Reader and now also https://digitalpalidictionary.github.io/ (and as a side note the striking relationship between SN and the Vibangha is also very evident in DPD when looking at word frequencies, as is the similarity with what the DPD calls Khuddaka Nikāya 3 consisting of Mahāniddesapāḷi, Cūḷaniddesapāḷi, Paṭisambhidāmaggapāḷi, Nettippakaraṇapāḷi, Milindapañhapāḷi, Peṭakopadesapāḷi.)
Anyway, returning to “there is no return” if we search nāparaṃ itthattāyāti pajānā
we end up with results for
nāparaṃ itthattāyāti pajānāti 13 times, 8 times in DN, 1 time in MN, 3 times in SN, 1 time in AN
nāparaṃ itthattāyāti pajānātīti 67 times ALL in SN
nāparaṃ itthattāyāti pajānātīti.pañcamaṃ 1 time (in SN)
nāparaṃ itthattāyāti pajānāmāti 1 time in SN and
nāparaṃ itthattāyāti pajānāmīti 19 times, 1 time in MN, 5 times in SN, 13 times in AN (all in AN9 and AN10)
So it LOOKS like the original phrase is in DN, and is quoted (hence the titi) in SN 68 times. (plus a variant in AN9 and 10)
this seems like another little bit of evidence that DN precedes SN in this case.
Anyone who has better knowledge of the pali may have a much simpler explanation than I have, and I would welcome it while I wait for my online pali class to begin
Metta.
well, might as well add a few more bits and pieces here;
in the DN context we have this “no more return” occuring in the context of 4 jhanas (no immaterial attainments) and projecting the mind towards knowledge and vision, thus;
When their mind has become immersed in samādhi like this—purified, bright, flawless, rid of corruptions, pliable, workable, steady, and imperturbable—they extend it and project it toward knowledge and vision.
So evaṁ samāhite citte parisuddhe pariyodāte anaṅgaṇe vigatūpakkilese mudubhūte kammaniye ṭhite āneñjappatte ñāṇadassanāya cittaṁ abhinīharati abhininnāmeti …pe…
This pertains to their knowledge. …
idampissa hoti vijjāya …pe…
They understand: ‘There is no return to any state of existence.’
nāparaṁ itthattāyāti pajānāti,
This pertains to their knowledge.
idampissa hoti vijjāya.
This is that knowledge.
Ayaṁ kho sā, ambaṭṭha, vijjā.
DN3
and
“It’s when a Realized One arises in the world, perfected, a fully awakened Buddha …
“idha, brāhmaṇa, tathāgato loke uppajjati arahaṁ sammāsambuddho …pe…
That’s how a mendicant is accomplished in ethics.
Evaṁ kho, brāhmaṇa, bhikkhu sīlasampanno hoti.
This, brahmin, is that ethical conduct. …
Idaṁ kho taṁ, brāhmaṇa, sīlaṁ …pe…
They enter and remain in the first absorption …
paṭhamaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati …
second absorption …
dutiyaṁ jhānaṁ …
third absorption …
tatiyaṁ jhānaṁ …
fourth absorption …
catutthaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati …pe…
They extend and project the mind toward knowledge and vision …
ñāṇadassanāya cittaṁ abhinīharati, abhininnāmeti …pe…
This pertains to their wisdom. …
Idampissa hoti paññāya …pe…
They understand: ‘… there is no return to any state of existence.’
nāparaṁ itthattāyāti pajānāti.
This pertains to their wisdom.
Idampissa hoti paññāya
This, brahmin, is that wisdom.”
ayaṁ kho sā, brāhmaṇa, paññā”ti.
DN4
It’s when a Realized One arises in the world, perfected, a fully awakened Buddha …
“Idha, brāhmaṇa, tathāgato loke uppajjati arahaṁ sammāsambuddho …pe…
That’s how a mendicant is accomplished in ethics. …
Evaṁ kho, brāhmaṇa, bhikkhu sīlasampanno hoti …pe…
They enter and remain in the first absorption …
paṭhamaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati.
