Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
THE
DISCOURSE
(aa
ON
GAIr
WHAT
IS PRIMARY
S UTTA)
A n Annotated Translation
--
GENERAL
INTRODUCTION
302
STEVEN COLLINS
303
explicitly on themes from the life and ideals of the Monastic Order,
and on language from the Vinaya; part IV gives my view of the
structure of the sutta as a whole, citing occurences of what I see as the
keywords of the text. I refer to the translation notes, which are found
on pp. 159--88, by section and note number; notes of this Introduction follow it on pp. 144--7. The bibliography for both Introduction
and translation notes is at the end.
Readers unfamiliar with AS might read through the translation at
this point, without notes (pp. 148--58); some acquaintance with the
text is necessary if the following Introduction is to be comprehensible.
304
STEVEN COLLINS
305
306
STEVEN COLLINS
like the beings in the parable when in the 'paradisial' state before their
'Fall' into agriculture and ordered society, neither produce nor store
their food.
I shall say m o r e below on the place of ascetic ideologies as hierarchical models of society in South Asia. F o r the m o m e n t I will end this
section by quoting a little m o r e f r o m Gellner on the issue. Although,
as mentioned,
agrarian society is doomed to violence.., it does not always place violence at the
summit of excellence, though the Western equation of nobility with military vocation
does so. Sometimes it places the scribes/legitmators above the swordsmen, though
we must remember that it is the scribes who write the record and formulate the
principles...
Agraria does on occasion invert values. They [i.e. values] may conspicuously defy,
rather than mirror, the social hierarchy. It may commend ascesis or humility rather
than display, conspicuous consumption and assertiveness. These inversions of values,
of the utmost importance in the history of mankind, can be seen in part as devices
employed by rival elements within the wider clerisy. One way the legitimators gain
influence and power is by being outside the formal system, by opting out, and ascesis
or humility constitutes a kind of conspicuous self-exile. The logic of the agrarian
world, however, does not allow such values to be implemented consistently and
universally. (pp. 154, 155--6; cp. 225) 3
(ii) in early Indian history: towns and small-scale polities
An account such as Gellner's, of course, operates at a very great level
of generality, and describes socio-economic structures very much of
the historical longue durde. It is thus reassuring when a specialist
scholar of early Indian archaeology and history writes that by the
6th--4th. centuries B.C. 'the technological base of the economy in this
period [had] already reached a level not to be significantly exceeded
until the 20th century' - - that is, until the coming of industrialism. 4 In
this section I give a brief summary of what I believe to be a scholarly
consensus on some aspects of the history of North India before the
Mauryan empire, which began in the 4th. century B.C. and reached its
apogee under Agoka in the 3rd. The study of early Indian history
continues to struggle with the problem of assessing the relative weight
of textual and archaeological evidence, but a reasonably clear picture
can be drawn, to the best of our available knowledge. 5 I am not
concerned with precise dating: so m u c h depends on the date of the
Buddha, at present under m u c h discussion. 6 The most likely time for
D I S C O U R S E ON W H A T IS P R I M A R Y ( A G G A N l q A - S U T T A )
307
308
STEVEN COLLINS
309
310
STEVEN COLLINS
milieu in which AS was produced. The fact that it seems to presuppose a society like that we conjecture to have existed in northeast
India in the 5th--4th. centuries does not mean that it merely passively
'reflects' its environment; rather, to place it there is to see it as an
interlocutor in an ongoing cultural debate, conducted by various
groups within the ruling strata of the time. In section (i) above, I used
Gellner's basic dichotomy of rulers and legitimators, albeit quoting
from him on 'rival elements within the wider clerisy'; I wish now to
specify more precisely what those rival elements were in ancient India,
and how they, and kings, produced different hierarchical models of
society. I take this phrase from Richard Burghart's 'Hierarchical
Models of the Hindu Social System') 5 Restricting himself to the
'Hindu' world, Burghart claims that kings, brahmins and ascetics each
produced ideologies of the social world which hierarchised it, and,
naturally, placed themselves at the top of whatever value-scale the
model embodied. 'Brahmans, ascetics and the king each claimed their
superiority in the particular world in which they lived', and 'each
person based his claim in terms of a particular hierarchy which was
the exhaustive and exclusive order of social relations'. This Brahmanical hierarchy is expressed in terms of ritual purity and 'the
sacrificial body of Brahma' (sic). Ascetic hierarchy is expressed in
terms of 'the cycle of confused wanderings'; that is, rebirth. (I would
add in the Buddhist case a universal morality which over-rides social
hierarchy of all kinds, at the same time as it upholds the Buddhist
ascetic one: see pp. 130--1 below.) Kingly hierarchy, which is found
more in 'panegyrical and epigraphic sources' than in the kind of text
usually studied by historians of religion, is expressed in terms of a
'tenurial hierarchy which was derived from [the king's] lordship over
the land', a lordship construed as a divine marriage between god-king
and the earth (78: 520--1). We may add to the list of sources for
kings' perspectives texts like the Artha-ddstra, redacted in its final form
not before the 3rd. century A.D. but nonetheless usable for the earlier
period; 16 and, from a later period still the whole tradition of sophisticated court poetry (especially its erotic forms) drama (especially
comedy), and the like. 17 Of course kings would also use themes from
'religious' hierarchical models, particularly in their public pronouncements (as did Agoka): but it is now clear that, for example, Dumont's
311
312
STEVEN COLLINS
313
314
STEVEN COLLINS
gewesen ist. No-one, I take it, would wish to disagree. (Even so, the
quotation from Rhys Davids just given continues 'but it reveals a
sound and healthy insight, and is much nearer to the actual facts than
the Brahman legend it was intended to replace'.) There would seem to
be an equivocation over the word 'positive'. Gombrich is using it
partly in a historiographical sense, much as did Rhys Davids. Tambiah
and Reynolds, it seems to me, are using the word in much the same
sense that Gombrich intends when he says that the sermon is 'serious';
but they see the text, in addition to satirising Brahmanism, as intended
to provide a non-satirical Buddhist charter for social arrangements.
The issue then becomes one of what, if anything, we can say about the
original sense and motivation of AS. Tambiah explicitly eschews the
question: 'I must confess I was not there when the Buddha gave this
discourse, nor was I able to ask him what he actually meant'; one
should not, he thinks, 'take an absolutist stand, and insist on a single,
unambiguous formulation of authorial intent' (89: 120; 102). (It is thus
unclear, to me at least, exactly what exegetical status Tambiah accords
to his own assertion that 'behind the m o c k e r y . . , there is a positive
. . . account'.) Gombrich, on the contrary, wants to 'discover the
original meaning of the Buddha's sermons' (92a: 160). I do not accept
that we have only two options, either finding an 'original meaning' or
abandoning ourselves to a free-for-all relativism, in which a text 'has
no objective or inherent meaning' (ibid. 159). Varying readings of any
text are always possible: but I think we have a responsibility to argue
for different readings, some of which must be judged better than
others. In this article I argue that AS was intended by its earliest
composer(s) and redactors to be a humorous parable: its serious intent
was as moral commentary rather than as a 'myth of origins -- charter
for society' or an account intended to be 'factually' or 'historically'
accurate.
