Introduction

In the present chapter I translate the Madhyama-āgama parallel to the Mahākaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta, followed by surveying differences between the two versions that exemplify the impact of oral transmission over a prolonged period undertaken by reciters who had not necessarily undergone training in memorizing skills from their early youth onwards.[n.1] Von Hinüber 1989: 67f points out that while brahmins were trained from their childhood onwards in memorizing, training as a reciter in the early Buddhist tradition would only begin after ordination, which usually took place at a later age; cf. also Frauwallner 1956: 172f and Gombrich 1990b: 6f.

---

Translation

Discourse on a Deva at the Hot Spring Grove[n.2] The translated text is MĀ 165 at T I 696b26 to 698c1; for a comparative study cf. Anālayo 2011a: 760–763. MĀ 165 at T I 696b26 gives the title as 溫 泉林天, thus differing from the Pāli version's title Mahākaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta. A partial Chinese parallel is T 1362 at T XXI 881c3 to 882c1, which has the title "discourse spoken by the Buddha on [the topic of] a good night", 佛說善夜經. A partial Tibetan parallel occurs three times in the Derge edition (D 313, D 617 and D 974), and twice in the Peking edition (Q 979 and Q 599). The occurrence of three versions of this translation in the Derge edition and two versions in the Peking edition appears to be due to some uncertainty about the category to which this text should be assigned, with the result that it was finally placed into two or even into three categories, namely sūtra, tantra, and dhāraṇī; cf. also Skilling 1997: 81–83. The Tibetan versions are entitled ʼphags pa mtshan mo bzang po zhes bya baʼi mdo, corresponding to Bhadrakarātrīnāma-ārya-sūtra (the prefix ʼphags pa qualifies the discourse itself; cf. Skilling 1997: 585f). The Chinese and Tibetan versions parallel only the first part of MN 133 and MĀ 165, as they do not have Mahākaccāna's commentary on the stanzas. The introductory narration of the meeting between Samiddhi and a deva recurs as the prologue to another discourse of different content, SN 1.20 at SN I 8,16; cf. also Jātaka tale no. 167 at Jā II 56,24. This meeting led to a different discussion, as the visiting deva tried to tempt Samiddhi with sensual pleasures. The parallels to SN 1.20, SĀ 1078 at T II 281c4 and SĀ2 17 at T II 379a24, do not give the name of their monk protagonist.

1. Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was dwelling in Rājagaha, staying in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Feeding Place.[n.3] According to MN 133 at MN III 192,2, at that time the Buddha was staying in the tapodārāma. The venerable Samiddhi was at that time also dwelling in Rājagaha, staying at the Hot Spring Grove.

When the night was over, at dawn, the venerable Samiddhi left his dwelling and approached the hot springs, took off his robes and, [having left] them on the bank, entered the hot springs to take a bath. Having taken a bath he came out, wiped his body [dry] and put on his robes.[n.4] In MN 133 at MN III 192,5 Samiddhi just stands and lets his limbs dry by themselves.

At that time there was a deva of excellent bodily shape, with a majestic appearance. When the night was over, at dawn, [this deva] approached the venerable Samiddhi, bowed down with its head to pay respects and stepped back to stand to one side.[n.5] MN 133 does not report that the deva paid respect by bowing down. The brilliance of the excellent splendour of that deva's appearance illuminated the hot springs and their banks. [After] having and stepped back to stand to one side, the deva said to the venerable Samiddhi:

2. "Monk, do you remember the stanzas[n.6] In MN 133 at MN III 192,11 the deva instead inquires after "the summary and the analysis" of these stanzas, uddesañ ca vibhaṅgañ ca, and after Samiddhi has explained that he does not know them, the deva asks after the stanzas themselves. on an auspicious night?"[n.7] MĀ 165 at T I 696c7: 跋地羅帝. Sanskrit fragment versions of this expression can be found in SHT III 816 V3, Waldschmidt 1971: 32, which reads: bhadragarātrīya (cf. also R2), and in fragment 3 b3, Minayeff 1983: 243, which reads bhadrakarātriyaḥ. The Tibetan versions (D 313 sa 161b2, D 617 ba 56a7, D 974 waṃ 90a3, Q 599 ya 96b3 and Q 979shu 171a7) speak of an "auspicious night", mtshan mo bzang po, corresponding to bhadrakarātrī. MN 133 at MN III 192,11 reads bhaddekaratta. Bodhi in Ñāṇamoli 1995/2005: 1342 note 1210 explains that "ratta and ratti could be taken to represent respectively either Skt rātra and rātri (= night) or Skt rakta and rakti (= attachment)". The Sanskrit and Tibetan versions support the first alternative. The venerable Samiddhi replied to the deva: "I do not remember the stanzas on an auspicious night." He [then] asked the deva: "Do you remember the stanzas on an auspicious night?" The deva replied: "I also do not remember the stanzas on an auspicious night." The venerable Samiddhi asked the deva again: "Who remembers the stanzas on an auspicious night?"[n.8] MN 133 does not report such inquiry or that the deva directs Samiddhi to the Buddha.

The deva answered: "The Blessed One is dwelling here in Rājagaha, staying in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Feeding Place. He remembers the stanzas on an auspicious night. Monk, you could approach the Blessed One and from him directly [learn how] to remember and recite the stanzas on an auspicious night. Why? [Because] the stanzas on an auspicious night pertain to the teachings, they pertain to what is beneficial, being the root of the holy life, they [lead to] progress in knowledge, progress in realization, and progress towards Nirvāṇa.[n.9] In MN 133 at MN III 192,25 the deva only indicates that these stanzas are beneficial and fundamental for the holy life. The next sentence in MĀ 165 (on the son of a good family) is without a counterpart in MN 133. [As] a son of a good family who, out of faith, has left the household life to become homeless and practise the path, you should [learn how] to remember and recite the stanzas on an auspicious night." After speaking like this, the deva paid respects with its head at the feet of the venerable Samiddhi and, having circumambulated him three times, vanished from that place.[n.10] In MN 133 at MN III 192,27 the deva simply vanishes, without paying respect or performing circumambulations.

