Why doesn't the Buddha give credit to the first senior mendicant in AN 6.61

Discussion
1

In AN 6.61 a group of senior mendicants try to answer the following question:

“Reverends, this was said by the Buddha in ‘The Way to the Beyond’, in ‘The Questions of Metteyya’:
“vuttamidaṁ, āvuso, bhagavatā pārāyane metteyyapañhe:

‘The sage has known both ends,
‘Yo ubhonte viditvāna,
and is not stuck in the middle.
majjhe mantā na lippati;
He is a great man, I declare,
Taṁ brūmi mahāpurisoti,
he has escaped the seamstress here.’
sodha sibbini maccagā’”ti.

But what is one end? What’s the second end? What’s the middle? And who is the seamstress?”
“Katamo nu kho, āvuso, eko anto, katamo dutiyo anto, kiṁ majjhe, kā sibbinī”ti?

The first one replies:

“Contact, reverends, is one end. The origin of contact is the second end. The cessation of contact is the middle. And craving is the seamstress,
“phasso kho, āvuso, eko anto, phassasamudayo dutiyo anto, phassanirodho majjhe, taṇhā sibbinī;
for craving weaves one to being reborn in one state of existence or another.
taṇhā hi naṁ sibbati tassa tasseva bhavassa abhinibbattiyā.
That’s how a mendicant directly knows what should be directly known and completely understands what should be completely understood. Knowing and understanding thus they make an end of suffering in this very life.”
Ettāvatā kho, āvuso, bhikkhu abhiññeyyaṁ abhijānāti, pariññeyyaṁ parijānāti, abhiññeyyaṁ abhijānanto pariññeyyaṁ parijānanto diṭṭheva dhamme dukkhassantakaro hotī”ti.

The Buddha says:

“Contact, mendicants, is one end. The origin of contact is the second end. The cessation of contact is the middle. And craving is the seamstress,
“phasso kho, bhikkhave, eko anto, phassasamudayo dutiyo anto, phassanirodho majjhe, taṇhā sibbinī;
for craving weaves one to being reborn in one state of existence or another.
taṇhā hi naṁ sibbati tassa tasseva bhavassa abhinibbattiyā.
That’s how a mendicant directly knows what should be directly known and completely understands what should be completely understood. Knowing and understanding thus they make an end of suffering in this very life.”
Ettāvatā kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu abhiññeyyaṁ abhijānāti, pariññeyyaṁ parijānāti, abhiññeyyaṁ abhijānanto pariññeyyaṁ parijānanto diṭṭheva dhamme dukkhassantakaro hotī”ti.

Except for the fact that the mendicant uses the term reverends and the Buddha used the term mendicants, There answers are identical in English and Pali. But the Buddha does not acknowledge that the first mendicant got it right.

Was a mistake made in a scriptorium?

1 Like
2

I’ll wager that the Buddha was supposed to say the self is in the middle.

3

I once looked at the parallel and if I remember correctly the parallel in Chinese only has five answers, the first one is missing. So only the Buddha has that answer.

4

But something isn’t kosher here, do we agree?

5

It’s implicit, not stated but intended to indicate that although all replies are correct, the first is the one the Buddha had in mind, although to say so directly would be an unwanted reinforcement of self. Another case is nibbana which is implicit in all the Buddha’s teachings but rarely stated.

1 Like
6

Or we can acknowledge a mistake was made somewhere.

7

Ahh, that would make sense.

1 Like
8

I cannot find the Chinese parallel here. Please provide a link to it if it exits in English.

9

I think maybe it’s this one SA 1164

In the Chinese version, the Buddha didn’t say “The cessation of contact is the middle”. Instead, it seems that the Buddha said “The feeling is the middle”

1 Like
10

The feeling of what?

11

Seems referring to feeling as among the links of dependent origination

1 Like
12

I would have thought it was the feeling of self. At least for the I unenlightened. For the enlightened it would be the cessation of contact, but the enlightened one is not the one ensnared.

13

I think two moments of contact in mind at the same time will be experienced like a movie rather than a snapshot giving the sense of being a persistent self in the world. That is, stuck in the middle.

Please let us know if anything more comes out of your research or if anyone knows of Chinese to English translation that’s available even if it needs to be purchased.

14

That’s true. I’d read it that way. This is fairly typical “noise” that we see in parallels. After a person compares enough parallels, it all blurs a bit. The exact wording is somewhat arbitrary, really, but these two sutras are saying the same thing.

1 Like
15

@cdpatton, Is that feeling as in touch or contact?

16

There’s no context to say one way or the other in the passage. I would assume contact is generic for any sensory contact. Feeling typically means the three feelings that arise from any sensory contact.

1 Like
17

If it is feeling than I could see the sequence being: contact, feeling, clinging for the unenlightened, but contact, feeling, arising of contact for the enlightened seems to be missing a cessation of contact that would imply the enlightened has a complete understanding of contact.

I read it as for the I unenlightened: contact, contact, The arising of contact and contact, cessation of contact, arising of contact for the enlightened so the ends would be the same for both and the enlightened would have complete understanding of contact.

18

If we go back to the verse, it says that by knowing two extremes one becomes forever detached in the middle. So, then knowing contact and the arising of contact, the enlightened is forever detached from feeling (in the Sarvastivada version). For the Theravada version, one is detached (or not stuck to) the cessation of contact. I’m not sure what exactly that means, other than not being nihilistic and wishing for contact to cease, maybe?

1 Like
19

Being stuck in the cessation of contact sounds like the nibanna. Being stuck in contact is sounds like a persistent self in the world.

I really think cessation of contact being in the middle is a mistake proven by the nonsensicalness of the meanings for both unenlightened and enlightened.

There is also the fact that the first mendicant and the Buddha answer the question the same way.

20

It’s very possible. I’d be curious to know if there’s any commentary in Pali, just to see if there’s a rationale that isn’t obvious to us.

There are a few other oddities when I look at the two more closely. Let’s put them into a table:

AN 6.61 SA 1164
1. Contact, its origin, cessation 6. Contact, its origin, feeling
2. Past, future, present 2. Past, future, present
3. Pleasant, painful, neutral feeling 3. Pleasant, painful, neutral feeling
4. Name, form, consciousness
5. Inner sense fields, outer sense fields, consciousness 1. Inner sense fields, outer sense fields, feeling
6. Identity, its origin, its cessation 5. Identity, its origin, [missing]
4. Existence, its origin, feeling

Something I notice is the Pali has consciousness and cessation as the “middle” in several cases, which are not in the Chinese. On the other hand, the Chinese has feeling as the “middle” of several of them. So, they both have a certain bias taking place. Items 2 & 3 are exact matches, however, maybe the original sutra showing through.

4 Likes