Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: SV: [Pali] Guhat.t.haka from the Mahaaniddesa

Expand Messages
  • keren_arbel
    Dear Ole Holten Pind, Can you make sense of this metaphor, of the cave as the body (as Norman add in his translation)? Why is the body a cave? In the rest of
    Message 1 of 21 , Feb 6, 2007
      Dear Ole Holten Pind,

      Can you make sense of this metaphor, of the cave as the body (as
      Norman add in his translation)? Why is the body a cave?
      In the rest of the verse it is said that this same man is "covered
      with many [defilements]" and not that inside the cave there are
      defilements. I just don't get this simile...

      Thanks for any explanaation,
      Mettacittena,
      Keren.
    • Nina van Gorkom
      Dear Keren, In compounds the stems are used of the nouns. Whether we see sometimes a long a depends on the context. There can also be a negation a inside a
      Message 2 of 21 , Feb 7, 2007
        Dear Keren,
        In compounds the stems are used of the nouns. Whether we see
        sometimes a long a depends on the context. There can also be a
        negation a inside a compound, very tricky.
        I have the Sutta and co in Thai, it is very long, but it is good.
        The body is bound up with kaama. Kaama are: vatthu kaama: the sense
        objects, the basis of clinging, or kilesa kaama: the kilesas. The
        sense objects are rupas and these can be experienced through the
        senses. When there is the body there is eyesense, earsense, etc. The
        body is compared to a room for the defilements. As we read, one is
        far from viveka, detachment. There are three vivekas: kaaya viveka,
        citta viveka and upadhi viveka.
        We are as it were intoxicated, and isn't this true?

        Nina.
        Op 6-feb-2007, om 14:46 heeft keren_arbel het volgende geschreven:

        > Can you make sense of this metaphor, of the cave as the body (as
        > Norman add in his translation)? Why is the body a cave?



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Ong Yong Peng
        Dear Ole, Nina and Keren, Ole is right that this niddesa talks about guhaa. As for the title, guhat.t.hakasuttaniddesa, it is a four-part compound meaning the
        Message 3 of 21 , Feb 7, 2007
          Dear Ole, Nina and Keren,

          Ole is right that this niddesa talks about guhaa.

          As for the title, guhat.t.hakasuttaniddesa, it is a four-part compound
          meaning "the 'niddesa' of 'eight' 'suttas' on 'guhaa'", as Nina explained.


          metta,
          Yong Peng.

          --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Ole Holten Pind wrote:

          The first verse of the Guha.t.thaka-sutta explains this compound. It
          denotes someone standing in a cave guhaa.

          > I cannot find the word guhat.t.haka in the dictionary. Can anyone
          help me understand this word/compound?
        • Ole Holten Pind
          Dear Keren, It is not at all clear whether guhaa denotes the body in this verse. The old commentary thinks so, but I am sceptical about whether or not this is
          Message 4 of 21 , Feb 7, 2007
            Dear Keren,

            It is not at all clear whether guhaa denotes the body in this verse. The old
            commentary thinks so, but I am sceptical about whether or not this is true.
            In fact, there is no passage in the canon that would support the view that
            the body is like a cave. In addition, many of the verses of the Suttanipata
            are peculiar and have no parallels in the canon as such. The
            interpretatition is therefore dubious.

            The one who is confined to a cave does not see the light i.e. the dhamma.
            This in my view explains the metaphor, because it is, evidently a metaphor.

            Regards
            Ole Holten Pind





            _____

            Fra: Pali@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Pali@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af
            keren_arbel
            Sendt: 6. februar 2007 14:47
            Til: Pali@yahoogroups.com
            Emne: Re: SV: [Pali] Guhat.t.haka from the Mahaaniddesa



            Dear Ole Holten Pind,

            Can you make sense of this metaphor, of the cave as the body (as
            Norman add in his translation)? Why is the body a cave?
            In the rest of the verse it is said that this same man is "covered
            with many [defilements]" and not that inside the cave there are
            defilements. I just don't get this simile...

            Thanks for any explanaation,
            Mettacittena,
            Keren.






            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • keren_arbel
            dear Ole Holten Pind, I tend to accept your explanation, since the body as a cave doesn t seem correct. Thanks, Keren.
            Message 5 of 21 , Feb 7, 2007
              dear Ole Holten Pind,

              I tend to accept your explanation, since the body as a cave doesn't
              seem correct.