This sacrifice has fewer requirements and undertakings than the former, yet is more fruitful and beneficial. …
Ayaṁ kho, brāhmaṇa, yañño purimehi yaññehi appaṭṭhataro ca appasamārambhataro ca mahapphalataro ca mahānisaṁsataro ca …pe…They enter and remain in the second absorption …
Dutiyaṁ jhānaṁ …
third absorption …
tatiyaṁ jhānaṁ …
fourth absorption.
catutthaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati.
This sacrifice has fewer requirements and undertakings than the former, yet is more fruitful and beneficial. …
Ayampi kho, brāhmaṇa, yañño purimehi yaññehi appaṭṭhataro ca appasamārambhataro ca mahapphalataro ca mahānisaṁsataro cāti. …pe…They extend and project the mind toward knowledge and vision …
Ñāṇadassanāya cittaṁ abhinīharati abhininnāmeti …
This sacrifice has fewer requirements and undertakings than the former, yet is more fruitful and beneficial.
ayampi kho, brāhmaṇa, yañño purimehi yaññehi appaṭṭhataro ca appasamārambhataro ca mahapphalataro ca mahānisaṁsataro ca …pe…They understand: ‘… there is no return to any state of existence.’
nāparaṁ itthattāyāti pajānāti.
This sacrifice has fewer requirements and undertakings than the former, yet is more fruitful and beneficial.
Ayampi kho, brāhmaṇa, yañño purimehi yaññehi appaṭṭhataro ca appasamārambhataro ca mahapphalataro ca mahānisaṁsataro ca.
And, brahmin, there is no other accomplishment of sacrifice which is better and finer than this.”
Imāya ca, brāhmaṇa, yaññasampadāya aññā yaññasampadā uttaritarā vā paṇītatarā vā natthī”ti.
DN5
etc,
whereas, continuing my theme of kamma/jhana vs aggregates/not-self in DN vs SN, in SN by far the bulk of “there is no return” is places at the end of an enumeration of the aggregates formula SN22 giving 31 of the 77 occurrences in that Nikaya, but even outside of SN22 we have;
At Sāvatthī.
Sāvatthinidānaṁ.Seated to one side, Venerable Rādha said to the Buddha:
Ekamantaṁ nisinno kho āyasmā rādho bhagavantaṁ etadavoca:“Sir, they speak of this thing called ‘Māra-like nature’.
“‘māradhammo, māradhammo’ti, bhante, vuccati.
What is a Māra-like nature?”
Katamo nu kho, bhante, māradhammo”ti?“Rādha, form has a Māra-like nature. Feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness have a Māra-like nature.
“Rūpaṁ kho, rādha, māradhammo, vedanā māradhammo, saññā māradhammo, saṅkhārā māradhammo, viññāṇaṁ māradhammo.Seeing this …
Evaṁ passaṁ …pe…
They understand: ‘… there is no return to any state of existence.’”
nāparaṁ itthattāyāti pajānātī”ti.
SN23.12
At Sāvatthī.
Sāvatthinidānaṁ.Seated to one side, Venerable Rādha said to the Buddha:
Ekamantaṁ nisinno kho āyasmā rādho bhagavantaṁ etadavoca:“Sir, they speak of this thing called ‘impermanence’.
“‘aniccaṁ, aniccan’ti, bhante, vuccati.
What is impermanence?”
Katamaṁ nu kho, bhante, aniccan”ti?“Rādha, form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are impermanent.
“Rūpaṁ kho, rādha, aniccaṁ, vedanā aniccā, saññā aniccā, saṅkhārā aniccā, viññāṇaṁ aniccaṁ.Seeing this …
Evaṁ passaṁ …pe…
They understand: ‘… there is no return to any state of existence.’”
nāparaṁ itthattāyāti pajānātī”ti.
SN23.13
With all of SN23 being repetitions like the above.
SN24 is the same with just one sutta given and the rest to be done “like in the last chapter”
SN35 switches it up and uses the 6 elements formulae instead of the 5 aggregates, again simply appending the “there is no return” quotation within a quotation at the end.
If you have your findings all in a spreadsheet, I would love to see it. Also, are you searching to see what concepts appear together in the same suttas? I have started, but have not gotten far in the latter.
I will be working on putting something together that summarises my argument and evidence in the coming couple of months.