But what, again, is at issue here? One of the most discussed aspects
of AS is its apparent proposal of a Social Contract theory of kingship
(see Appendix 2). In western political thought it is still an uncertain,
and in some ways now unimportant question how far social contract
theorists believed their accounts of 'the Original Contract' to be
historically factual descriptions of an event or allegories giving the
justification for legal sanctions. 23 If western political thinkers in the
315
316
STEVEN COLLINS
317
have no reason to deny are early, and which seem to me to help clarify
its meaning and style. First let me summarise my approach to AS. I
take it to be a story whose raison d'etre is to present a Buddhistascetic hierarchical model of society, offered with satirical and ironic
wit in the manner of moral commentary, and with the discursive form
of an aetiology. (For this reason I prefer to call its story of origins a
parable rather than a myth.) Buddhist monasticism and morality order
the logic of values and social relations: Brahmanical values are
satirized and kingly values subordinated, albeit that neither the
Brahmanical hierarchy of discrete social classes nor kingship are
contested as 'social facts' (in the Durkheimian sense). This is the
overall theme which structures the whole of AS as we have it, and
which gives it unity and coherence. Brahmanical social classes are seen
not as a cosmogonic 'success story' but as a 'Fall': this Fall/Evolution
of Mankind is expressed in language and values derived from the
Monastic Order. The earliest Community of Beings, what one might
call the earliest Sam.gha, falls from 'glorious mind-made' celibacy to
the contemporary, embodied Brahmanical social order, by a series of
deeds which are described in the language used for the corresponding
contraventions of the Monastic Rule, the Vinaya. Thus social classes
and kings constitute a 'Fall' from an originally Buddhistic community
(aggaFlfia in the temporal sense of 'what is primary'); Buddhist moral
values, which are laid out systematically in AS twice, before and after
the story of origins, in # 5--7 and # 27--30, are 'what is primary'
(aggatMa in the evaluative sense: see p. 331 below). There are references to Brahmanicat texts and practices in all parts of the text, and
the story of king Pasenadi in # 8 is thematically continuous with the
understanding of kingship and the ks.atriya class given in the parable.
Leaving aside whatever general value these introductory remarks
might have, I hope that what I take to be my discovery of references
to the Vinaya in AS represents a genuine contribution to knowledge.
But if it is accepted that these references exist, one might then raise
the general issue of what such 'reference' means: how far, and in what
ways, can we use other texts to elucidate AS? Overall, there seems to
me no a priori solution to the question of inter-textuality. There can
be no way of proving that all, most or any audiences for individual
Buddhist texts would have interpreted them in the light of others: we
318
STEVEN COLLINS
319
320
STEVEN COLLINS
ence' for AS was much wider; but if that wider audience were familiar
with the characters of Vfisettha and Bhfiradvfija, they would be appropriate as the represented audience.)
In another text of the Sutta Nipdta, the Discourse on 'Brahmanical
Lore' (Brdhmanadhammika-sutta) there is a discussion at Sfivatthi
between the Buddha and wealthy brahmins, but this time, as the text
insists, they were 'aged, old, elderly, advanced in years, in their old
age'. With the sense of passing time perhaps characteristic of old age,
they ask the Buddha whether 'brahmans n o w . . , live in conformity
with the brahmanical lore of the brahmans of old' (pordn.dnam.
brdhmandnam brdhman,adhamme; cp. AS # 4.1 and # 13.4 on
pordn,a). He replies in the negative, and paints a picture of such old
Brahmanical lore which blends motifs from both Buddhist and Brahmanical asceticism. They had no wealth, but begged their food from
door to door; they lived as celibate students for 48 years, 34 and then
married within their own group without bride-price; those who were
married had sex only at the right time, while 'the supreme brahman
did not indulge in sexual intercourse even in a dream'; 3S their
sacrifices did not involved killing cows. However, they began to covet,
inter alia, the wealth and 'excellent women' of kings, and so began
composing hymns 36 to acquire them. 'And they, receiving wealth there,
found pleasure in hoarding it up' (Sn 306, dhanam laddhd sannidhim
samarocayum: see below on 'storing up [objects of] desire'); they
began the 'ancient mean practice' of cow-sacrifice. Because of this, the
other three social classes were 'split up' (the commentary, Pj II 324,
interprets this to mean that they no longer lived in harmony). This
text, like AS, criticises Brahmins by saying that they have forgotten the
past; both recount a narrative of their degeneration from an ideal. The
two narratives are, on the surface level of a temporal sequence of
actual events, quite different; but when read as parables using stories
of the past to make a contemporary moral point, they complement
each other perfectly well.
I have said that AS (and related texts) presents a Buddhist ascetichierarchical model of society; but it is a complex one with an inner
dynamic of its own. The moral values on which the hierarchy is based
are often, indeed normally, correlated with social status: monks and
nuns are 'above' all laity, including Brahmins and kings9 But this
9
D I S C O U R S E ON W H A T IS P R I M A R Y ( A G G A N N A - S U T T A )
321
322
STEVEN COLLINS
individual from any class leaves home for homelessness, and lives
virtuously, the king 'salutes him respectfully, rises up from his seat for
him' (as in AS # 8), supports him materially and affords him protection: in such a case, 'the previous designation "ks.atriya" (etc.) has
disappeared, and he is reckoned simply as "ascetic"' (yd hi ' s s a . . .
323
the Buddhist tradition, from at least the time of the Mahdvastu and
the M~lasarvdstivdda Vinaya. The Pali commentarial tradition seems
not to have understood the text in the way I do, or if it did has not
said so; the commentary does notice some jokes (see # 4.3) and both
commentary and sub-commentary are aware of one of the references
to Vedic ideas (see # 3.3), but neither mention the Vinaya. For some
readers, perhaps, this in itself might be enough to render what I say an
over-speculative and purely modern reading. Ultimately, the worth of
my interpretation must be judged on its own merits, according to the
weight of the detailed evidence and arguments adduced. Modern
scholars of Classical Greek texts are not necessarily concerned if their
interpretations of them were not shared by commentators in the
intervening centuries. I do think that, in the Pali Buddhist case, there
are reasons for paying great attention to the commentarial tradition
when considering the development of systematic and context-free
religious doctrine, and the way the later tradition understood (and
redacted) its canonical texts from that point of view. But with a text as
context-sensitive as I believe AS to be, perhaps we might accord
ourselves greater interpretive autonomy. I do not wish merely to say
that, as a reader, I have the privilege to respond in any way I like to a
text, and so my interpretation is self-justificatory. I want my reading to
be accorded historical value, to be seen as discovering motifs and
intentions genuinely present in the text and in the minds of its original
composer(s) and (at least some of) its original audience(s). If this is so,
how can I explain the fact that other texts present versions of # 10-21 with apparently straightforward seriousness, and that the commentarial tradition has failed either to notice or to mention the references
to the Vinaya I see in AS? I will sketch out an answer to these
questions, but I do not expect to close the issue decisively -- I am
content to leave the matter open for discussion.
If I am right, AS (that is, some oral ancestor of our written text)
was originally composed in the pre-Mauryan period in Northeast
India, in the socio-economic and political circumstances described in
Part I (ii) and (iii), circumstances discovered by modern historiography.
Although it would be wrong to allege that ancient South Asians had
no 'historical consciousness', it is hardly surprising that memories and
narratives of the past were then deployed, in texts, in ways very
324
STEVEN COLLINS
325
326
STEVEN
COLLINS
III. The Story of Origins, monastic life and ideals, and the Vinaya
(i) individual verbal reminiscences of the Monastic Code (Vinaya)
Here I simply list the relevant places: the translation notes contain the
textual and linguistic detail.
# 11ft. The first food-stuffs likened to ghee (sappi), cream (navanita)
and honey (madhu): three of the five 'medicines' allowed to monks
and nuns (Nissaggiya Pficittiya 23, et freq.; see below).
# 12. Tasting the 'earth-essence' with the finger: contravenes Sekhiya
rules 52 and 53 (see # 12.2).
# 12. Taking (big) mouthfuls with the hands: contravenes Sekhiya
rules 39, 40, and (possibly) 42 and 46 (see # 12.3).
# 16. Having sex: contravenes Pfirfijikfi 1. Note the use of dpaffati in
# 17 (see # 17.3). 'Away with you and your impurity!' (nassa asuci):
recalls use of ndseti as a technical term for expulsion from the monkhood (see # 16.4 and 5).
# 17. Making houses (agdrdni... kdtum): contradicts the fundamental
symbol of monastic life, 'going forth from home to homelessness'
( agdrasmd anagdriyam, pabbaffd). Such pabbaffd constitutes the (first)
change of status from layperson to (novice) monk, the 'lower ordination'. Houses are said to be made for the purpose of concealing/
covering immorality; cp. the ubiquitious motif 'dwelling in a house is a
constriction.., going-forth is an open-air life'. 41
# 17. Storing food for 8 days: contravenes Nissagiya Pficittiya 23 and
Pficittiya 38. Note the grammatical peculiarity of sannidhi-kdrakam
(see below pp. 328--9).