3. Not long after the deva had disappeared, the venerable Samiddhi approached the Buddha, bowed down with his head to pay respects, stepped back to sit to one side and said: "Blessed One, today, when the night was over, at dawn, I left my dwelling and approached the hot springs, took off my robes and, [having left] them on the bank, entered the hot springs to take a bath. Having taken a bath I came out, wiped my body [dry] and put on the robes.

At that time there was a deva of excellent bodily shape, with a majestic appearance. When the night was over, at dawn, [this deva] approached me, bowed down with its head to pay respects and, having stepped back, stood to one side. The brilliance of the excellent splendour of that deva's appearance illuminated the hot springs and their banks. [After] having stepped back to stand to one side, that deva said to me:

'Monk, do you remember the stanzas on an auspicious night?' I replied to that deva: 'I do not remember the stanzas on an auspicious night!' [Then] I asked the deva: 'Do you remember the stanzas on an auspicious night?' That deva replied: 'I also do not remember the stanzas on an auspicious night!' I again asked that deva: 'Who remembers the stanzas on an auspicious night?'

That deva answered: 'The Blessed One is dwelling here in Rājagaha, staying in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Feeding Place. He remembers the stanzas on an auspicious night. Monk, you could personally approach the Blessed One and from him directly [learn how] to remember and recite the stanzas on an auspicious night. Why? [Because] the stanzas on an auspicious night pertain to what is beneficial, they pertain to the teachings, being the root of the holy life, they [lead to] progress in knowledge, progress in realization, and progress towards Nirvāṇa. [As] a son of a good family who, out of faith, has left the household life to become homeless and practise the path you should [learn how] to remember and recite the stanzas on the auspicious night!' After speaking like this, that deva paid respects with its head at my feet and, having circumambulated me three times, vanished from that place."

The Blessed One asked: "Samiddhi, do you know that deva's name and where it comes from?"[n.11] This inquiry and the revelation of the deva's name is not found in MN 133. The venerable Samiddhi replied: "Blessed One, I do not know that deva's name and I also do not know where it comes from." The Blessed One said: "Samiddhi, that deva is a general of the troops in the heaven of the Thirty-three, called Main Hall."[n.12] At this point, MĀ 165 at T I 697a11 switches from the earlier 天, corresponding to deva, to 天子, corresponding to devaputta. Childers 1875/1993: 115 s.v. devaputto explains that "devaputto ... means simply a male deva", so that this change of terminology may be of no further significance.

Then the venerable Samiddhi said: "Blessed One, now is the right time, Well-gone One, now is the right time for the Blessed One to teach the stanzas on an auspicious night to the monks.[n.13] In MN 133 at MN III 193,6 Samiddhi instead requests the Buddha to teach the summary and the analysis on an auspicious night. Having heard them from the Blessed One, the monks will remember them well."

4. The Blessed One said: "Samiddhi, listen well and pay proper attention to what I shall teach to you." The venerable Samiddhi said: "Yes, indeed." Then, all the monks [being ready] to listen and receive the instructions, the Buddha proclaimed [these stanzas]:[n.14] MN 133 does not explicitly refer to other monks at this point, though their presence is evident from the continuity of the discourse.

5. "Be careful not to think about the past, and do not long for the future. Matters of the past have already ceased, the future has not yet come.[n.15] A parallel to this stanza can also be found in the Yogācārabhūmi, T 1579 at T XXX 387c28; cf. also Enomoto 1989b: 35 and Wayman 1989: 209; further parallels are listed in Skilling 1997: 82. As for phenomena in the present moment, one should contemplate with mindfulness [their] lack of stability. The wise awaken in this way.[n.16] The second part of this stanza in MN 133 at MN III 193,15 instead reads: "immovable and unshakeable, having known it let him [continue to] cultivate [in this way]", asaṃhīraṃ asaṃkuppaṃ, taṃ vidvā-m-anubrūhaye (Se: asaṃhiraṃ, Ce and Se: asaṅkuppaṃ, Se: viddhā). If one undertakes [such] practice of noble ones, who [would] be worried about death? I shall disengage from [all] that [which is related to death], [so that this] great dukkha and misery comes to an end.[n.17] MN 133 at MN III 193,16 instructs that "right now diligence should be done, who knows if death will come tomorrow, there is no bargaining with Death and its great armies", ajj' eva kiccam ātappaṃ, ko jaññā maraṇaṃ suve, na hi no saṅgaraṃ tena, mahāsenena maccunā (Ce: kiccaṃ, Se: saṅgaran). Practise diligently like this, day and night without negligence! Therefore, the stanzas on an auspicious night should regularly be taught."[n.18] The second part of this stanza in MN 133 at MN III 193,19 instead indicates that "to him, indeed, the night is auspicious, so the peaceful sage has explained", taṃ ve bhaddekaratto ti, santo ācikkhate munī ti. 6. Having spoken like this, the Buddha got up from his seat and entered his dwelling to sit in meditation.

7. The monks thereon had the following reflection: "Venerable friends, please know that the Blessed One has given this brief instruction and, without explaining its details, has gotten up from his seat and entered his dwelling to sit in meditation, [namely]:

'Be careful not to think about the past, and do not long for the future.

Matters of the past have already ceased, the future has not yet come.

As for phenomena in the present moment, one should contemplate with mindfulness [their] lack of stability.

The wise awaken in this way.

If one undertakes [such] practice of noble ones, who [would] be worried about death?

I shall disengage from [all] that [which is related to death], [so that this] great dukkha and misery comes to an end.

Practise diligently like this, day and night without negligence!

Therefore, the stanzas on an auspicious night should regularly be taught.'"

They further had the following reflection: "Venerable friends, who would be able to explain in detail the meaning of what the Blessed One has just said in brief?" They further had the following reflection: "The venerable Mahākaccāna is always praised by the Blessed One and by his wise companions in the holy life. The venerable Mahākaccāna would be able to explain in detail the meaning of what the Blessed One has just said in brief. Venerable friends, let us together approach the venerable Mahākaccāna and request him to explain its meaning. If the venerable Mahākaccāna explains it, we shall remember it well."[n.19] In MN 133 the monks do not explicitly indicate their intention to remember Mahākaccāna's explanation.

