Introduction

In the present chapter I study the Ekottarika-āgama version of the Saccavibhaṅga-sutta, in particular in relation to a significant difference to be found between the Pāli and the Ekottarika-āgama versions of this discourse. This difference points to the possibility that at an earlier time references to the four noble truths in this and other discourses may have been without the qualification "noble".

The Saccavibhaṅga-sutta of the Majjhima-nikāya takes up a subject that according to tradition stands at the very heart of early Buddhist philosophy and practice, the four noble truths.[n.1] MN 141 at MN III 248,1 to 252,28. The Pāli version has three Chinese counterparts. One of these Chinese parallels is found in the Madhyama-āgama,[n.2] MĀ 31 at T I 467a28 to 469c8. another parallel is an individual translation.[n.3] T 32 at T I 814b8 to 816c27, attributed to 安世高. Harrison 1997: 277 lists T 32 among translations by 安世高 that might stem from an Ekottarika-āgama collection; cf. also Harrison 2002: 4 on the opus of 安世高. The third Chinese parallel to the Saccavibhaṅga-sutta occurs in the Ekottarika-āgama, translated below.[n.4] EĀ 27.1 at T II 643a26 to 643c1.

---

Translation

[Discourse on the Four Truths][n.5] [11] The title follows Anesaki 1908: 144; the original has no title.

1. Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park.

2. At that time the Blessed One addressed the monks: "Monks, this is reckoned to be the teaching that we always proclaim, that is, the four truths. With countless means I have investigated this teaching, analyzing its meaning and widely explaining it to humankind.

3-4. "What are the four? That is, the teaching about the truth of dukkha is a teaching I have with countless means investigated, analyzing its meaning and widely explaining it to humankind. With countless means I have proclaimed the truths of arising, of cessation, and of the path, investigating this teaching, analyzing its meaning, and widely explaining it to humankind.

5. "Monks, you should associate with the monk Sāriputta, honour and respect him! The reason is that the monk Sāriputta with countless means proclaims these four truths, he widely explains them to humankind. When the monk Sāriputta analyzes their meaning to living beings and to the four assemblies, widely explaining them to humankind, incalculable numbers of living beings are freed from the stains and attain the pure eye of the Dharma.

"Monks, you should associate with the monks Sāriputta and Moggallāna, honour and respect them! The reason is that the monk Sāriputta is a parent to beings. By means of [his help] having been born, they are raised to grow up by the monk Moggallāna.

The reason is that the monk Sāriputta proclaims to humankind the essential teaching about becoming accomplished in the four truths. The monk Moggallāna proclaims to humankind the essential teaching about becoming accomplished in the supreme, about becoming accomplished in dwelling without influxes. You should associate with the monks Sāriputta and Moggallāna!"

6. Having said this, the Blessed One returned to his meditation hut.

7–9. Then, soon after the Blessed One had left, Sāriputta addressed the monks: "One who is able to attain [insight into] the teaching of the four truths, such a person swiftly attains good fortune.

10–20. "What are the four? That is, [there is] the truth of dukkha, whose meaning I have in turn with countless means widely explained. What is the truth of dukkha? That is, birth is dukkha, old age is dukkha, disease is dukkha, death is dukkha, dejection, sorrow, and vexation are dukkha, association with what is disliked is dukkha, dissociation from what is liked is dukkha, not obtaining what one wishes is dukkha, in short, the five aggregates of clinging are dukkha. This is reckoned to be the truth of dukkha.

21. "What is the truth of the arising of dukkha? That is, it is the fetter of craving.

22. "What is the truth of cessation? That is, the truth of cessation is the final and remainderless cessation of the fetter of craving and lust. This is reckoned to be the truth of cessation.

23–31. "What is the truth of the path? That is, it is the noble eightfold path of right view, right intention, right speech, right effort, right livelihood, right action, right mindfulness, and right concentration. This is reckoned to be the truth of the path. Those living beings, who are able to hear this teaching on the four truths, will quickly attain good fortune."