# 18. 'Setting a limit' (mariyddd): may recall monastic boundaries
(sTmd) (see # 18.2).
# 20. The verb khiyati, 'become angry': found standardly in this sense
only as a formulaic expression in the Vinaya (see # 20.1).
# 21. The term mahdsammata: modelled on monastic appointments
(see Appendix 1).
(ii)
327
328
STEVEN COLLINS
5. 'He cannot enjoy (objects of) desire, making a store (of them) as
he formerly did when living in a house' (sannidhikdrakam. kdme
paribhufifitum, seyyathdpi pubbe agdriyabh(~to). This recalls both
Nissaggiya Pficittiya 23 and Pficittiya 38: the similarity calls for
extended comment.
(iii) 'making a store ~ the Fall of Mankind and Vinaya infractions
The word kdma can be both subjective and objective, referring to
desire and its objects. While it stands for attachment to anything and
everything in Buddhist psychology, there is clearly an emphasis on
sensual and sexual pleasure. The verb bhuj, used here, can mean to
eat, and also to consume or enjoy in any and every sense. In this
context all these connotations of the word are in play, with the idea
that the householder stores both the actual objects of his enjoyment
(from food to wife) and the psychological propensity to desire them.
The form of the word sannidhi-kdrakam is of particular importance
here. The suffix -kdraka is usually used to refer to a person or process
which makes something, or to the act of making. Here neither sense is
syntactially appropriate, and the word seems to agree with nothing in
the sentence. The commentary to the passage cited (Ps III 234) glosses
it as an absolutive or gerund, sannidhim katvd, 'having made a store',
and states that such a monk cannot eat foods such as sesame, husked
rice, ghee, cream, etc., which he has stored for present consumption,
as he did when a layman enjoying material pleasures (yathd pubbe
gihibhg~to sannidhim katvd vatthukdme paribhu~]ati evam tila-tand,ulasappi-navanitddini sannidhim katvd iddni paribhuhfitum abhabbo). 42
The explanation of sannidhikdrakam as a gerund is found in most of
the relevant commentaries,43 and seems to be historicaly correct.
Edgerton, in BHS Grammar ~ 22.5 and # 35.5. describes what he
calls 'quasi-gerunds' in -akam, and adds that some are found in the
Pail Pfitimokkha. Examples in the Pfitimokkha are Nissaggiya Pficittiya
23, Pficittiya 38 (both with exactly this phrase; see below), and
Sekhiya 18--28. Gerunds in -am are called adverbial by Whitney
(1989: 359--60), n.amul in the terminology of PS_ninian grammar: they
are even rarer in Pall than in Sanskrit, but they are found.44 AS
contains two, in ~ 12 dlumpa-kdrakarn. (see # 12.3), and in # 17 this
word, sannidhi-kdrakam.
329
330
STEVEN COLLINS
language and content. The rules should have been familiar to all
monks and nuns, as the Pdtimokkha was (supposed to be) recited
every fortnight in the presence of all members of each monastic
community. The five infractions of the Vinaya impossible for an ideal
ascetic are thus precisely the stages in the Fall of Mankind from
celibacy to civilisation, in sections # 16--20. Each and every event in
the degeneration of beings is in some way related to the monastic
order, its ideals and its Code:
# 12 eating with a finger and then in handfuls: contravenes Sekhiya
rules (as above, p. 326).
# 13--5 'pride in appearance' (van. n.a): cp. the class- (van. n.a-)pride
and related denigration of Buddhist monks attributed to Brahmins at
the start of the sutta, which had been abandoned by Vfisettha and
Bhfiradvfija in their intention to become monks (cf. IV below on
keywords).
# 16 having sex: (Impossible Thing no. 3) contravenes Pdrgtjika 1:
methunam dhamrnam patisevim, su; beings 'expelled from the sam. gha'
because of this: nassa (referring to ndsand).
# 17 storing rice for more than 7 days: (Impossible Thing no. 5)
contravenes Nissaggiya Pdcitiya 23, Pdcittiya 38): yato te. . . sattd
sannidhikdrakarn sdlirn upakkamim, su paribhuhjitum. , atho kano pi
tand. ularn pariyonandhi, thuso pi tan. d.ulam pariyonandhi. . .
# 19 theft: (Impossible Thing no. 2) contravenes Pdrdfika 2: sakam
bhglgam parirakkhanto ahftataram bhdgam, adinnam ddiyitvd paribhuhfi. Note that the text specifies that he kept his own portion (of
rice) while taking another's, which has not been given; this underscores that it counts as an intentional theft, not simple carelessness
about ownership.
# 19 lying: (Impossible Thing no. 4) contravenes Pficittiya 1: musdvddo
pa~fiayati.
19--20: Impossible Thing no. 1 (cf. Pficittiya 61 against killing any
living thing, and Pdrdfika 1, against murder) is not described directly
as AS, but may be inferred. It is first adumbrated by the violence of
the beings in r 19, and then -- by implication -- by the legitimate
331
punishment given by the first king in # 20. The text does not specify
that capital punishment is involved, but this is assumed by the
commentarial tradition: Sv 870 glosses the phrase khfyitabbam
khiyeyya, inter alia, as hdretabbam hdre)ya, simply 'remove (whoever)
has to be removed'; the sub-commentary, DAT III 59) explains,
somewhat gingerly, sattanikdyato nihdretabbam., '(whoever) is to be
removed from the world of beings'. It has almost always been an
accepted part of a king's function throughout Buddhist and Indian
history to execute criminals, and this of course makes Buddhist moral
ambiguity about them automatic and unavoidable. 45 In AS, sex and
storing rice are called in ~ 18 pdpakd akusald dhammd, 'bad,
unwholesome things'; in # 19 and # 20 theft, lying and violence are
called 'bad'; the term datjddddnam., 'taking up the stick', refers here to
the beings' violence in # 19, but dan.d.a is also a standard term for
royal punishment; in # 22 these three things, and the now apparently
legitimate royal activity of pabbdjana, 'banishing', are called 'bad,
unwholesome things', seemingly with the approval of the narrative
voice (see # 20.2 on royal punishment for theft, and # 22.1).
IV. The structure of AS, and key-words
Part of the unity and coherence of AS is achieved by the repetition of
certain key words, often with deliberate plays on their various senses.
The words are agga, aggahha, set(ha, the prefix brahma-, and vanna.
(For the close relationship between the first four of these terms, see
# 7.2, 7.3, and # 9.2.) I accept Gombrich's (92a: 169--70) analysis of
aggahha as an adjective formed by the ending -hha added to agga in
the sense of 'first'; aggahha thus means, in his rendering, 'primeval' or
'original'. I think there is also a deliberate play on words here with
agga in the sense of 'best', found in # 7 and # 31 (see # 7.2).
Fortunately for a translator, the English 'primary' can also have the
same two senses: the first two meanings listed in the Oxford English
Dictionary are 'of the first order in time or temporal sequnce; earliest,
primitive, original' and 'of the first or highest rank or importance; that
claims the first consideration; principal; chief'. In the title of the sutta I
render the word 'what is primary', as I see it deliberately catching both
senses; the grammatical nature of the phrase aggan.~ akkhdyati in # 7
332
STEVEN COLLINS
and # 31 suggests the English 'what is primary' there too (see # 7.2),
albeit that to refer to a person as 'what is primary' is a little ungainly
in English.
The word settha means 'best', and is used repeatedly in the text by
various people of various things (see below); the prefix brahma- can
be used with the same meaning in Pali, and this allows puns on the
name of the Brahmanical god Brahmfi (see # 9.2, # 32.1). It is not
surprising, in a text proposing an (ascetic) hierarchy, that there should
be so many words, so often repeated, for 'best', etc. The most polyvalent term in AS, and the most frequently repeated, is vanna. On its
first appearance it is used by Brahmins to refer to their social class; as
Gombrich (92a: 163, cf. 168) points out, it can also mean 'colour',
'complexion', 'good looks'; I have sometimes rendered it 'appearance'
(see # 11.3 and 13.1). All these senses are used as the text goes along;
but in each case echoes of the other senses are also in play.
