SuttaCentral
Thank you! As if the Buddha would have spent a single jot of time teaching anything other than a direct path. It’s not a satisfactory meaning at all.
I couldn’t disagree more. Kevalin = “consummate one”, tathāgata = “Realized One”, nibbāna = extinguishment. None of these is less translatable or more emotive than, say, bilāra = “cat” or ratha = “chariot”.
In the Brihadaranyaka passage, ekāyana has an entirely clear and specific meaning, there is nothing mystical about it.
Is it possible other paths could be Paceka Buddhas path?
In the suttas, the only path to nibbana is the eightfold. Arahants, Buddhas, and Paccekabuddhas are simply different kinds of people following that path.
I think there is something to be said for the ordering of concepts here:
Ekāyano ayaṃ bhikkhave maggo - Monastics, there is a definite path
FOR
sattānaṃ visuddhiyā - for the purification of beings,
sokapariddavānaṃ - to make an end of pain and sadness
samatikkamāya dukkhadomanassānaṃ -to get past sorrow and lamentation
atthagamāya - to arrive at what is truly beneficial
ñāyassa adhigamāya - to gain insight pertaining to attainments
nibbānassa sacchikiriyāya - to witness Nibbāna
THAT IS:
yadidaṃ…
…cattāro satipaṭṭhānā.
The 4FoMindfulness
What I’m trying to say is the ekayana isn’t referring to the results (which come later), but is rather a simple adjective for the path itself.
Eka refers to ‘one’, not necessarily unified, IMO, but I’m not a pali scholar. Unified might have unification with Brahma as a nuance. It also suggests a samatha only path to most modern readers, but should include practices for the arising of insight as well (for satipatthana completes both samatha and vipassana).
with metta
What does this all mean? Can you point to a, preferably multiple English translations?
My translation:
For a translation of the whole text in context, as well as a traditional commentary, see:
Notice that, as just one example of the Buddhist flavor of this passage, the very next line introduces the famous simile of salt in water.
The idea of all rivers entering the great ocean and becoming one water is a simile found in EBTs. I think it is also a very widely used concept as well and quite possibly in many cultures. The author of the book (link above) brings in the lump of salt idea for Brahman and not the ancient text itself, as far as I can see, not having read this in-depth. Convergence has much more to do with non-duality with it its theistic connotations of Self and its union with Brahma. This isn’t a Buddhist concept. Its more the late merging with the eternal Buddha and Mahayana.
They also borrow the simile of a wave merging with the sea, upon nibbana, not knowing it is Brahmanism, similar to small self big Self concepts.
with metta
Thanks. I’ve just gone back and re-read “The Path of Convergence” section* in “A History of Mindfulness”, seeing how thoroughly the topic is covered there. (From first reading of the book I’d remembered the choice of “convergence” for ekayana, but not all this detail – the book is full of fascinating detail hardly fully grasped on 1st run-thru.)
*In the ebook digital version at pp. 208-218. I have also another digital version, that has less detailed table of contents, but uses endnotes and has appendices and an index, where that section is at pp.124-130.
My sense was, on first going through the ekayana issue more closely in reading V. Analayo’s Satipatthana books, that a better take on “one-going” was in as “going to one”, i.e. a path that has a single goal. As V. Sujato point out (in AHOM), the yana-as-suffix-idiom is putting the target as prefix, which would then be the (reversed) English phrase “going-to-one”. So “convergence” is a reasonable candidate as a single word. My preference, given some linguistic background, would be to prefer a challenging if awkward translation, to avoid having the reader settle too comfortably into “readable” English and miss the radical nature of the Buddha’s insights.
Gethin’s book – published in 1991 from his dissertation in 1987 – perhaps predates the current level of interest in detailed investigation the Vedic backdrop to the Buddha’s teaching (as in, eg, the work of A. Wynne or J. Jurewicz). In his section on “The ekayana formula” (pp.59-66) it appears his source for the Vedic/Upanishad information was a German Dictionary of Sanskrit from the late 19th-century. He does, too, in his English translation of the opening of the Satipatthana Sutta, use ‘ekayana’ rather than an English word, as per his comment later on that the term is best left untranslated. At that time (at least) his focus wasn’t translation of Pali texts into English, per se; he had less “skin in the game”, so to speak, than V. Analayo or V. Sujato in terms of addressing the general (English speaking) public.