              Thanks,
              Keren.
            • Nina van Gorkom
              Dear Keren and Ole, It depends on your attitude towards the Commentaries. The Commentary explains it as a room. a dwelling for kilesas. Personally I like this.
              Message 6 of 21 , Feb 8, 2007
                Dear Keren and Ole,
                It depends on your attitude towards the Commentaries. The Commentary
                explains it as a room. a dwelling for kilesas. Personally I like this.
                Nina.
                Op 8-feb-2007, om 7:45 heeft keren_arbel het volgende geschreven:

                > I tend to accept your explanation, since the body as a cave doesn't
                > seem correct.



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Piya Tan
                Sutta Nipata Commentary (SnA) actually says to the cave means to the body (guhaayan ti kaaye) (SnA 2:514). Further down, SnA continues by repeating the
                Message 7 of 21 , Feb 8, 2007
                  Sutta Nipata Commentary (SnA) actually says "to the cave" means "to the
                  body" (guhaayan ti kaaye) (SnA 2:514). Further down, SnA continues by
                  repeating the gloss and then says, "The body is called 'a cave' because it
                  is an opening and a dwelling for wild beasts such as lust and so on" (kaayo
                  hi raagaadiina.m vaa.lana.m vasanokaasato guhaa ti vuccati." (SnA 2:515).

                  This analogy is easily understood and accepted by Buddhist practitioners as
                  an example of illustrative or conventional language. In fact, much of the
                  early texts (such as those of Sn) have this poetical and figurative approach
                  to esp the higher aspects of the Dharma.

                  Very often we find an interesting conjunction between what the scholars and
                  what the Commentaries say, and when the practitioners agree, too, we have
                  all the planets in wondrous alignment.

                  Otherwise, it is still all right to have private understanding as long as it
                  is not motivated by greed, hate or delusion. (This last root is very tricky,
                  indeed. That's where a living transmission from a living Buddhist master or
                  practitioner is much more help than all the dukedom of a library).

                  May we enter the stream in this life itself.

                  Piya Tan


                  On 2/8/07, Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Dear Keren and Ole,
                  > It depends on your attitude towards the Commentaries. The Commentary
                  > explains it as a room. a dwelling for kilesas. Personally I like this.
                  > Nina.
                  > Op 8-feb-2007, om 7:45 heeft keren_arbel het volgende geschreven:
                  >
                  > > I tend to accept your explanation, since the body as a cave doesn't
                  > > seem correct.
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  >
                  >


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Ong Yong Peng
                  Dear Piya, Nina, Ole and Keren, I tend to agree with Piya and Nina. As for what Piya said about living tradition and living master, let s not forget about
                  Message 8 of 21 , Feb 8, 2007
                    Dear Piya, Nina, Ole and Keren,

                    I tend to agree with Piya and Nina. As for what Piya said about living
                    tradition and living master, let's not forget about living language,
                    which is the main objective of this group!

                    Here is my attempt on the English translation:

                    Tainted by many in the cave, remaining attached,
                    engrossed in temptation, so deeply the man;
                    indeed, from detachment he is,
                    renounces not thus, the sensual desires easily in this world.

                    satto guhaaya.m bahunaabhichanno,
                    attached, in the cave, covered with much,

                    * satta [=laggo (comm)] (adj) attached.
                    * guhaa (f) cave.
                    * bahunaabhichanna = covered with much.
                    - bahu (adj) much.
                    - abhicchanna (adj) covered with.

                    ti.t.tha.m naro mohanasmi.m pagaa.lho;
                    standing, the man, immersed in enticement;

                    * ti.t.thanta (ppr of ti.t.thati) standing.
                    * nara (m) man.
                    * mohana (n) making dull or stupid, infatuation, enticement, allurement.
                    * pagaa.lha (pp of pagaahati) sunk into, immersed in.

                    duure vivekaa hi tathaavidho so,
                    remote indeed, from detachment he (is) so.

                    * duura (adj) distant, remote.
                    * viveka (m) detachment.
                    * hi (indec) indeed.
                    * tathaavidha (adv) [see tathaa] such like, so.

                    kaamaa hi loke na hi suppahaayaa.
                    sensual desires indeed, in this world indeed, not easily renounced.