I set out here the structure of AS as I see it, showing where and
how the key-words occur. I label the first two parts 'Story of the
Present' and 'Story of the Past' to evoke the use of the same terms in
the structure of Jfitaka narratives. I see the organisation of AS as in
this sense analogous to that of Jfitaka tales, although it is not, of
course, presented as such.
# 8
# 9
333
# 27--32 Conclusion
# 27--30 Morality, Rebirth and Release the same for all social groups
(repeats sentiments of g/5--7)
# 31
# 32
334
STEVEN COLLINS
DISCOURSE
O N W H A T IS P R I M A R Y
(AGGANIqA-SUTTA)
335
336
STEVEN COLLINS
top of the social hierarchy, and other texts -- including even the Manusmrti -- which
make the king the highest.
18 (92: 22--3), referring to Heesterman (85).
19 The first to suggest that the story of origins must have been a separate text was
Edmnnds (04: 207--9); more recently Schneider (57) and Meising (88) have taken a
similar approach.
20 I am here influenced by recent trends in Homeric scholarship; see, e.g., Macleod
(82), esp. pp. ix and 37--40, and Griffin (80), esp. pp. 12--5.
21 I use this term in the sense proposed by Ramanujan (91).
22 See also Sarkisyanz (65). Much of the heat, and much of the point, can be
removed from the debate between Tambiah and Carrithers (77), (87), (93: chapter 7),
when one distinguishes what AS and the figure of mahdsammata might be in their
earliest form, and what the 'myth of origins' and Mahfisammata (sic, now become a
proper name for an individual) became in the later tradition.
23 Some seem to have taken it as historically factual, pointing to what they thought
was the 'natural', pre-political, 'we-Contract' condition of the newly-discovered
American Indian tribes as empirical evidence; others seem to have recognised the
allegorical nature of the story, while still according it explanatory and legitimatory
value. See Lessnoff (86).
24 He was writing of the poet Andrew Marvell (32: 255). I am grateful to Gananath
Obeyesekere for introducing me to this passage (in a talk entirely unconnected with
AS), and for kindly tracking down the precise reference.
25 Manuel and Manuel (79: 16, 80, 103, 229, 343).
26 ibid., p. 1 on More, and passim.
27 I think it would be interesting to study the Brahmanical tradition of dharma-ddstra
from this 'o/eu-topian' perspective; but that must await another occasion, and perhaps
another scholar.
28 See, e.g. KRN Coll. Pap. II # 43 on the Sabhiya Sutta.
29 Kahrs (83) has argued that in Sanskrit, such 'etymologies' are to be understood in
relation to the Brahmanical view of it as a language with a special and direct relation
to reality: thus, the more meanings perceivable in a word, the more it tells us about
the world. RFG cites Kahrs, arguing that the etymologies in AS are deliberately
parodying this view. I am not sure that this point is decidable. As I hope to show in a
future article, while there is some evidence that early Buddhism did have a view of
language as purely conventional, by the commentarial period the form of Middle
Indo-Aryan we call Pali (for the texts, the language of Magadha) was seen as having a
privileged, epistemologically direct relation to reality, if not the ontological status
accorded to Sanskrit in the Brahmanical MimSmasfi school.
30 See Bronkhorst (83); and for the a-historicism of Sanskrit Deshpande (85).
31 Translations from the Sutta Nipata, here and of the Brdhmanadhammika Sutta, are
by Norman (92).
32 For a list of examples of Brahmanical terminology used in a (new) Buddhist sense,
see KRN Coll. Pap. 1V # 99.
33 Although novices were not allowed to attend formal-ritual recitations of the
Pdtimokkha ('in a seated assembly', nisinna-parisd, Vin I 135), as 'co-resident pupils'
of a preceptor, they learnt to recite it (Vin I 47: cp. H o m e r [51:62 n. 7] and CPD s.v.
uddisdpeti.
34 The word is komdrabrahmacariya: see AS # 31.2 and # 31.3.
32 See Collins (forthcoming) on the significance of this in Buddhist monasticism.
DISCOURSE
O N W H A T IS P R I M A R Y
(AGGANlqA-SUTTA)
337
338
STEVEN COLLINS
339
340
STEVEN COLLINS
341
342
STEVEN COLLINS
in the same way as (does) the spreading out (of skin) on top of boiled
milk-rice as it cools down? It had colour, 4 smell and taste; its colour
was like sweet ghee or cream, its taste like fine clear honey. 5
# 12. Then, monks, a certain being, greedy by nature, 1 thinking 'what
can this be?', tasted the earth-essence with his finger? As he tasted the
earth-essence with his finger he was pleased, and craving came upon
him. Other beings imitated that being, tasting the earth-essence with
their finger(s). They too were pleased, and craving came upon them.
Then, monks, these beings started to eat the earth-essence taking (big)
mouthfuls of it with their hands? As they did so, their self-luminosity
disappeared. When their self-luminosity disappeared, the moon and
sun appeared; when the sun and moon appeared, the twinkling stars
appeared; when the stars appeared, night and day appeared; when
night and day appeared, the seasons and years appeared. Thus far,
monks, did the world evolve.
# 13. Those beings, monks, spent a long time eating the earth-essence,
living on it as their food. According to how (much) these beings ate,
so (much did) their bodies become hard, and good and bad looks
became known. 1 Some beings were good-looking, others ugly; those
who were good-looking despised those who were ugly: "we are betterlooking than they, they are uglier than us!' Because these (beings),
proud and arrogant by nature, 2 were proud of their appearance, the
earth-essence disappeared. When it had disappeared, they came
together and lamented "Look (aho), the (earth) essence (rasam.) (has
disappeared), look . . . the essence" so nowadays, when people have
tasted something good they say "Oh the taste, oh the taste!" (aho
rasam. 3 They recall the original, primary word(s), but they don't
understand what they mean. 4
# 14. Then, monks, when the earth-essence had disappeared, a
fragrant earth appeared for those beings; it appeared (suddenly) just
like a mushroom. 1 It had colour, smell and taste; its colour was like
sweet ghee or cream, its taste like fine clear honey. Then they started
to eat the fragrant earth. Those beings, monks, spent a long time
eating the fragrant earth, living on it as their food. According to how
343
(much) these beings ate, so to an even greater degree did their bodies
become hard, and good and bad looks become known. Some beings
were good-looking, others ugly; those who were good-looking despised
those who were ugly: "we are better-looking than they, they are uglier
than us!" Because these (beings), proud and arrogant by nature, were
proud of their appearance, the fragrant earth disappeared. When it
had disappeared, a (kind of) creeper appeared. 2 It appeared Iike a
kalambukfi plant. 3 It had colour, smell and taste; its colour was like
sweet ghee or cream, its taste like fine clear honey.
# 15. Then they started to eat the creeper. Those beings, monks,
spent a long time eating the creeper, living on it as their food. According to how (much) these beings ate, so to an even greater degree did
their bodies become hard, and good and bad looks become known.
Some beings were good-looking, others ugly; those who were goodlooking despised those who were ugly: "we are better-looking than
they, they are uglier than us!" Because these (beings), proud and
arrogant by nature, were proud of their appearance, the creeper
disappeared. When it had disappeared, they came together and
lamented 'we've had it, the creeper has given out on us!'. 1 So nowadays, when people are touched by some hardship, they say 'we've had
it, it's given out on us!' They recall the original, primary word(s), but
they don't understand what they mean.