8. Thereupon the monks approached the venerable Mahākaccāna, exchanged greetings, stepped back to sit to one side, and said: "Venerable Mahākaccāna, please know that the Blessed One has given this brief instruction and, without explaining its details, has gotten up from his seat and entered his dwelling to sit in meditation, [namely]:

'Be careful not to think about the past, and do not long for the future. Matters of the past have already ceased, the future has not yet come. As for phenomena in the present moment, one should contemplate with mindfulness [their] lack of stability. The wise awaken in this way. If one undertakes [such] practice of noble ones, who [would] be worried about death? I shall disengage from [all] that [which is related to death], [so that this] great dukkha and misery comes to an end. Practise diligently like this, day and night without negligence! Therefore, the stanzas on an auspicious night should regularly be taught.' We had the following reflection: 'Venerable friends, who would be able to explain in detail the meaning of what the Blessed One has just said in brief?' We further had the following reflection: 'The venerable Mahākaccāna is always praised by the Blessed One and by his wise companions in the holy life. The venerable Mahākaccāna would be able to explain in detail the meaning of what the Blessed One has just said in brief.' We only wish that the venerable Mahākaccāna would give an extensive explanation, out of compassion."[n.20] In MN 133 at MN III 194,29 the request by the monks does not refer to compassion.

9. The venerable Mahākaccāna said: "Venerable friends, let me deliver a simile. On hearing a simile the wise will understand its meaning. Venerable friends, just as if there were a man who wants to search for heartwood. In order to search for heartwood, he enters the forest, holding an axe.[n.21] MN 133 does not mention the axe. He sees a great tree possessed of roots, branches, joints, twigs, leaves, flowers and heartwood. That man does not take hold of the roots, branches, joints and heartwood, but only takes hold of the twigs and leaves.[n.22] MĀ 165 at T I 697c4 employs the character 觸 to describe the action of this man. The usual meaning of 觸 is "to touch", although Hirakawa 1997: 1069 indicates that the same character can also render upahanyamāna and parāmṛṣṭa, which would better fit the present context. MN 133 at MN III 195,1 speaks of thinking that heartwood should be sought among branches and leaves.

"Venerable friends, what you said is just like that. [Although] the Blessed One is present, you leave and come to ask me about this meaning. Why? Venerable friends, please know that the Blessed One is the eye, is knowledge, is meaning, is the Dharma, is the master of the Dharma, is the general of the Dharma, he teaches the true meaning, the revelation of all meanings is because of the Blessed One.[n.23] MN 133 at MN III 195,5 reads: "the Blessed one knows [what is to be] known, the Blessed One sees [what is to be] seen, he has become vision, he has become knowledge, he has become the Dharma, he has become Brahmā, he is the speaker, expounder and elucidator of meaning, the giver of the deathless, the lord of the Dharma, the Tathāgata", bhagavā jānaṃ jānāti passaṃ passati cakkhubhūto ñāṇabhūto dhammabhūto brahmabhūto vattā pavattā atthassa ninnetā amatassa dātā dhammassāmī tathāgato. Venerable friends, you should have approached the Blessed One to ask about this meaning: 'Blessed One, how is this? What is its meaning?' As the Blessed One would have explained it, venerable friends, you could have remembered it well."

10. Then the monks said: "Yes, indeed, venerable Mahākaccāna, the Blessed One is the eye, is knowledge, is meaning, is the Dharma, is the master of the Dharma, is the general of the Dharma, he teaches the true meaning, the revelation of all meanings is because of the Blessed One. We should have approached the Blessed One to ask about this meaning: 'Blessed One, how is this? What is its meaning?' As the Blessed One would have explained it, we could have remembered it well. Yet, the venerable Mahākaccāna is always praised by the Blessed One and by his wise companions in the holy life. The venerable Mahākaccāna will be able to explain in detail the meaning of what the Blessed One has just said in brief. We only wish that the venerable Mahākaccāna would give an extensive explanation, out of compassion."[n.24] Instead of appealing to his compassion, in MN 133 at MN III 195,19 the monks express their hope that giving an explanation will not inconvenience him.

11. The venerable Mahākaccāna said to the monks: "Venerable friends, listen together to what I say.

12-13.[n.25] In MN 133 at MN III 195,27, corresponding to §12 in Ñāṇamoli 1995/2005: 1046f, Mahākaccāna repeats the stanzas spoken by the Buddha. In MĀ 165 this repetition comes only at the end of Mahākaccāna's explanation at T I 698b8, where the same is again found in MN 133 at MN III 198,9. "Venerable friends, how does a monk think about the past? Venerable friends, with the really existing eye a monk came to know agreeable forms,[n.26] MĀ 165 at T I 697c20: 實有眼. In relation to future and present, MĀ 165 does not qualify the sense organs as "really" existing. which the mind remembers, forms that are yearned for, that are connected with desire, that the mind delights in, that [become] a basis for holding on [to forms], a basis that is from the past. His consciousness has desires and is defiled with attachment in regard to the past. Because of consciousness having desires and being defiled with attachment, he delights in those [forms]. Because of delighting in them, he [keeps on] thinking about the past.[n.27] MN 133 at MN III 195,32 reads: "'such was my eye in the past, such were forms', [thinking like this] consciousness is bound by desire and lust. Due to consciousness being bound by desire and lust, he delights in that [past visual experience]. Delighting in that, he follows after the past", iti me cakkhuṃ ahosi atitam addhānaṃ iti rūpā ti tattha chandarāgapaṭibaddhaṃ hoti viññāṇaṃ, chandarāgapaṭibaddhattā viññāṇassa tad abhinandati, tad abhinandanto atītaṃ anvāgameti (Be and Se: cakkhu; Be: chandarāgappaṭibaddhaṃ and chandarāgappaṭibaddhattā).

"It is the same for the ear ... the nose ... the tongue ... the body... With the really existing mind a monk came to know agreeable mind-objects, which the mind remembers, mind-objects that are yearned for, that are connected with desire, that the mind delights in, that [become] a basis for holding on [to mind-objects], a basis that is from the past. His consciousness has desires and is defiled with attachment in regard to the past. Because of consciousness having desires and being defiled with attachment, he delights in those [mind-objects]. Because of delighting in them, he [keeps on] thinking about the past. Venerable friends, in this way a monk [keeps on] thinking about the past.