(Back to the coverage in AHOM) In the Satipatthana context, I would have thought the one goal (ekayana) to be nibbana, as the ekayana magga is towards “the purification of beings” (sattānaṃ visuddhiyā); perhaps by association with Buddhaghosa’s book that would seem to refer to the ultimate goal. The analysis that samadhi is meant there instead (according to other usage in the sutta-s) is s/w surprising, though not unwelcome. There’s a lot of bias in modernist Buddhism (at least here in America) towards the “dry insight” approach, hand in hand with stigmatizing jhana practice (both as addicting, and because deep concentration can trigger psychotic reactions among the many followers who come to meditation for psychotherapy, i.e. harbor serious neuroses).
On the other hand too, having picked up somewhere (forgot where) that jhana can be seen as a mini-preview, a foretaste, albeit transient, of nibbana, I, for one, find it encouraging – allowing, in the words of Ayya Khema, that jhana is a necessary but not sufficient condition for awakening. Be it EBT based or whatever, it seems plausible that, as the Mahasi Sayadaw has taught, whether developed through jhana or through “vipassana khanika samadhi”, an extreme degree of samadhi necessarily occurs at the moment of magga-phala attainments.
just to add to this, the passage in BU 2.4.11 is repeated in BU 4.5.12
We find it again in the Chandogya Upanishad, CU 7.1.2, CU 7.1.4, CU 7.2.1, CU 7.7.1 in an a little bit more perplexing expression ‘ekāyanaṃ devavidyāṃ’ which Olivelle translates as ‘the science of gods’. He comments on this expression
The meaning of ekayana (lit., “point of convergence,” see CU 7.5.2) is uncertain (Horsch 1966, 37). The commentator Samkara’s interpretation as “statecraft” (nitisastra) is clearly anachronistic. I follow Faddegon (1926) in taking the term as the opposite of vakovakya (“speech and reply” or “dialogue”). “Science of the gods” (devavidya) is again a guess; the term may mean the knowledge of myths.
CU 7.5.2 is again more spiritual with
cittaṃ hy evaiṣām ekāyanam | cittam ātmā | cittaṃ pratiṣṭhā
- thought is the point of convergence of all these things; thought is their essence; and on thought they are based (Olivelle)
- Intelligence is the one mergent, Intelligence is the origin and Intelligence is the resting-place (Ganganath)
- All these therefore centre in will, consist of will, abide in will (Müller)
Apart from the two passages in BU and CU I couldn’t find the term in any veda, brahmana or upanisad. So I guess it’s a bit too much said that it represents a specific concept, certainly not a high metaphysical one. We have to assume a simple meaning, and I think the Upanisadic contexts allow a simple reading as ‘convergence’ or ‘meeting-point’.
Bhante @sujato what is the meaning of Yana?
Sorry if you already discussed it before.
To me, it sounds like “going” or “vehicle”
@Gabriel
In this context (ChUp.), Radhakrishnan has it even as “ethics & politics”. But it seems more like “ethics” - “the way to go”, so to speak.
Professional bias, I suppose 
एकायन ekāyana [ayana]
अयन ayana [act. इ √ i]
I don’t know if we should go as far as the Vājasaneyi Saṃhitā, as far as the meaning is concerned; but अयन ayana (also spelled áyana with an á), meaning “way” or “manner” - we would have the possible meaning of “one way”, or “one manner” for Eka + ayana= Ekāyana.
Would that be “ethical”, as in one of the meaning in ChUp? - as in “the one (only,) proper way to go”?
That is the question.
@SarathW1
In the above context, yes.
Who takes MN 10 (or DN 22) seriously anyway? - I mean as EBT.
It is āyana, from the root i in the sense of “going”. Yāna = “vehicle” is a different word. But the two were confused by some of the ancient Chinese translators (or perhaps in their source texts).
It make sense in Sinhalese grammar.
Eka+ayana=ekayana
Another matter to be considered is that Samma Sati (Satipathana) is only one aspect of Noble Eightfold Path. We can’t attain Nibbana by only practicing Satipathana. Satipatihana is the gradual development of other factors. So convergence makes more sense as Satipathana consolidate all other factors. However, as an English translation, it sounds better and easy to understand when it translate as “direct path”, “only path” etc.
Is it not ayana?
From the PED:
ayana:
(nt.) [Vedic ayana, fr. i] (a) “going”, road. – (b) going to, goal S V.167 (ekāyano maggo leading to one goal, a direct way), 185 (id.); DA I.313; Dāvs IV.40. — See also eka°.
So can’t it be eka+ayana?
In the PED the entry I get for āyana is
I wish to give my intuitive answer here on ‘ekayana’.