                    * kaama (m, n) sensual desire.
                    * loka (m) world.
                    * na (neg) not.
                    * suppahaaya = having renounced easily.
                    - pahaaya (ger of pajahati) having renounced.

                    Please correct me if there is any mistake.


                    metta,
                    Yong Peng.



                    --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Piya Tan wrote:

                    Sutta Nipata Commentary (SnA) actually says "to the cave" means "to
                    the body" (guhaayan ti kaaye) (SnA 2:514). Further down, SnA continues
                    by repeating the gloss and then says, "The body is called 'a cave'
                    because it is an opening and a dwelling for wild beasts such as lust
                    and so on" (kaayo hi raagaadiina.m vaa.lana.m vasanokaasato guhaa ti
                    vuccati." (SnA 2:515).

                    > It depends on your attitude towards the Commentaries. The
                    > Commentary explains it as a room. a dwelling for kilesas.
                  • Ole Holten Pind
                    The text addresses the fate of someone who remains stuck in the cave immersed in delusion. It seems to me that guhaa is used as metaphor for mohana. I am not
                    Message 9 of 21 , Feb 9, 2007
                      The text addresses the fate of someone who remains stuck in the cave
                      immersed in delusion. It seems to me that guhaa is used as metaphor for
                      mohana. I am not aware of any passage describing the being attached (satta)
                      to the body (as a cave). I may be wrong, though. However, this remains the
                      only example in the canon of the use of guhaa to denote the body,
                      metaphorically or otherwise. Mahaaniddesa and PJ I, of course, takes it to
                      stand for the body. I wonder if this is an example of commentarial
                      ingenuity.

                      With best wishes,
                      Ole Holten Pind

                      _____

                      Fra: Pali@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Pali@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af Piya Tan
                      Sendt: 8. februar 2007 15:36
                      Til: Pali@yahoogroups.com
                      Emne: Re: SV: SV: [Pali] Guhat.t.haka from the Mahaaniddesa



                      Sutta Nipata Commentary (SnA) actually says "to the cave" means "to the
                      body" (guhaayan ti kaaye) (SnA 2:514). Further down, SnA continues by
                      repeating the gloss and then says, "The body is called 'a cave' because it
                      is an opening and a dwelling for wild beasts such as lust and so on" (kaayo
                      hi raagaadiina.m vaa.lana.m vasanokaasato guhaa ti vuccati." (SnA 2:515).

                      This analogy is easily understood and accepted by Buddhist practitioners as
                      an example of illustrative or conventional language. In fact, much of the
                      early texts (such as those of Sn) have this poetical and figurative approach
                      to esp the higher aspects of the Dharma.

                      Very often we find an interesting conjunction between what the scholars and
                      what the Commentaries say, and when the practitioners agree, too, we have
                      all the planets in wondrous alignment.

                      Otherwise, it is still all right to have private understanding as long as it
                      is not motivated by greed, hate or delusion. (This last root is very tricky,
                      indeed. That's where a living transmission from a living Buddhist master or
                      practitioner is much more help than all the dukedom of a library).

                      May we enter the stream in this life itself.

                      Piya Tan

                      On 2/8/07, Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@xs4all. <mailto:vangorko%40xs4all.nl>
                      nl> wrote:
                      >
                      > Dear Keren and Ole,
                      > It depends on your attitude towards the Commentaries. The Commentary
                      > explains it as a room. a dwelling for kilesas. Personally I like this.
                      > Nina.
                      > Op 8-feb-2007, om 7:45 heeft keren_arbel het volgende geschreven:
                      >
                      > > I tend to accept your explanation, since the body as a cave doesn't
                      > > seem correct.
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      >
                      >

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Ong Yong Peng
                      Dear friends, I have reworked the verse, now with the trilinear: satto guhaaya.m bahunaabhichanno, attached / in the cave / covered with much Attached, tainted
                      Message 10 of 21 , Feb 9, 2007
                        Dear friends,

                        I have reworked the verse, now with the trilinear:

                        satto guhaaya.m bahunaabhichanno,
                        attached / in the cave / covered with much
                        Attached, tainted by many in the cave,

                        ti.t.tha.m naro mohanasmi.m pagaa.lho;
                        standing / man / immersed in enticement
                        the man, remaining engrossed in temptation;

                        duure vivekaa hi tathaavidho so
                        in deep / from detachment / indeed / such like / he
                        In deep (allurement), from detachment, indeed, such he (is) like,

                        kaamaa hi loke na hi suppahaayaa
                        sensual desires / alas / in world / not / indeed / having renounced easily
                        alas, renounces easily not indeed, the sensual desires in the world.