14. "Venerable friends, how does a monk not think about the past? Venerable friends, with the really existing eye a monk came to know agreeable forms, which the mind remembers, forms that are yearned for, that are connected with desire, that the mind delights in, that [become] a basis for holding on [to forms], a basis that is from the past. His consciousness has no desires and [is not] defiled with attachment for the past. Because of consciousness not having desires or being defiled with attachment, he does not delight in those [forms]. Because of not delighting in them, he does not [keep on] thinking about the past.

"It is the same for the ear ... the nose ... the tongue ... the body... With the really existing mind a monk came to know agreeable mind-objects, which the mind remembers, mind-objects that are yearned for, that are connected with desire, that the mind delights in, that [become] a basis for holding on [to mind-objects], a basis that is from the past. His consciousness has no desires and [is not] defiled with attachment for the past. Because of consciousness not having desires or being defiled with attachment, he does not delight in those [mind-objects]. Because of not delighting in them, he does not [keep on] thinking about the past. Venerable friends, in this way a monk does not think about the past.

15. "Venerable friends, how does a monk long for the future? Venerable friends, if there are eye, forms and eye-consciousness of the future, and a monk wishes to obtain what has not yet been obtained, [or] his mind longs for [more of] what has already been obtained, because of having longing in his mind he delights in those [forms]. Because of delighting in them, he longs for the future.[n.28] MN 133 at MN III 196,25 reads: "may my eye be such in the future, may forms be such', [thinking like this] the mind is inclined towards getting what has not been gotten. Because of the mind being inclined, he delights in that [future visual experience]. Delighting in that, he hopes for the future", iti me cakkhuṃ siyā anāgataṃ addhānaṃ iti rūpā ti appaṭiladdhassa paṭilābhāya cittaṃ paṇidahati, cetaso paṇidhānapaccayā tad abhinandati, tad abhinandanto anāgataṃ paṭikaṅkhati (Be and Se: cakkhu).

"It is the same for the ear ... the nose ... the tongue ... the body... If there is the mind, mind-objects and mind-consciousness of the future, and he wishes to obtain what has not yet been obtained, [or] his mind longs for [more of] what has already been obtained, because of having longing in his mind he delights in those [mindobjects]. Because of delighting in them, he longs for the future. Venerable friends, in this way a monk longs for the future.

16. "Venerable friends, how does a monk not long for the future? Venerable friends, if there are eye, forms and eye-consciousness of the future, and a monk does not wish to obtain what has not yet been obtained, and his mind does not long for [more of] what has already been obtained, because of having no longing in his mind he does not delight in those [forms]. Because of not delighting in them, he does not long for the future.

"It is the same for the ear ... the nose ... the tongue ... the body... If there is the mind, mind-objects and mind-consciousness of the future, and he does not wish to obtain what has not yet been obtained, and his mind does not long for [more of] what has already been obtained, because of having no longing in his mind he does not delight in those [mind-objects]. Because of not delighting in them, he does not long for the future. Venerable friends, in this way a monk does not long for the future.

17. "Venerable friends, how does a monk cling to phenomena in the present moment? Venerable friends, if there are eye, forms and eye-consciousness of the present, and a monk's consciousness has desires and is defiled with attachment for what is present, because consciousness has desires and is defiled with attachment, he delights in those [forms]. Because of delighting in them, he clings to phenomena in the present moment.[n.29] MN 133 at MN III 197,15 reads: "the eye and forms, friends, are both presently arisen. [If] consciousness is bound by desire and lust in regard to what is presently arisen, due to consciousness being bound by desire and lust, he delights in that [present visual experience]. Delighting in that, he is overwhelmed by presently arisen phenomena", yañ c' āvuso cakkhuṃ ye ca rūpā ubhayam etaṃ paccuppannaṃ, tasmiṃ yeva paccuppanne chandarāgapaṭibaddhaṃ hoti viññāṇaṃ, chandarāgapaṭibaddhattā viññāṇassa tad abhinandati, tad abhinandanto paccuppannesu dhammesu saṃhīrati (Be and Se: cakkhu, Be and Ce: ce instead of yeva, Be: chandarāgappaṭiº, Se: saṃhirati).

"It is the same for the ear ... the nose ... the tongue ... the body... If there is the mind, mind-objects and mind-consciousness of the present, and a monk's consciousness has desires and is defiled with attachment for what is present, because consciousness has desires and is defiled with attachment, he delights in those [mindobjects]. Because of delighting in them, he clings to phenomena in the present moment. Venerable friends, in this way a monk clings to phenomena in the present moment.

18. "Venerable friends, how does a monk not cling to phenomena in the present moment? Venerable friends, if there are eye, forms and eye-consciousness of the present, and a monk's consciousness has no desires and [is not] defiled with attachment for what is present, because of the consciousness not having desires or being defiled with attachment, he does not delight in those [forms]. Because of not delighting in them, he does not cling to phenomena in the present moment.

"It is the same for the ear ... the nose ... the tongue ... the body... If there is the mind, mind-objects and mind-consciousness of the present, and a monk's consciousness has no desires and [is not] defiled with attachment for what is present, because of the consciousness not having desires or being defiled with attachment, he does not delight in those [mind-objects]. Because of not delighting in them, he does not cling to phenomena in the present moment. Venerable friends, in this way a monk does not cling to phenomena in the present moment.

19. "Venerable friends, regarding this brief instruction given by the Blessed One who, without explaining its details, got up from his seat and entered his dwelling to sit in meditation, [namely]:

'Be careful not to think about the past, and do not long for the future.

Matters of the past have already ceased, the future has not yet come.

As for phenomena in the present moment, one should contemplate with mindfulness [their] lack of stability.

The wise awaken in this way.

If one undertakes [such] practice of noble ones, who [would] be worried about death?

I shall disengage from [all] that [which is related to death], [so that this] great dukkha and misery comes to an end.