# 16. Then, monks, when the creeper had disappeared, there
appeared for those beings rice, growing without cultivation; it was
without powder, (already) husked, sweet-smelling and ready to eat. 1
Whatever they gathered in the evening for their evening meal, in the
morning had grown back ripe again; whatever they gathered in the
morning for their morning meal, in the evening had grown ripe again:
(the work of) harvesting was unknown. 2 Those beings, monks, spent a
long time eating the rice which grew without cultivation, living on it as
their food. According to how (much) these beings ate, so to an even
greater degree did their bodies become hard, and good and bad looks
become known. The female parts appeared in a woman, and the male
parts in a man; 3 the woman looked at the man with intense, excessive
longing, as did the man at the woman. As they were looking at each
344
STEVEN COLLINS
other with intense longing passion arose in them, and burning came
upon their bodies; because of this burning, they had sex. When the
(other) beings saw them having sex, some threw earth (at them), some
threw ashes, 4 other cow-dung, (saying) "Away with you and your
impurity, away with you and your impurity!''s "How could a being do
such a thing to another being?" So nowadays, people in certain areas,
when a bride is being led out, throw dirt, ash or cow-dung. They recall
the original, primary (actions), but they don't understand what they
mean. 6
# 17. Monks, what was thought improper at that time is nowadays
thought proper. 1 At that time the beings who took to having sex were
prevented from entering either small or larger settlements 2 for a
month or two. Since those beings were excesssively intoxicated at that
period of time by (this) immorality,3 they took to building houses to
conceal it. 4 Then a certain being, lazy by nature, thought "Well! Why
am I troubling myself gathering rice for my evening meal in the
evening, and (again) for my morning meal in the morning? Why
shouldn't I gather it just once, for both evening and morning?" And he
did so. Then another being came up to him and said "Come, being,
let's go to gather rice". "There's no need! I've gathered rice just once
for both evening and morning." The (second) being thought "that
seems (a) good (idea); my friend", 5 and imitated him by gathering rice
just once for two days. Then another being came up to the (latter)
being, and said "let's go to gather rice". "There's no need! I've
gathered rice just once for two days". The (third) being thought "that
seems (a) good (idea)", and imitated him by gathering rice just once
for four days. Then another being came up to the (latter) being, and
said "let's go to gather rice". "There's no need! I've gathered rice just
once for four days". The (fourth) being thought "that seems (a) good
(idea)", and imitated him by gathering rice just once for eight days.
Because these beings took to eating rice which they had stored up, 6
powder and husk then covered the grain, cutting without regeneration
and harvesting became known; and the rice stood in clumps. 7
# 18. And then, monks, the beings came together and lamented "bad
things a have appeared for us beings; we were formerly made of mind
345
346
STEVEN COLLINS
347
348
STEVEN COLLINS
349
350
STEVEN COLLINS
351
352
STEVEN COLLINS
Brahmfi is a 'cunt', all they are doing is 'pressing out' demerit (by what
we would now call blasphemy).
# 5.1. As stated in note 2 to the Introduction, I give transliterated Skt
forms for the four classes. I assume that most readers of this translation will be familiar with the scheme. Leaving the terms untranslated
will also recall to mind that they do not denote 'priests', 'warriors' or
'farmers' in any and every context, but only people with those occupations as defined and represented by Brahmanical ideology. (You can't
be a ks.atriya in Kansas.) The placing of the ksatriya class first, before
brahmins, is common in Buddhist texts and clearly intentional (see
also # 32).
# 7.1. Literally dark and white dhamma-s, states of mind, phenomena, etc.
# 7.2. The last phrase is so tesam aggam akkhdyati dhammen' eva no
adhamrnena. 'Properly' for dhammena clearly cannot catch all the
nunaces of the term, nor catch the overlap with dhamma in the next
sentence: 'according to the Dhamma' (sc. the Buddha's teaching) is
also possible, as are many other renderings. In the phrase aggam.
akkh@ati, aggam (both 'first and best': see Introduction p. 331) can
be taken as neuter substantive, in place of an adjective in agreement
with the subject (thus RhD 'declared chief among them'; this is a
commentarial gloss, Mp III 74, etc.; of. CPD, PED s.v. akkh~yati). If
the verb is taken to mean not simply 'is declared', but 'is proclaimed,
acclaimed, praised', then aggam may be taken adverbially, 'in front', 'in
the first place', etc. (as PED s.v. agga seems to do). The sense is the
same in both cases: I choose the former alternative, and translate 'what
is primary', to bring out the connexion with aggaftfia, both in the text
and in the sutta's title, and below in # 9.1, although no doubt more
elegant renderings are possible in particular contexts. This phrase is
found frequently, used with terms in all genders (see CPD, PTC s.v.
akkhSyati); at A III 36 it is found with the singular verb used of a
plural subject; at A V 59--60 aggam, akkhgffati is found first with king
Pasenadi, and then aggam., with plural verb, is used of the Abhassara
gods, in a passage closely resembling AS # 10. (See # 9.1 below.)
353
Commentaries (e.g. Ps I 136, Mp I 124, I 114, It-a 102) say that 'the
word agga is seen in (the senses of) beginning, top, a part, and what is
best (agga-saddo ddi-koti-koffhdsa-set.thesu dissati): examples of the
first and second are ajjatagge, beginning from now, henceforth, and
atigulagga, finger-tip (I omit the third, which raises difficulties irrelevant
here); the fourth is exemplified by the phrase Tathdgato tesarn aggarn
akkhdyati, 'of these the Tathfigata is called what is primary'. The word
is also common in the compound etadaggarn., 'primary among these',
as in A I 23--6, the etadagga-vagga, which gives a long list of the
Buddha's disciples whom he declares 'primary' or 'pre-eminent' in
different accomplishments. This vagga is well-known to Buddhist
tradition, since the commentary attaches extensive biographical details
about each figure named.
# 7.3. That there is an explicit connexion between the uses of agga
and set.t.ha here is proved by the logic of this section. The Buddha
asks why wise men do not tolerate the brahmins' claim to be the best
class, settho vann.o; and answers by stating that the Arahant is called
aggarn, and that the Dhamma is seCt.ha.
# 8.1. Anuttaro. The commentary reads anan~ard (agreeing with
Sakya-kuld) in place of anuttaro here, and glosses antara-virahitd,
attano kulena sddisd, 'without (social) distance, like his own family';
that is, from the same social level. Antara means an interval or
distance, in a variety of semantic domains (see CPD s.v.). CPD s.v.
anantara accepts the reading and comments 'prob. -- .next in rank';
RhD also accepts the reading but interprets the word geographically,
'neighbouring', commenting that 'the c o n t e x t . . , does not call for such
a word as anuttaro'. I do not see why: Pasenadi, whose words these
are, is said to revere Gotama, and anuttara is a standard flattering
superlative in Pali and Sanskrit. In a text which proposes a Buddhist
ascetic hierarchy, it is no surprise when a king is made to say that the
Buddha 'is unsurpassed'. But both readings make sense.
g/8.2. The text repeats all the words for 'obeisance... (etc.)' twice
over; my translation both summarises and attempts to catch the tone
of the Buddha's insistence on the physical realities of subordination.
354
STEVEN COLLINS
355
356
STEVEN COLLINS
that all audiences wouldcatch allusions from one text to another; but
this passage from the A~guttara Nikdya suggests that to those familiar
with Buddhist texts, the conjunction of Pasenadi, et al., with a discussion of 'what is primary' in AS would not be unique or unusual. (For
a discussion of the geography depicted in the early texts, see Rhys
Davids (03: 23ff.), and for a convenient map of Pasenadi's territory,
Cousins (84: 284).)
# 9.2. I explain these four epithets as follows: (i) 'he who has
Dhamma for a body' is, as RFG 165 points out, a way of expressing
an idea found elsewhere, that the significance of the Buddha is his
enunciation of the Truth. Thus, famously, at SIII 120 'he who sees me
sees the Dhamma; he who sees the Dhamma sees me'. (Paul Harrison
[92] has shown that the word dharmakdya in early MahfiySna sfitras is
often to be understood, as here [see the commentary Sv 865], as a
possessive adjective, a bahuvri~, agreeing with 'the Buddha', and not
as a substantive set in apposition.) (ii) The phrase 'who has the best
body' translates brahmakdyo, but cannot retain the pun with 'has/is
Brahmfi's body' (i.e. replaces Brahmfi in the Brahmanical view as the
source for scripture, 'father' of the monks, etc.). The word brahma is
standardly used to mean 'best' in compounds; here Sv 865 remarks
that in the first epithet the Buddha's body is called dhamma; and then
states that 'dhamma is said to be brahma-/Brahmgl in the sense of
'best' (dhammo hi setthat.t.hena Brahma ti vuccati). (iii) In 'who is
Dhamma' (dhammabh(tto) the element -bh~to functions simply as an
identity marker, as it does also in (iv) 'who is best' (brahmabMtto); but
in the latter there is a further play on 'has become Brahmfi', in the
sense of being the Buddhist replacement/parallel for Brahmfi in the
Brahmanical view. The epithets dhammabhfita and brahmabh(tta are
found in a number of other places, always explained similarly (e.g. M I
111 with Ps II 76; S IV 94 with Spk II 389). BrahmabhVtta can be
applied to arahants, as at S III 83 (which also says they are best in the
world, ete agg(~ ete setthd; Spk II 282 glosses setthabh~tta).