‘Eka’ means one, unified, singular, indivisible, primary as many words in Pali and Sanskrit has a range of meaning. ‘Yana’ means ‘vehicle’ or mode of transportation or movement from place to place.
IMHO ‘Ekayana’ - points to this body-mind-sense vehicle we all humans have in our spiritual journey on this Earth plane. This is the only vehicle we have for our Earth journey, so we need to protect and guard it and establish this ekayana (body-mind vehicle) from forgetfulness, restlessness and repeated wandering into samsara to the 4 frame/anchor of mindful-awareness. It does not matter what one calls himself/herself by faith or tradition in or outside Buddhism.
Samma sati establishes the condition for Samma Samadhi for this body-mind process so it can merge with the ocean of universal/cosmic consciousness (one taste of freedom) awakening to knowledge and vision of true Dhamma by relinquishing ‘I am’
Our body is made of stardusts (anything heavier than helium is).
See Rohitassa Sutta AN 4.45 @ SuttaCentral
"For it is in this fathom-long carcass with its perception and mind that I describe the world, its origin, its cessation, and the practice that leads to its cessation.
> The end of the world can never
> be reached by traveling.
> But without reaching the end of the world,
> there’s no release from suffering.
> So a [wise] person, understanding the world,
> Has completed the spiritual journey, and gone to the end of the world.
> A peaceful one, knowing the end of the world,
> does not hope for this world or the next.”
@ hope Bhante Sujato is agreeable to my change of [word].
More on our star connection. We're All Made of Stardust. Here's How. - YouTube
ps. I am not opposed to Ekayana meaning as ‘One Way’. Then the problem comes which Buddhist tradition, institution or lineage is interpreting that.
I just pointed out another unique perspective (more feminine one) how Ekayana fits with the concept of this human ‘body-mind’ as the universal vehicle for realizing the ultimate Truth. This kicks out all sectarianism, supremacy and sexism within Dharma. Ekayana and One Dharma are one and same, no matter what wrapping it has. I understand, this may not be acceptable to those who tightly cling to their tradition, institution or lineage habits.
“Stardust” does not include the fire element, which activates processes in the other elements, and that is also the role played by the fourth foundation of mindfulness in respect to the other three foundations, which are equivalent to elements, body= earth, feeling=water, mind states=air:
“What, bhikkhu, is the fire element? The fire element may be either internal or external. What is the internal fire element? Whatever internally, belonging to oneself, is fire, fiery, and clung-to, that is, that by which one is warmed, ages, and is consumed, and that by which what is eaten, drunk, consumed, and tasted gets completely digested, or whatever else internally, belonging to oneself, is fire, fiery, and clung-to: this is called the internal fire element. Now both the internal fire element and the external fire element are simply fire element. And that should be seen as it actually is with proper wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ When one sees it thus as it actually is with proper wisdom, one becomes disenchanted with the fire element and makes the mind dispassionate towards the fire element."—MN 140
Care must be exercised to distinguish between the universal mind and the sheeple state:
Universal consciousness:
“And in the great community of this cosmos there are brahmans & contemplatives endowed with psychic power, clairvoyant, skilled [in reading] the minds of others. They can see even from afar. Even up close, they are invisible. With their awareness they know the minds of others. They would know this of me: “Look, my friends, at this clansman who — though he has in good faith gone forth from the home life into homelessness — remains overcome with evil, unskillful mental qualities.” There are also devas endowed with psychic power, clairvoyant, skilled [in reading] the minds of others. They can see even from afar. Even up close, they are invisible. With their awareness they know the minds of others.”—AN 3.40
Hive mind, sheeple (first part):
“So in this case, Kalamas, don’t go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, ‘This contemplative is our teacher.’ When you know for yourselves that, ‘These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering’ — then you should abandon them.”—AN 3.65
I think “one/a way”, “one/a manner” is correct for ekāyana.
It seems the term or idea, ekāyana, for the practice or teaching of satipatthana is not found in SN 47 Satipatthana Samyutta and its corresponding SA version.
Good point indeed.
universal/cosmic consciousness (one taste of freedom) awakening to knowledge and vision of true Dhamma by relinquishing ‘I am’
Please quote me fully. By universal consciousness I mean unbounded and infinite states of rupa and arupa realms accessible by jhanas. No worries for ‘the sheeple state’ when one is not identified with any of the six elements.
‘Vehicle’ is yāna, not yana. But the word under discussion is ekāyana. The latter cannot possibly be analysed as eka + yāna because there’s no yāna in it.