Practise diligently like this, day and night without negligence!

Therefore, the stanzas on an auspicious night should regularly be taught.'

"This brief instruction given by the Blessed One without explaining its details, I would explain in detail in this way, employing these phrases and words. Venerable friends, you can approach the Buddha and set out [my explanation] in full [to him].[n.30] MN 133 does not report that Mahākaccāna explicitly told the monks to repeat his explanation in front of the Buddha, though the same is implicit in his invitation at MN III 198,14 that they should ask the Buddha about the meaning of the stanza. As the Blessed One explains its meaning, venerable friends, you can together remember it."

20. Then, having heard the venerable Mahākaccāna's explanation, the monks remembered well [how] to recite it, got up from their seats, circumambulated the venerable Mahākaccāna three times, and left.[n.31] MN 133 does not record that the monks remembered Mahākaccāna's exposition well, nor does it report that they circumambulated him. Circumambulations are more frequently mentioned in the Madhyama-āgama than in Pāli discourses; cf. Anālayo 2011a: 21. Approaching the Buddha they bowed down with their heads to pay respects, stepped back to sit to one side and said: "Blessed One, the brief instruction just given by the Blessed One without drawing out the meaning in detail, after which [the Blessed One] got up from his seat and entered his dwelling to sit in meditation, the venerable Mahākaccāna has explained in detail employing these phrases and words."

21. Having heard it, the Blessed One expressed his praise: "Well done, well done. My disciple is endowed with the eye, with knowledge, with Dharma, with meaning.[n.32] The Buddha's praise of Mahākaccāna in MN 133 at MN III 199,11 highlights that he is wise and has great wisdom. Why? [Because] in regard to this instruction given by the teacher to the disciples in short, without explaining its details, that disciple has explained it in detail employing these phrases and words. You should remember it like this, as the monk Mahākaccāna has explained it. Why?[n.33] This question and the following sentence are not found in MN 133. With the help of this explanation you will properly contemplate its meaning like this."

The Buddha spoke like this. The monks, having listened to what the Buddha said, delighted in it and received it respectfully.

---

Study

Out of the variations found between the Mahākaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta and its Madhyama-āgama counterpart, two instances deserve a closer examination. One of these two instances occurs in Mahākaccāna's explanation of the set of stanzas spoken by the Buddha in the Madhyama-āgama version. According to the Madhyama-āgama account, when describing the need to avoid attachment to past experiences, Mahākaccāna qualifies the sense organs as "really" existing.[n.34] MĀ 165 at T I 697c20: 實有, while in the case of future and present experience MĀ 165 at T I 698a15+21 only employs 有, without 實. This qualification, which has no counterpart in the Majjhima-nikāya version, could be reflecting the school affiliation of the Madhyama-āgama. In fact the *Mahāvibhāṣā uses precisely the same expression in its treatment of the Sarvāstivāda tenet that the past and the future really exist.[n.35] T 1545 at T XXVII 393a24: 實有過去未來; cf. also the discussion in the Vijñānakāya, T 1539 at T XXVI 534c18, with a résumé in Bareau 1955a: 137, and the survey in Cox 1995: 136–137, with further references in her notes. The Theravādin critique of this position can be found in Kv 116,27. Thus in the present instance it seems as if a belief held by the Sarvāstivādins caused a change in the formulation of a canonical passage.

What is particularly noteworthy about the present case is that the qualification of the sense organs as "really" existing is not used in regard to present and future times. Hence, though the use of this qualification appears to express the influence of Sarvāstivāda thought, this influence seems to have been of a somewhat accidental type, since it is not applied consistently. If the application of this qualification were the outcome of conscious editing, one would expect the same qualification to have been similarly applied to sense organs in future and present times.[n.36] This treatment of just the past as really existing would not only differ from the position taken in the Sarvāstivāda school(s), but also from that taken in the Kāśyapīya tradition, which apparently affirmed a partial existence of the past (in as much as the past is still to bear fruit) and a partial existence of the future (in as much as some future events are already now determined); cf. Bareau 1955b: 202 and the discussion in Kv 151,8.

This is significant, since it indicates that even in the case of an apparent influence of the school affiliation on the text, such influence need not be the outcome of deliberate change. In the present case, it seems as if part of a Sarvāstivāda analysis of sense experience, which would have made some statement to the effect that the sense organs "really" exist, became part of the discourse during the process of transmission. Because of the accidental nature of this intrusion of exegetical material into the discourse, apparently only the treatment of the past was affected, and the exposition of present and future experiences remained in a more original form.[n.37] For a study of cases where commentarial exegesis appears to have become part of a discourse at some point during transmission cf. Anālayo 2010d.

An example of later influence appears to also occur in the Majjhima-nikāya version, this being the second of the two instances mentioned above. This instance occurs in relation to the question asked by the deva visiting Samiddhi. According to the Pāli account, the deva first asks Samiddhi if he knows "the summary and the analysis" on an auspicious night. When Samiddhi admits that he does not know them, the deva asks if he knows the "stanzas" on an auspicious night, which Samiddhi also does not know.[n.38] MN 133 at MN III 192,10: "do you remember the summary and the analysis on an auspicious night?", dhāresi ... bhaddekarattassa uddesañ ca vibhaṅgañ cā ti?; followed at MN III 192,16 by: "do you remember the stanzas on an auspicious night?", dhāresi ... bhaddekarattiyo gāthā ti? The corresponding passage in the Madhyama-āgama version reports only a single query, which concerns the stanzas.[n.39] MĀ 165 at T I 696c7. The same is also the case for the other Chinese translation and the Tibetan version, although these speak of the "discourse" on an auspicious night, instead of the "stanzas"; cf. T 1362 at T XXI 881c10: "have you heard the discourse on the auspicious night?", 聞善夜經不?, and D 313 shu 171b1: "monk, do you know the discourse on an auspicious night?", dge slong khyod kyis mtshan mo bzang poʼi mdo sde shes sam? (found similarly in D 617 ba 56b2, D 974 waṃ 90a5, Q 599 ya 96b5 and Q 979 shu 171b1). I already noted this inconsistency in MN 133 in Anālayo 2005: 101.