The commentary here (Sv 865) is quite certain that the sutta is
carefully arranged, with section # 10 following logically after # 9.
Earlier (Sv 861 on # 3) it had explained orasd mukhato jdt~ in the
Brahmanieal view (see note # 3.5) as 'having been in the breast they
357
come out by the mouth'. Here it gives the Buddhist parallel, keeping
alive what is otherwise a dead metaphor: the person with 'firm faith' is
'an own son, born from the mouth through being established in the
Paths and Fruits by means of the sound of the Dhamma coming out
from [the Buddha's] mouth, which had been in his chest'. When the
Buddha is said to 'have Dhamma for a body' it explains 'the Tathfigata
thought out the Word of the Buddha (recorded) in the Three Pitakas
in his heart and brought it out with his voice'. At the start of the next
section, it states: 'thus far the Blessed One has made clear the argument which refutes (the Brahmanical view of) the best; now in another
way, in order to [do the same thing] he says [the opening phrase of
# 10]' (ettavatd Bhagavd set.tha-cchedaka-vddarn dassetvd iddni
aparena pi nayena set.tha-cchedaka-vddarn eva daseturn . . . ddim dha).
# 10.1. The profusion of imprecise time-words, hoti kho s o . . .
samayo yam. kaddci karahaci dighassa addhuno accayena, and
yebhuyyena, 'usually', 'as a rule', might suggest that there is a studied
vagueness about the cosmogony here.
# 11.1. See RFG 166--7 for reminiscences of Brahmanical cosmogony in this section, as now found in Rig Veda X.129 and
Brhaddranyaka Upanis.ad 1, 2.
# 11.2. The narrative now changes to the aorist, from the generalising
present tense used previously. The compound rasa-pathavi was
translated by RhD 'savoury earth'; as PED s.v. rasa remarks, this is
"not quite clear'. It would seem to be a karmadhdraya, 'essence-earth'
or 'earth-essence'; the Sanskrit versions of this story have pr.thivi-rasa
(Mhv I 339; see Jones' note to his translation vol. 1 p. 286; Msv Vin
p. 7); AS r 13 has the two members of the compound separately,
rasdya pathaviyd. It is also possible to take it as a p(trva-nip&a, a
compound whose members appear in reverse order. Pathavi-rasa is
found elsewhere with the sense of an 'essence of earth' which, along
with the ~essence of moisture' (@o-rasa) is necessary for plant growth
(e.g. S I 134, A I 32, V 213, Spk I 250, II 84, Pj II 5--6). This is what
distinguishes fertile soil from ash or stone. The nature of the gradual
evolution here, the step-by-step move from immaterial to material
358
STEVEN COLLINS
D I S C O U R S E ON W H A T IS P R I M A R Y (AGGA1N~lqA-SUTTA)
359
360
STEVEN COLLINS
361
362
STEVEN COLLINS
363
364
STEVEN COLLINS
365
fruit which consists in husked rice'. Compare the same terms used at
Mhv V 30, of the paradisial conditions at the time of Agoka's consecration, and Anfig v.27, at the time of the future Buddha Metteyya.
# 16.2. n@addnam, pafi~dyati. The commentary (Sv 869), followed
by RhD, takes apaddna in the literal sense of 'cut', and interprets this
to mean that the signs of cutting from the previous gathering were not
to be seen. I prefer to see this phrase as referring to another in the
long list of things which were not yet known, as the aetiology of
contemporary everyday life unfolds; thus I take apaddna to refer to
the whole business of harvesting _rice with husks, in opposition to the
carefree 'gathering' of ready-husked grains described here.
# 16.3. In this section instead of another repetition of vanna-pride,
the narrative switches directly to the aetiology of sex. The version in
Buddhaghosa's Visuddhimagga (418 -- XII 50--1) provides an
interesting transition (found in abbreviated form in Spence Hardy's
Sinhalese version (1880: 67) and in the 19th. century text NitiNighand.uva: see Appendix 2). After the rice appears so too, spontaneously, do cooking utensils and fire; although the rice thus cooked
is like jasmine flowers, and needs no sauces, when the beings eat this
'gross' (ol.drika) food, urine and excrement appear in them -- presumably the previous foodstuffs were too ethereal for such a result -and openings appear in the body to let it out, like wounds or sores
(van.a-mukhdni). Thus maleness and femaleness (purisa-, itthi-bhdva)
arise: a somewhat ironic idyll of 'domestic life in the olden days'. (The
body and its orifices are regularly compared to a boil with nine holes:
e.g. A IV 386--7, Pj I 46, Vism 196 = VI 93.) There seems no point
worrying here, as does the commentary, about how a man and a
woman could have existed before the appearance of the parts (it says
this is due to previous karma); it is that appearance which constitutes
them as differently gendered. R N ) has here 'in the female appeared
the distinctive features of the female, and in the male those of the
male. Then truly did woman contemplate man too closely, and man,
woman.' This rendering suggests either that all (? some) members
of each gender acted thus, or perhaps that the terms are generic:
'Woman' and 'Man'. But there is no reason for either assumption; all
366
STEVEN COLLINS
367
368
STEVEN COLLINS
369
sthdpitavantah. .
# 19.1. 'From this moment on' is tadagge, 'from this beginning' (cf. Sv
870 tam aggam, katvd). Note that not only theft and lying, but also
accusations and punishment (normal parts of legal procedure) are seen
as 'bad things', as the next section states. See further # 20.2 and 22.1.
# 20.1. Sammd-khfyitabbam. khiyeyya. The verb khfyati is said by
PED to be the passive of khayati, meaning to waste away, but it is
difficult to see how this could be so semantically. The word is used in
this sense almost solely in the Vinaya, where it standardly occurs in a
group of three verbs, ujjhdyati khiyati vipdceti, said by CPD (s.v.
ujjhdyati) to be 'a stock group of three near synonyms' meaning 'to
become indignant or irritated, grumble, murmur, complain, protest'.
The contexts in which the verbs are used show that they must have
370
STEVEN COLLINS
371
372
STEVEN COLLINS
abhinibbatti ahosi), where the phrase 'from the (other) four groups is
in the ablative. Although the genitive case can usurp the functions of
other cases, there seems no reason why the ablative should not have
been used in # 21 also, if RhD's interpretation had been intended.
As in # 7.2. my translation does not try to catch the overlap
between the uses of dhamma here and in the next sentence.
# 22.1. Note that banishment, one of the tasks of the first king, is
included in what is bad and unwholesome. There is no reason to
assume that the narrative voice here intends any criticism of the
sentiment.
# 22.2. This etymology for brdhmana is common elsewhere: e.g. Dh
386, Sn 519. It would have had more immediate sense in a dialect
where brdhmana appeared as bamhana or bambhana; it seems that
such a form lay behind Pali brdhmana, which was restored as a
Sanskritism: see, e.g., KRN Coll. Pap III 131--2, 239--40.