The main word frequency ones are as above, but I may uncover more going forward, I will post it all as an new thread in the essay topic when it’s ready.
Metta
1 Like
One other one that’s not in the above list is saḷāyatan which in DPR gives:
DN: 6 (ALL in DN14)
MN: 26 (in MN9 MN11 nine times in MN38 then MN115 MN121 MN137 MN142 MN149 MN152)
SN: 80 times (all bar 9 occurrences in SN12)
AN: 4 times (all bar one occurrence in AN3.62 the other occurrence being in AN10.92)
it occurs once in the VInaya, 4 times in the Udana, and not at all in any of the other early books.
using the Digital Pali Dictionary gives:
Vinaya Pārājika 0
Vinaya Pācittiya 0
Vinaya Mahāvagga 1
Vinaya Cūḷavagga 0
Vinaya Parivāra 0
Sutta Dīgha Nikāya 7
Sutta Majjhima Nikāya 11
Sutta Saṃyutta Nikāya 66
Sutta Aṅguttara Nikāya 3
Sutta Khuddaka Nikāya 1 2
Sutta Khuddaka Nikāya 2 0
Sutta Khuddaka Nikāya 3 36
Abhidhamma Dhammasaṅgaṇī 1
Abhidhamma Vibhaṅga 23
Abhidhamma Dhātukathā 6
Abhidhamma Puggalapaññatti 0
Abhidhamma Kathāvatthu 7
Abhidhamma Yamaka 0
Abhidhamma Paṭṭhāna 0
this pattern, of SN having a lot of mentions and then Sutta Khuddaka Nikāya 3 having a lot, and Abhidhamma Vibhaṅga having a lot is quite characteristic.
So to summerise, saḷāyatan appears to cluster in later suttas (numerically speaking) in MN and in SN12 and to basically be absent from DN, the VInaya and the early KN books, except where it occasionally occurs in the context of the idappaccayatāpaṭiccasamuppādo
All this seems to me to allow one to make an argument that several of the more “analytic” and “philosophical” doctrines (the aggregates, the sense bases) have their center of gravity in the final third of MN and in SN, and that SN shows an affinity with the later books of KN and with the abbhidhamma Vibhanga.
This as least makes it not unthinkable that SN reflects a period of Buddhism that moved from a more… passionate framing of kamma and jhana to a dryer and more analytic presentation centering around aggregates and not-self.
Anyway, my last day at work for the year is this Thursday coming, and after than I intend to try and write up my arguments more fully, so until then…
Metta!
1 Like
Oh wait, all the occurrences in SN bar 1 are in SN12 (all the other occurrences are in end bits like Saḷāyatanavagge catutthapaṇṇāsako samatto
So the only occurrence of the term outside SN12 occurs at SN35.117
(I should just say, I am aware that the term and the idea are two different things, and there are plenty of suttas with the eye, the ear, etc etc…)
SN35.117 is interesting in that it starts with the Buddha talking about pañca kāmaguṇā and then the Buddha goes away to meditate and the monks ask Ananda to explain what was said and Ananda says saḷāyatana the monks then go back to the Buddha and the Buddha says Ananda explained correctly.
this is something we see a lot in the suttas. I will leave it to the astute to ponder why.
Metta
So what? What is your conclusion?
So my conclusion is that the term is rare apart from the last part of MN and SN12.
Maybe to bring out a contrast it’s helpful to look at a related example,
pañca kāmaguṇ:
DN: 6
MN: 15
SN: 15
AN: 5
saḷāyatan:
DN: 6
MN: 26
SN: 80
AN: 4
(pañcakāmaguṇ provides 1 more occurance in each of DN, MN and SN)
…I have been trying to figure out a proxy to help capture the formulae of the form the eye and sights, the ear and sounds etc… because they exhibit so much diversity in terms of content it’s not possible simply to put wildcards in, but anyway, while tinkering I examined:
cakkhuviññāṇa
and got
DN: 3 (all in DN22 and DN33)
MN: 31
SN: 86
AN: 0
(in MN, 6 occurrences are in MN1-99 vs 25 occurrences in MN100-152, this again is a fairly charecteristic pattern in the searches i am doing, with the “SN style” terms clustering in the latter third of MN compared to the first two thirds.)