                        metta,
                        Yong Peng.


                        --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Ong Yong Peng wrote:

                        Tainted by many in the cave, remaining attached,
                        engrossed in temptation, so deeply the man;
                        indeed, from detachment he is,
                        renounces not thus, the sensual desires easily in this world.
                      • Ong Yong Peng
                        Dear friends, the commentary recommends the third line to be read as: duure vivekaa hi tathaavidho so in remote / from detachment / indeed / such like / he In
                        Message 11 of 21 , Feb 9, 2007
                          Dear friends,

                          the commentary recommends the third line to be read as:

                          duure vivekaa hi tathaavidho so
                          in remote / from detachment / indeed / such like / he
                          In (allurement) remote from detachment, indeed, such he (is) like,

                          metta,
                          Yong Peng.


                          --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Ong Yong Peng wrote:

                          duure vivekaa hi tathaavidho so
                          in deep / from detachment / indeed / such like / he
                          In deep (allurement), from detachment, indeed, such he (is) like,
                        • Ong Yong Peng
                          Dear Ole, I think the key is probably satta , which have several meanings, another of which is also suitable for this verse: creature, sentient being. For
                          Message 12 of 21 , Feb 9, 2007
                            Dear Ole,

                            I think the key is probably 'satta', which have several meanings,
                            another of which is also suitable for this verse: creature, sentient
                            being.

                            For example, the first two lines according to the commentary are:

                            satto guhaaya.m bahunaabhichanno,
                            ti.t.tha.m naro mohanasmi.m pagaa.lho;

                            Attached, tainted by many in the cave,
                            the man, remaining engrossed in temptation;

                            Here, the commentary suggests that 'cave' is a metaphor for 'body'. It
                            further comments that just like the cave is a dwelling space for wild
                            beasts, the body is a dwelling space for lust and so on.

                            All in all, the commentary explains the first two line as "the man,
                            remaining immersed in allurement, is attached to and tainted by
                            defilements in himself (the body)".

                            However, if we take satta as 'sentient being', we get:

                            The being, tainted by many in the cave,
                            the man, remaining engrossed in temptation;

                            Here, we see a simile of a man remaining engrossed in temptation to be
                            like a being covered by weeds and vermin in the cave.

                            It is very unlikely the verse literally refers to a person remaining
                            stuck in a cave. The reason the commentator picked the first
                            explanation is probably that it suits meditation as an inward-looking
                            practice.

                            metta,
                            Yong Peng.


                            --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Ole Holten Pind wrote:

                            The text addresses the fate of someone who remains stuck in the cave
                            immersed in delusion. It seems to me that guhaa is used as metaphor
                            for mohana. I am not aware of any passage describing the being
                            attached (satta) to the body (as a cave). I may be wrong, though.
                            However, this remains the only example in the canon of the use of
                            guhaa to denote the body, metaphorically or otherwise. Mahaaniddesa
                            and PJ I, of course, takes it to stand for the body. I wonder if this
                            is an example of commentarial ingenuity.
                          • Ole Holten Pind
                            Dear Ong Yong Peng, I have to admit that the verse puzzles me. There is not a single passage in the canon in which guhaa is used metaphorically of the body.
                            Message 13 of 21 , Feb 10, 2007
                              Dear Ong Yong Peng,

                              I have to admit that the verse puzzles me. There is not a single passage in
                              the canon in which guhaa is used metaphorically of the body. The few
                              occurrences are invariably to caves. In addition, abhi(c)channo can only
                              mean covered, and it is constructed with instr. of the thing
                              something/someone is covered with. However, what does covered with many
                              refer to? The idea of someone covered with all the kilesas seems to me very
                              unlikely. It probably refers to his clothing and jewelry or the like, all of
                              them objects of sensuous desire (kaamaa) that should be transcended.

                              Regards,
                              Ole Holten Pind

                              _____

                              Fra: Pali@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Pali@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af Ong Yong
                              Peng
                              Sendt: 10. februar 2007 02:07
                              Til: Pali@yahoogroups.com
                              Emne: Re: SV: SV: SV: [Pali] Guhat.t.haka from the Mahaaniddesa



                              Dear Ole,

                              I think the key is probably 'satta', which have several meanings,
                              another of which is also suitable for this verse: creature, sentient
                              being.