# 22.3. The PTS text has pann.a-, which must be a mistake (or
alternative) for the reading panna-, which is found in the commentary
and glossed as a past participle of pat, to fall. RFG 172--3 suggests
reading sanna-musald, '(with) pestle set down', here, seeing in this
word and in vftadhumd yet another allusion to Brahmanical texts, this
time to law-books. But there are problems with this. As he notes, the
Brahmanical dharma-rule applies these words to those from whom the
ascetics beg, not the beggars themselves; they should beg from houses
where the pestle has been laid down and there is no more smoke
(from the cooking fire). The texts RFG cites read sanna-; the version
of the rule in the Brdhm@d.a Purdna (I, 7, 177) reads vipanna- (the
corresponding passage of the Vdyu Purdna has dsanna-). I cite these
latter two texts from Kirfel (27: 99). Patrick OliveUe suggests (pers.
comm.) that the parallel with the dharma-rule can be maintained by
reading (whatever the first part of the compound) -musale, a locative
case meaning 'when the pestle has been set down'. One would have to
make a sentence break after jhdyanti ('they meditated'), and read all
three next words in the locative to preserve the full parallel.
373
374
STEVEN COLLINS
375
376
STEVEN COLLINS
377
(RFG 171): the sentence from # 7, with the standard list of titles and
epithets, is simply repeated verbatim. But as argued in the Introduction, the presumption is so strong that the celibate life aimed at
nirvdna translates into monastic status that almost anyone who is 'an
A r a h a n t . . . ' , etc., will in practice be a monk. Most mss. here omit
vusitavd.
# 31.2. It is not impossible that there is here a slight echo of the
other sense of agga, 'first'. The pre-lapsarian beings did not commit
any of the Five Impossible Things (see Introduction); they lived as a
celibate community (sam.gha) and were not (yet) capable of the Vinaya
infractions which constitute the Fall/Evolution of Mankind. By this
stage of the sutta, an audience sensitive to the multiple puns and
cross-references might well see a sense in which the Arahant recreates
that state, but here without the possibility of lapsing. There would then
be even more point in ending with a verse from 'the ever-virgin
Brahmfi'. There would also be the implication that monastic celibacy is
a kind of return to a 'Golden Age', an idea common in many traditions. Other elements from AS are found in Buddhist depictions of
future utopias (e.g. Anfig v.27), but the parallel 'past Golden Age =
future Utopia' is not exact, and the point here is a matter of nuance
only.
# 32.1. This verse is often cited and ascribed to Brahmfi Sanamkumfira; its incorporation here is significant for various reasons. First, the
name recalls the Buddhist view that the term Brahmfi does not refer
to a Creator God, as in the Brahmanical view with which the Sutta
began; it is not even the proper name of a single supernatural, but
designates a class of beings who live in the Brahma-worlds, above the
Divine Worlds (devalokd) in which 'gods' live. Second, Sanamkumfira
means 'ever a youth'; I translate it 'Ever-Virgin' because in Brahmanical
legend this was the name of one of Brahm~'s sons, who remained
perpetually celibate. Like the true brahmins of old (see note # 22.1)
he practises the celibate, 'divine' life (komdra-brahrnacariya, A III
224ff.; cp. Introduction p. 320 and note 34). The name can be given,
as a title, to any great ascetic (see Mon.W.s.v.), and so it is appropriate as a conclusion to a sutta extolling an ascetic point of view.
Third, as Buddhaghosa explicitly points out in his re-telling of AS at
378
STEVEN
COLLINS
Vism 417 = XIII 44, the Abhassara-world in which the myth starts is
a Brahma-world, and so the mention of this figure recalls the prelapsarian beginnings of the tale (the Sinhalese version given in Spence
Hardy (1880: 66--8) uses the word 'brahmas' in place of 'beings'
throughout its telling of the story of origins). Finally, since here the
Buddha cites this verse from a Brahmfi as 'well-spoken' (subhdsita)
and then recites it as his own words (it is also ascribed to the Buddha
at S II 284), he replaces the god Brahmfi and the Vedas of the
Brahmanical tradition with his own 'revelation', the Word of the
Buddha; just as he had done in # 9 (see # 9.2). I take this connexion
between opening and closing frame to be deliberate.
~r 32.2. I assume the word loke is understood, agreeing with devamdnuse; the world of gods and men here encompasses all the supernatural worlds, and it goes without saying that no being in a world
below the human could be 'best'. The phrase jane tasmim, which I
render here as elsewhere 'in this world' refers to the human world;
jana, like loka, can refer to the world and/or its inhabitants.
ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviations for Pali texts are those of C P D (see E p i l e g o m e n a to vol. 1, and later
additions); texts cited are PTS editions, unless otherwise stated.
AS = Aggah~a Sutta
B H S D = Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Dictionary, F. E d g e r t o n (53)
B R = O. Boehtlingk and R. R o t h (1855--), Sanskrit W6rterbuch
Childers = R. C. Childers (1875), A Dictionary of the Pali Language
C P D = Critical Pali Dictionary
H O S = H a r v a r d Oriental Series
K R N Coll. Pap. = K. R. N o r m a n , Collected Papers vols. I--1II.
M o n W = Monier-Williams (1899), A Sanskrit-English Dictionary
M s v Vin = Mddasarvdstivddin Vinaya, ed. R. Gnoli (77)
M W = translation of AS in M. W a l s h e (87)
P E D = The Pali Text Society's Pali-English Dictionary, T. W. Rhys Davids and W.
Stede ( 1 9 2 1 - - 5 )
P T C = Pali Tipitikam. Concordance, ed. F. W. W o o d w a r d et al. ( 1 9 5 6 - - )
PTS = Pali Text Society
R F G = R. F. G o m b r i c h (92a)
R h D = translation of A S in T. W. and C. A. F. Rhys Davids (21)
Skt = Sanskrit
379
380
STEVEN COLLINS
(ii) man and sam-man can mean 'think highly of', 'esteem';
(if) the prefix sam- means 'together', and so sam-man can mean
'think together with', 'agree on', 'consent to', 'appoint' (for the last see
below on monastic appointments).
The relevant syntactic relationships possible between the parts of
compounds with -sammata, are three:
(i) X-sammata can be a karmadhdraya, a descriptive determinative,
meaning 'thought to be X', 'regarded as X'. This is by far the most
common use. Some examples are: (a)dhamma-s., 'thought (im)proper'
(DIII 89, i.e. AS # 17; see # 17.1); hfna-s./settha-s., 'considered a
lesser thing/the best' (D HI 94, i.e. AS # 23), ratana-s., 'regarded as
valuable' (Vin IV 163, etc.), atthi-s., 'considered to exist' (Patis-a 635:
the whole phrase is yam. bhikkhave atthi-sammatam loke panditdnam
aham 'pi atthi ti vaddmi; the PTS edition does not print atthi-s, as a
compound, which is a mistake); sddhu-s., 'considered good' (D I 48,
etc.); sacca-s., 'considered true' (S IV 230); mitga-s., 'thought to be
dumb' (Sn 713); sukha-s., dukkha-s., 'thought of as happiness,
regarded as miSery' (Sn 760, transl. Norman [92: 88]), kdya-s., (a
collection of bones) 'regarded as a/the body' (Ps I 260, Spk III 190,
Vbh-a 354). Commentaries in such cases standardly explain the
compound as X ti sammato X-sammato. M-s in this analysis would be
'considered to be great', mahd ti sammato mahdsammato. This is quite
appropriate for a king: kingly self-descriptions do tend to use the
word; and as a substantive mahd can mean 'a great or nobleman'
(Mon.W s.v.). It seems to me certain that this meaning is in play here:
the sense is 'considered to be great', 'regarded as a nobleman'. This
sense of the word mahd is the familiar element which makes m-s
parallel to the better-known terms khattiya and rdja.