(further, cakkhuviññāṇa in the first 2 thirds of MN occurs first in MN9, a teaching of Sariputta, next in MN10 a sutta widely regarded to emanate from SN, next in MN18, in the part of the sutta taught by Mahākaccāna rather than the part spoken by the Buddha, and so we don’t have this technical term put directly into the mouth of the buddha (granting the SN origin of MN10) until MN38, which is a composite of several teachings strung together in relation to Sati’s heresy)
(and just a little bit more on MN38, the sutta is quite clearly a composite, providing many separate teachings as examples of refutations for Sati’s heresy, one of which involves parittacetaso the “heart restricted” as in “When they see a sight with their eyes, if it’s pleasant they desire it, but if it’s unpleasant they dislike it. They live with mindfulness of the body unestablished and their heart restricted.”
this word occurs only in MN38 and SN35, and it’s first occurrence in SN35 (at SN35.132 it is taught not by the Buddha, but by Mahākaccāna ! it next occurs at SN35.243 taught by Mahāmoggallāna, and in the final 2 occurrences (at SN35.244 and SN35.247) it is unattributed.
contrast this with for example another phrase that occurs in MN38 tathāgato loke uppajjati this is attested in all 4 nikayas, in multiple suttas in multiple vaggas in each case.
other parts of the restricted heart pericope exhibit strange behaviours, cetovimuttiṃ paññāvimuttiṃ yathābhūtaṃ occurs in one other place in MN, at MN78, but it is put in the mouth of the builder Pañcakaṅga where he says;
It’s when a mendicant behaves ethically, but they don’t identify with their ethical behavior. Idha, thapati, bhikkhu sīlavā hoti no ca sīlamayo, And they truly understand the freedom of heart and freedom by wisdom where these skillful behaviors cease without anything left over. tañca cetovimuttiṁ paññāvimuttiṁ yathābhūtaṁ pajānāti; yatthassa te kusalā sīlā aparisesā nirujjhanti.
it then gets repeated in AN5 and AN10, as an ethics teaching, but the whole pericope seems to eminate on its own from SN35.132, in the mouth of Mahākaccāna, it is not found in all 4 NIkayas)
addendum 6/11/22:
another example has come up, I have been trying to get a handle on the “undeclared points” and thought to search for moghamaññan "other ideas are silly, with moghama on DPR got
DN: 13
MN: 33
SN: 0
AN: 21
this is not a case of me looking through word lists for anything that jumps out about SN, this is me taking a particular topic I am interested in, in this case the undeclared points, and trying to use DPR to find all the occurances of a particular doctrinal topic, and once again finding that SN sticks out as different from the other 3 principle Nikayas. It just keeps happening.
another example; in trying to get a handle on the “undeclared points” i.e at MN72 I thought to search for moghamaññan, “other opinions are silly” on DPR so I used moghama and got:
DN: 13
MN: 33
SN: 0
AN: 21
once again, I am not laboriously looking through word lists hunting for instances where the term is lacking in SN, rather I am looking into a topic that interests me, the undeclared points, and finding, again, that SN sticks out like a sore thumb as different in tenor from the other 3 principle NIkayas with regards to some particular topic. It just keeps happening.
I should note that one counter-example has come up for me so far, again in relation to this undeclared points research; adhiccasamuppannaṃ arisen by chance or arisen without cause, which is strikingly absent from MN:
DN: 11
MN: 0
SN: 25
AN: 1
This is the only time I can think of where a topic has been present in both DN and SN but lacking in MN, fascinating.
Since moghamaññan ti appears sometimes as moghaṃ aññan ti it would be better to search for just mogha-. It’s not an especially common word and so shouldn’t take you inordinately long to investigate all the occurrences of it.
1 Like
Thanks @Dhammanando , I am waiting with baited breath to do Bhante @sujato 's pali course so i can figure these things out for myself and annoy him all the more with my mahayanish? ramblings
Although a quick search of that root shows no occurrences of the longer term either as a compound or as discrete words in SN.
a similar result is obtainable just using idameva saccaṃ
DN: 13
MN : 33
SN: 0
AN: 21
KN: 33
1 Like