The presentation in the Pāli discourse is to some extent puzzling, since the "stanzas" would correspond to the "summary". This can be seen in the subsequent part of the Mahākaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta where, after the Buddha has spoken the stanzas without further explaining their meaning, the monks wonder who would be able to explain the meaning of this "summary".[n.40] MN 133 at MN III 193,24: "Friends, the Blessed One, having given this brief summary to us ... who would explain the meaning of this brief summary given by the Blessed One?", idaṃ kho no, āvuso, bhagavā saṃkhittena uddesaṃ uddisitvā ... ko nu kho imassa bhagavatā saṃkhittena uddesassa uddiṭṭhassa ... atthaṃ vibhajjeyyā ti?(Ce and Se: saṅkhittena) This clearly identifies the stanzas as the summary. In fact, apart from the stanzas it would be difficult to find anything else that could be reckoned as a summary.

Not only the reference to a "summary", but also the mentioning of an "analysis" does not fit subsequent events too well. This comes to light in the section that describes the exchange between Samiddhi and the Buddha. After reporting what had taken place earlier, Samiddhi formulates his request for a teaching by repeating the question the deva had asked him, that is, by inquiring about a "summary" and its "analysis".[n.41] MN 133 at MN III 193,5: "it would be good, venerable sir, if the Blessed One were to teach me the summary and the analysis on an auspicious night", sādhu me, bhante, bhagavā bhaddekaratassa uddesañ ca vibhaṅgañ ca desetū ti. Although the Buddha agrees to this, after having taught the stanzas he retires to his dwelling without delivering any analysis or explanation of the stanzas. This is rather puzzling, since once the Buddha has agreed to Samiddhi's request, one might wonder why he should suddenly change his mind and withdraw without delivering the analysis he has just indicated that he is willing to give.

In the Madhyama-āgama version, the deva and Samiddhi had only been discussing the stanzas, so that when Samiddhi comes to see the Buddha he only asks to be taught the stanzas. In view of this, in the Madhyama-āgama account it is quite natural for the Buddha to teach only the stanzas. Thus it seems as if the inquiry after a "summary" and an "analysis" in the Mahākaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta does not fit its context too well, and the flow of events in the Madhyama-āgama version is more natural.

The same pattern recurs in the case of the Uddesavibhaṅga-sutta and its Madhyama-āgama parallel.[n.42] The present discussion already appeared in Anālayo 2011a: 788–790. In the Pāli version of this discourse, the Buddha himself announces a teaching that involves a summary and an analysis, but then withdraws to his dwelling after giving only the summary. [n.43] MN 138 at MN III 223,5: "I will teach you a summary and an analysis, monks, listen and attend well, I am about to speak", uddesavibhaṅgaṃ vo, bhikkhave, desissāmi, taṃ suṇātha sādhukaṃ manasikarotha bhāsissāmī ti. Bodhi in Ñāṇamoli 1995/2005: 1349 note 1249 comments that "it is strange that the Buddha, having announced that he will teach a summary and an exposition, should recite only the summary and leave without giving the exposition". In the Madhyamaāgama parallel, the Buddha does not make any such announcement, so that here his departure after teaching only a summary does not create any inconsistency.[n.44] In MĀ 164 at T I 694b16 the Buddha instead announces that he will give a teaching that is good in the beginning, middle and end, etc. Another relevant case is the Lomasakaṅgiyabhaddekaratta-sutta, which also reports how a deva asks a monk about the summary and analysis of an auspicious night, followed by asking him about the verses.[n.45] MN 134 at MN III 199,27: "do you remember the summary and the analysis on an auspicious night?", dhāresi ... bhaddekarattassa uddesañ ca vibhaṅgañ cā ti?, followed at MN III 200,5 by: "do you remember the verses on an auspicious night?", dhāresi ... bhaddekarattiyo gāthā ti? As here, too, the verses correspond to the summary, this double inquiry creates the same redundancy as in the Mahākaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta. In this case, again, the Madhyama-āgama counterpart and another Chinese parallel only have a single inquiry.[n.46] Both versions inquire after the verses together with their meaning, MĀ 166 at T I 698c14: 偈及其義 and T 77 at T I 886b7: 偈及解義. On considering these three instances, one might wonder what could have caused these recurrent references to a summary and its analysis, which do not fit the remainder of these discourses.

Explicit references to a summary and an analysis occur also in the introductory section to another two discourses in this particular chapter of the Majjhima-nikāya. [n.47] MN 131 at MN III 187,17 and MN 132 at MN III 190,1, where, however, the reference to a summary and an analysis does not create any redundancy or inconsistency. Other discourses in this chapter announce a summary, which they then follow with an analysis, while still other discourses adopt the pattern of a summary and its analysis without explicit announcement.[n.48] MN 137 at MN III 216,8, MN 139 at MN III 230,20 and MN 140 at MN III 239,15 explicitly identify their introductory statement as a summary, which they then follow by a more detailed analysis. MN 135 at MN III 203,10, MN 136 at MN III 209,2 and MN 141 at MN III 248,4 proceed from a succinct statement to its analysis, without, however, announcing this explicitly. Thus the basic pattern, where a "summary" statement is followed by a more detailed explanation, an "analysis", appears to be a uniting theme of this particular chapter in the Majjhima-nikāya, the "chapter on analysis", Vibhaṅgavagga.[n.49] The only exception to this appears to be MN 142, which does not follow this pattern. Rhys Davids 1902: 475 is of the opinion that MN 142 "seems to belong, in its subject-matter, to the Vinaya" and was "probably interpolated" in the Majjhima-nikāya.