                              For example, the first two lines according to the commentary are:

                              satto guhaaya.m bahunaabhichanno,
                              ti.t.tha.m naro mohanasmi.m pagaa.lho;

                              Attached, tainted by many in the cave,
                              the man, remaining engrossed in temptation;

                              Here, the commentary suggests that 'cave' is a metaphor for 'body'. It
                              further comments that just like the cave is a dwelling space for wild
                              beasts, the body is a dwelling space for lust and so on.

                              All in all, the commentary explains the first two line as "the man,
                              remaining immersed in allurement, is attached to and tainted by
                              defilements in himself (the body)".

                              However, if we take satta as 'sentient being', we get:

                              The being, tainted by many in the cave,
                              the man, remaining engrossed in temptation;

                              Here, we see a simile of a man remaining engrossed in temptation to be
                              like a being covered by weeds and vermin in the cave.

                              It is very unlikely the verse literally refers to a person remaining
                              stuck in a cave. The reason the commentator picked the first
                              explanation is probably that it suits meditation as an inward-looking
                              practice.

                              metta,
                              Yong Peng.

                              --- In Pali@yahoogroups. <mailto:Pali%40yahoogroups.com> com, Ole Holten
                              Pind wrote:

                              The text addresses the fate of someone who remains stuck in the cave
                              immersed in delusion. It seems to me that guhaa is used as metaphor
                              for mohana. I am not aware of any passage describing the being
                              attached (satta) to the body (as a cave). I may be wrong, though.
                              However, this remains the only example in the canon of the use of
                              guhaa to denote the body, metaphorically or otherwise. Mahaaniddesa
                              and PJ I, of course, takes it to stand for the body. I wonder if this
                              is an example of commentarial ingenuity.






                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Ong Yong Peng
                              Dear Ole, thanks for the information. I agree that (simply) covered with kilesas does not make much Buddhist philosophical sense. Referencing the commentary
                              Message 14 of 21 , Feb 10, 2007
                                Dear Ole,

                                thanks for the information. I agree that "(simply) covered with
                                kilesas" does not make much Buddhist philosophical sense. Referencing
                                the commentary (again), I think it is more appropriate in today's
                                language to say "tainted with kilesas/defilements". :-)

                                However, I do agree that 'bahu' can refer to anything because of the
                                liberal construct. I think your interpretation, though unconventional,
                                is another alternative way of understanding the verse.

                                metta,
                                Yong Peng.


                                --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Ole Holten Pind wrote:

                                There is not a single passage in the canon in which guhaa is used
                                metaphorically of the body. The few occurrences are invariably to
                                caves. In addition, abhi(c)channo can only mean covered, and it is
                                constructed with instr. of the thing something/someone is covered
                                with. However, what does covered with many refer to? The idea of
                                someone covered with all the kilesas seems to me very unlikely. It
                                probably refers to his clothing and jewelry or the like, all of them
                                objects of sensuous desire (kaamaa) that should be transcended.
                              • Ole Holten Pind
                                Dear Yong Peng, The problem is that the very few recorded instances of abhi(c)channa refer to something that covers something else in the physical sense. I
                                Message 15 of 21 , Feb 11, 2007
                                  Dear Yong Peng,

                                  The problem is that the very few recorded instances of abhi(c)channa refer
                                  to something that covers something else in the physical sense. I think the
                                  verse makes perfect sense when interpreted in the light of the early
                                  Buddhists' attitude towards wearing fancy clothing, jewelry, garlands etc.
                                  Take, for instance, the description found in Brahmajalasuttanta and compare
                                  it to the rules of the patimokkha.

                                  Best wishes,
                                  Ole Pind



                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • Ong Yong Peng
                                  Dear Ole, thanks again. The is the type of information that PaliScope will need. I will put it in when I make an entry for the term. metta, Yong Peng. ... The
                                  Message 16 of 21 , Feb 13, 2007
                                    Dear Ole,

                                    thanks again. The is the type of information that PaliScope will need.
                                    I will put it in when I make an entry for the term.

                                    metta,
                                    Yong Peng.


                                    --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Ole Holten Pind wrote:

                                    The problem is that the very few recorded instances of abhi(c)channa
                                    refer to something that covers something else in the physical sense.
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.