(ii) X-sammata can be a tatpursua, a dependent determinative,
meaning '(highly) regarded by X', 'esteemed by X'; the nirukti in AS
pretends that this is the case, seeing mahd- as a short form of
mahdjana. This seems rather unlikely; the very unlikelihood is part of
the ironic point, I take it. Whatever kingly hierarchy AS assumed or
was reacting to (see Introduction), I doubt that the king's 'being
appointed by the people' formed part of it. Examples of other compounds with this form are: loka-s., 'esteemed by people', 'famous' (Ja I
49, Vism 120 --- IV 10: the HOS reading is to be preferred to PTS's
381
382
STEVEN COLLINS
383
384
STEVEN COLLINS
385
( dhammakathika );
(iii) kittima-ndmam, 'a made-up name', such as any personal name
decided on by parents and relatives, such as 'Tissa' or 'Phussa'; and
(iv) opapdtika-ndmam., 'a spontaneously-occurring name', such as
'moon' or 'sun' (canda, suriya) which are the same in every age, and
whose referents 'create their own names as they arise' (attano ndmam
karontd uppaffanti, As 932; Mob 111 has pavattanti, 'occur'). Mob
110 and As 392 also class under this fourth heading Buddhist techical
terms such as r@am., vedand, etc., and nibbdna: these are called at
Vista 441--2 = XIV 25, Vbh-a 387 sabhdva-nirutti, translated by
lqanamoli (75: 486--7; 91: 127) as 'individual-essence language' and
'natural language'. The other three kinds of ndma are simply the
function of process of name-giving (ndma-karan. a-kiccam Mob 112,
ndma-gahana-kiccam As 392). (There are other classifications of
ndma at Sadd 878--80, Vism 209 = VII 54, Sp 122, Spk I 95, Pj I
107, which do not help the present discussion.)
Sdmafi~a is derived from samdna, 'equal', 'shared', 'general', etc. In
both Pati and Sanskrit, samdna can be opposed to visesa (Skt. vi~esa)
386
STEVEN COLLINS
387
388
STEVEN COLLINS
DISCOURSE
ON WHAT
IS P R I M A R Y
(AGGAIqlqA-SUTTA)
389
Although I would not call AS 'a cosmogonic text' tout court, I think
Lingat is right to deny that it had a 'theory of power' which was used
by anyone. He cites (p. 97) modem anthropological data from Hocart
(50:51), who reported that Sinhalese villagers believed that Mahfisammata had assigned duties to particular social groups. The Nit#
Nighand.uva, a Sinhala digest of 'traditional law' drawn up in the first
part of the 19th. century for the British colonial government after its
conquest of the Kandyan kingdom, opens with a version of the AS
story, including the 'election' of the king; but it introduces this as an
account of the origin of castes, replacing brahmins, vaigyas and gfidras
with castes indigenous to Sri Lanka (LeMesurier and Panabokke
[1880: 4--5]). This is a small example to support the general claim I
made in the Introduction (p. 325), that in later times in Sri Lanka and
Southeast Asia, where (Theravfida) Buddhist-legitimators had few if
any real challengers in the provision of conceptual coercion, their
'antagonistic symbiosis' with king-thugs tended to be more symbiotic
than antagonistic (though never wholly so), and they were more prone
than were their Indian predecessors to give an ideological grounding
of the existing social 'world'. Thus the AS story becomes an account,
and legitimation, of the existing order of castes. There seems to have
been little if any use of the contract theory to justify defiance of a king
perceived to be unjust, as had been the case with the rise of such
theories in Europe.
390
STEVEN COLLINS
WORKS CITED
Basham, A. L. (63) The Wonder that was India. (2nd. ed.). New York: Grove Press.
Bechert, H. (ed.) (91) The Dating of the Historical Buddha. (Symposien zur Buddhismusforschung IV, 1). Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in
G6ttingen. Philologisch-Historische Klasse Nr. 189. G6ttingen: Vandenhoeek &
Ruprecht.
Boehtlingk, O. and Roth, R. (1855--) Sanskrit WOrterbuch. St. Petersburg.
Bronkhorst, J. (81) 'Nirukta and Astfidhyfiy~: their shared presuppositions', IndoIranian Journal 23: 1--14.
Brown, P. (71) 'The Rise and Function of the Holy Man in Late Antiquity', Journal of
Roman Studies 61: 80--101.
Brown, P. (78) The Making of Late Antiquity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Buitenen, J. B. van (81) The Bhagavad Gitd in the Mahdbhdrata. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
Burghart, R. (78) 'Hierarchical models of the Hindu Social System'. Man, n.s. 13:
519--536.
Burghart, R. (85) Introduction to R. Burghart and A. Cantlie (eds.) Indian Religion.
London: Curzon Press.
Caillat, C. (74) 'Pfili ibbha, Vedie ibhya-', L. S. Cousins et al. (eds.) Buddhist Studies
in Honour of L B. Homer. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Carrithers, M. B. (77) 'Review Article: World Conqueror and World-Renouncer: a
study of Buddhism and Polity in Thailand against a historical background by S. J.
Tambiah, Journal of the Anthropological Society of Oxford 8: 95--105.
Carrithers, M. B. (87) 'Buddhist without History', Contributions to Indian Sociology
21: 165--8.
Carrithers, M. B. (93) Why Humans Have Cultures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Childers, R. C. (1875) A Dictionary of the Pali Language. London: Trfibner.
Collins, S. (82) Selfless Persons: imagery and thought in Theravdda Buddhism.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Collins, S. (88) 'Monasticism, Utopias and Comparative Social Theory', Religion 18:
101--35.
Collins, S. (90) 'On the Very Idea of the Pall Canon', Journal of the Pali Text Society
XV: 89--126.
Collins, S. (forthcoming) 'The Body in Theravfida Buddhist Monasticism', in S.
Coakley (ed.) The Body: Comparative Studies in Spiritual and Devotional Practice.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cone, M. and R. F. Gombrich (77) The Perfect Generosity of Prince Vessantara.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cousins, L. S. (84) 'Buddhism', in J. Hinnells (ed.) A Handbook of Living Religions.
London: Viking.
Critical Pali Dictionary (1924--), ed. V. Trenckner et al. Vols I and II; vol. III fasc.1.
Copenhagen: Munksgaard.
Davids, T. W. Rhys (1899) Dialogues of the Buddha. Part I. Sacred Books of the
Buddhists vol. II. London:
Davids, T. W. Rhys (03) Buddhist India. New York: G. P. Putnam's sons.
Davids, T. W. and C. A. F. Rhys (21) Dialogues of the Buddha. Part III. Sacred Books
of the Buddhists vol. VI. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
D I S C O U R S E ON W H A T IS P R I M A R Y ( A G G A I ~ ' N A - S U T T A )
391
392
STEVEN COLLINS
D I S C O U R S E ON W H A T IS P R I M A R Y ( A G G A N I q A - S U T T A )
393
Sharma, R. S. (68) Aspects of Political Ideas and Institutions in Ancient India. Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass (2nd. ed.).
Sharma, R. S. (83) Material Culture and social Formations in Ancient India. Delhi:
Macmillan India.
Siegel, L. (87) Laughing Matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Smith, B. K. (89) 'Classifying the Universe: Ancient Indian Cosmogonies and the
Varna System', ConMbutions to Indian Sociology 23, 2: 241--60.
Smith, B. K. (92) 'Canonical Authority and Social Classification: Veda and Varna in
Ancient Indian Texts', History of Religions 32, 2: 103--25.
Spellman, J. W. (64) Political theory of ancient India: a study of kingship form the
earliest times to circa A.D. 300. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Spence Hardy, R. (1880) A Manual of Buddhism. London: Northgate. (2nd. ed.)
Tambiah, S. J. (76) World Conqueror and WorM-Renouncer: a study of Buddhism and
Polity in Thailand against a historical background. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Tambiah, S. J. (89) 'King Mahasammata: the first ldng in the Buddhist story of
Creation and his persisting relevance', Journal of the Anthropological Society of
Oxford 20: 101--122.
Thapar, R. (61) Agoka and the Decline of the Mauryas. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Walshe, M. (87) Thus Have I Heard. London: Wisdom.
Whitney, W. D. (1889) Sanskrit Grammar. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
(2nd. ed.)
Winternitz, M. (33) A History of Indian Literature. Vol. II Buddhist Literature and
Jaina Literature. Calcutta: University of Calcutta.
Zwilling, L. (92) 'Homosexuality as Seen in Indian Buddhist Texts', in J. Cabezon
(ed.) Buddhism, Sexuality' and Gender. Albany: State University of New York
Press.
Dept. o f S o u t h A s i a n Languages a n d Civilisations
University o f Chicago