This characteristic pattern would have given a strong sense of cohesion and connectedness to this group of discourses during oral transmission. In fact nine counterparts to the discourses found in the Vibhaṅga-vagga of the Majjhima-nikāya are located in the corresponding chapter on analysis in the Madhyama-āgama. [n.50] This is the 13th chapter in the Madhyama-āgama, the 根本分別品, which contains the counterparts to MN 132, MN 133, MN 134, MN 135, MN 136, MN 137, MN 138, MN 139 and MN 140, though in a different sequence. This is a remarkable correspondence, as the two collections have only four chapters at all in common. Of these four chapters, two chapters have each four discourses in common and one chapter has only two discourses in common with its counterpart.[n.51] The 4th Majjhima-nikāya chapter on pairs (Mahāyamaka-vagga) has a counterpart in the 15th Madhyama-āgama chapter on pairs (雙品), which contains parallels to MN 31, MN 32, MN 39 and MN 40. The 9th Majjhima-nikāya chapter on kings (Rāja-vagga) has a counterpart in the 6th Madhyama-āgama chapter related to kings (王相應品), which contains parallels to MN 81 and MN 83. The 10th Majjhima-nikāya chapter on brahmins (Brāhmaṇa-vagga) has a counterpart in the 12th Madhyama-āgama chapter on brahmins (梵志 品), which contains parallels to MN 91, MN 93, MN 96 and MN 99. Thus for the Majjhima-nikāya "chapter on analysis" and the Madhyama-āgama "chapter on analysis" to share nine discourses is remarkable, suggesting that the pattern where a summary is followed by an analysis did indeed form a strong bond that kept this group of discourses together in the two reciter traditions.

This suggests that the reciters would have been well aware of the pattern responsible for the formation of this chapter. Since the references to a summary and an analysis are absent from the respective Madhyama-āgama parallels, and in several cases do not fit their context, resulting in redundancies and inconsistencies, the most plausible explanation would be that they came to be part of the Pāli discourses during oral transmission. That is, during the oral transmission of the discourses now collected in the Majjhima-nikāya a remark, which originally may have been just a mnemonic aid to help the reciters be aware of the characteristic shared by this group of discourses, might have become part of the discourses themselves.

In the case of the Mahākaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta, this reference to a summary and an analysis creates both a redundancy (mentioning a "summary" and again the "verses") and an inconsistency (the Buddha withdraws without teaching the analysis he had agreed to deliver). Thus the case of the Mahākaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta could be another example of how a notion held by the reciters influenced the wording of a discourse during the course of oral transmission.

The two cases discussed above – the redundant query after a summary and an exposition in the Pāli version and the qualification of past sense organs as truly existing in the Chinese version – thus seem to testify to the same phenomenon, namely to the influence exercised by views and ideas held by the reciters on the way they transmitted the discourse. In both cases, these influences result in creating inconsistencies within the discourses themselves, either by having the Buddha not give an analysis he had earlier agreed to give, or by qualifying only the sense organs of the past as truly existing, without applying the same to present and future sense organs. In both cases, if these influences had been the outcome of conscious editing, one would expect the editors to have executed their task with more care and consistency, either by avoiding having the Buddha announce an analysis he then does not give, or by applying the qualification "really" consistently. Thus both cases are probably best understood as results of a more accidental type of change, as would be only natural for material transmitted by oral means.[n.52] Nattier 2003b: 52 explains that "to assume a 'creative individual author' as the driving force behind interpolations in Buddhist scripture is to import a model that is foreign to most of the literary processes that have shaped the production of Indian religious texts".

Besides these differences, however, the central theme of the two versions of the present discourse is closely similar. This theme finds its succinct expression in the set of stanzas on how to properly spend an "auspicious night". The allusion to an auspicious night could well be a popular phrase taken over and infused with a deeper meaning,[n.53] Cf. Ñāṇamoli 1995/2005: 1343 note 1210. Ñāṇaponika 1977: 346 note 966 relates the expression bhaddekaratta to the brahmin custom of spending a religious observance night by fasting, staying awake and meditating. something the discourses often depict the Buddha as doing.[n.54] Rhys Davids 1921: 132 illustrates this mode of teaching with the image of "pouring new wine into the old bottles". Hershock 2005: 4 speaks of "openly accommodating ... existing political, social and religious authorities" and then focussing "on how they might be skilfully redirected", expressive of a "general strategy of accepting, but then pointedly revising the meaning" of contemporary conceptions.

Though the basic idea of an auspicious night might stem from ancient Indian conceptions of particular nights that are considered spiritually auspicious, the last stanza in both versions makes it clear that the recommendations given are not meant for a single night only, as such practice should be undertaken "day and night".[n.55] MN 133 at MN III 193,18: ahorattaṃ and MĀ 165 at T I 697a24: 晝夜. Ñāṇananda 1973/1984: 3 comments that "the Bhaddekaratta-suttas do not appear to envisage withdrawal from thoughts of the past, future and present for so little as one night. On the contrary, the verses ... say that the person ... abides ardently and unweariedly day and night, that is, surely for some consecutive time lasting longer than 'one night'". In fact, references to a night in ancient Indian usage need not exclude the daytime, as "night" can function as an umbrella term for both day and night.[n.56] According to Thanissaro 2002: 346, the reference to a night in the expression bhaddekaratta "should be interpreted in light of the custom – common in cultures that follow the lunar calendar – of calling a 24-hour period of dayand-night a 'night'"; cf. also Winternitz 1908: 361 note 1, who explains that Indians reckon time in "nights", instead of "days". Thus the central message of the Mahākaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta and its Madhyama-āgama parallel would be that by letting go of past memories, by being free from yearning for the future, and by dwelling without attachment in the present moment, any time becomes a truly "auspicious" time.

As Mahākaccāna clarifies in the two versions of the present discourse, the problem faced when trying to put this instruction into practice is that the mind may succumb to longing and desires in relation to any of the senses and in regard to any of the three time periods. In regard to the past, this may take place by reviving memories of what happened in former times. These could be beautiful things one has seen, pleasant music or words heard, fragrant odours one has smelled, delicious flavours one has tasted, delightful physical touches, or even pleasant mental experiences that took place without being directly stimulated by some sensory input. Reviving such memories one "follows after" the past.[n.57] Regarding the instruction in MN 133 at MN III 193,11 that one "should not follow after the past", the commentary Ps V 6,16 explains that anvāgameti intends "to go after" (by way of craving and views). Yet, what is past is gone and has ceased completely, thus spending the present moment immersed in memories of the past is to waste the potential of the here and now.[n.58] Ñāṇananda 1973/1984: 27 clarifies, however, that "it is not so much the mere recollection of the past that is the bondage ... it is the tendency to retrace, revive, relive and relish the past that has to be eliminated", that is, the problem is not memory as such, but attachment and delight in regard to what is remembered.

The same applies to any future experience, where the tendency of the untrained mind is to spend time in daydreaming and fantasizing about experiences yet to come. Underlying such daydreams is a longing for pleasant experiences by way of any of the six senses, a wish to have things the way one would like them to be. Yet, such wishful thinking is unrealistic and again simply a waste of time since it neglects taking advantage of whatever the present moment has to offer.

As any attempt at formal meditation practice will easily show, to avoid revival of past memories and fantasies about the future is not an easy task and requires sustained effort at repeatedly returning to the only moment where one can really live: the present moment. Though to remain in the present moment is already a demanding task, the Mahākaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta and its Madhyama-āgama parallel indicate that to spend a truly "auspicious night" requires more than that: the present moment's experience should be productive of insight. According to the Chinese version, one should contemplate the lack of stability of what takes place in the present, thereby becoming aware of the impermanent nature of all experience. The Pāli version speaks of remaining unshakeably established in contemplating arisen phenomena with insight.[n.59] MN 133 at MN III 193,13. The commentary explains that this intends contemplation of impermanence, together with the other insight contemplations that build on awareness of impermanence.[n.60] Ps V 1,13: aniccānupassanādīhi sattahi anupassanāhi ... vipassati.

Thus awareness of impermanence seems to be a key aspect of the stanzas on an auspicious night, in that one who maintains clear understanding of the changing nature of phenomena will remain established in the present moment free from attachment and thereby avoid either dwelling on the past or longing for the future.

The same theme recurs in other discourses related to this particular set of stanzas. In the Majjhima-nikāya, the Mahākaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta is one out of four discourses that take the stanzas on an auspicious night as their common theme. The first of these discourses is the Bhaddekaratta-sutta,[n.61] MN 131 at MN III 187,13 to 189,23. This discourse appears to have no Chinese counterpart. However, Sanskrit fragment SHT III 816, Waldschmidt 1971: 32, could be a partial parallel to MN 131, as SHT III 816 V1–2 records that the Buddha was at Jeta's Grove and addressed the monks on his own when delivering the stanzas, a description that is similar to the introductory narration in MN 131 at MN III 187,13. which follows the stanzas with an explanation given by the Buddha. According to this explanation, delight in memories of past experiences related to the five aggregates [affected by] clinging is to dwell on the past; wishing for some particular future manifestation of the five aggregates [affected by] clinging is to yearn for the future; and mistaking any of the five aggregates [affected by] clinging as a self means that the present moment is not being properly contemplated. In the Ānandakaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta,[n.62] MN 132 at MN III 189,25 to 191,29, which has a parallel in MĀ 167 at T I 699c27 to 700b22. Ānanda delivers precisely the same explanation on the stanzas. In the Lomasakaṅgiyabhaddekaratta-sutta a monk approaches the Buddha for an explanation of the stanzas,[n.63] MN 134 at MN III 199,19 to 202,9, which has two parallels in MĀ 166 at T I 698c3 to 699c25 and T 77 at T I 886a25 to 887a26. with the Buddha in reply giving the same explanation as in the Bhaddekaratta-sutta. That is, the Bhaddekaratta-sutta, the Ānandakaccānabhaddekaratta-sutta and the Lomasakaṅgiyabhaddekaratta-sutta provide the same explanation of the stanzas on an auspicious night, based on the five aggregates [affected by] clinging.

Thus to spend a truly auspicious night could be undertaken by directing awareness to the arising and passing away of the five aggregates, thereby remaining with detachment in the present moment, without dwelling on fond memories from the past or engaging in fantasies about the future.

Whereas the Buddha and Ānanda relate the stanzas on an auspicious night to the five aggregates, Mahākaccāna offers an explanation that is based on the six senses. The Buddha's endorsement of Mahākaccāna's exposition clarifies that this different presentation is but a complementary perspective on the same topic. That is, to view experience from the perspective of the five aggregates or to view it from the perspective of the six senses are complementary approaches to the development of insight. Both are analyses of subjective existence, the one focussing on the constituents of subjective personality (aggregates), while the other takes up the different facets of subjective experience (senses). In both cases, the main point remains the same, in that by leaving behind past and future, and by remaining with awareness of impermanence in the present moment, the path to liberation unfolds.

This basic requirement, aptly described in the stanzas on an auspicious night and treated from complementary perspectives by the Buddha and Mahākaccāna, finds a succinct expression in a stanza in the Dhammapada, a stanza that has been preserved similarly in a range of parallel versions:

"Let go of the past, let go of the future, Let go of the present, transcending existence."[n.64] Dhp 348: muñca pure muñca pacchato, majjhe muñca bhavassa pāragu; with parallels in Gāndhārī Dharmapada stanza 161, Brough 2001: 144: muju pura muju pachadu, majadu muju bhavasa parako, Patna Dharmapada stanza 150, Cone 1989: 142: muñca pure muñca pacchato, majjhe muñca bhavassa pāragū; Uv stanza 29.57, Bernhard 1965: 391: muñca purato muñca paścato, madhye muñca bhavasya pāragaḥ, with its Tibetan counterpart in stanza 29.60, Beckh 1911: 112 or Zongtse 1990: 326: "let go of past and future, let go of [what is] in between, transcend existence", sngon bral phyi ma dang bral zhing, dbus bral srid paʼi pha rol phyin. Chinese versions of this stanza can be found in T 210 at T IV 569b12: "avoid [what is] before and be free of [what is] behind, let go of the middle, cross over [all] that", 釋前解後, 脫中度 彼 (following the indication in Hirakawa 1997: 1177 that 釋 can also render pari +√hṛ), T 212 at T IV 752c23: "let go of [what is] before, let go of [what is] behind, let go of [what is] between, transcend existence", 捨前捨後, 捨間 越有, and T 213 at T IV 794a13: "let go of [what is] before and let go of [what is] behind, let go of [what is] between, transcend existence", 捨前及捨後, 捨 間越於有.