32. At the time when the venerable Sāriputta proclaimed this teaching, countless and incalculable numbers of beings, who heard this teaching, were freed from the stains and obtained the pure eye of the Dharma.

[They thought]: "We have quickly attained good fortune. The teaching proclaimed by the Blessed One to us [leads to] a peaceful abiding and a fortunate state."

[The Buddha said]: "For this reason, [members of] the four assemblies, seek the means to practise these four truths. Monks, you should train in this way."

At that time the monks, having heard what the Buddha had said, were delighted and received it respectfully.

---

Study

What makes the Ekottarika-āgama discourse translated above interesting is not just what it says, but even more so what it does not say, since it does not use the qualification "noble" in regard to the four (noble) truths.[n.6] [14] Cf., e.g., EĀ 27.1 at T II 643a28: 四諦. T 32 at T I 814b8 uses just the expression "four truths", 四諦, or just "truth", 諦 (in relation to one of them), but at times alternatively has the expressions 賢者四諦 or 賢者諦; cf., e.g., T 32 at T I 814b18 and 815c15. MĀ 31 speaks of the "four noble truths", 四聖諦; cf., e.g., MĀ 31 at T I 467b3. At first sight, this absence could strike an odd note, since the expression "four noble truths" is so familiar that to speak just of "four truths" could give the impression of some translation error.

As the preceding chapters would have shown,[n.7] Cf. above p. 51ff, 87ff, and 165ff. among the four Āgamas extant in Chinese the Ekottarika-āgama is not the best-preserved collection. Thus one might wonder how seriously this reference to "four truths" should be taken. However, the Ekottarika-āgama parallel to the Saccavibhaṅga-sutta does employ the qualification "noble" in regard to the eightfold path.[n.8] [16] EĀ 27.1 at T II 643b22: 賢聖八品道. EĀ 46.8 at T II 779a12 also introduces all four as the "four truths", but then at T II 779a13 qualifies the truth of the path as a "noble truth". This makes it at least safe to conclude that there would not have been an intentional choice to omit this qualification in regard to the "four truths", as in such a case one would not expect the qualification "noble" to be found at all.

The absence of the attribute "noble" is not confined to the Ekottarika-āgama parallel to the Saccavibhaṅga-sutta, as Ekottarika-āgama discourses in general speak only of the "four truths".[n.9] [17] EĀ 4.1 at T II 557a20, EĀ 24.5 at T II 619a9, EĀ 25.1 at T II 631a8, EĀ 26.9 at T II 639b8, EĀ 28.1 at T II 649b20, EĀ 28.3 at T II 650b17, EĀ 29.6 at T II 657c29, EĀ 29.9 at T II 658c9, EĀ 30.2 at T II 659c25, EĀ 30.3 at T II 665b8, EĀ 31.9 at T II 672c20, EĀ 37.8 at T II 714c5, EĀ 37.10 at T II 717a25, EĀ 39.8 at T II 733a25, EĀ 41.2 at T II 745a17, EĀ 42.4 at T II 753c6, and EĀ 45.5 at T II 773b11 (not taking into account verses, where the absence of the qualification "noble" could be due to the need to fit the syllable count). The same is also the case for several discourses found in a partially preserved Saṃyukta-āgama translation.[n.10] [18] SĀ2 81 at T II 402a23, SĀ2 92 at T II 405b15, SĀ2 152 at T II 431b21, and SĀ2 184 at T II 439c13 refer to the "four truths" (not taking into account verses). SĀ2 322 at T II 481c8 uses the expression "four truths", but then at T II 481c10 refers to the "four noble truths". SĀ2 198 at T II 445b9 qualifies only the first truth as a "noble truth", whereas the other three are simply "truths". A similar pattern occurs in SĀ2 340, which at T II 487b20 qualifies the first truth as a "noble truth", and then covers the remaining three without bringing in any truth qualification at all. In contrast, discourses in the Dīrgha-āgama collection, the Madhyama-āgama collection, and the completely preserved Saṃyukta-āgama collection regularly use the expression "four noble truths".

References to the four truths without the qualification "noble" also occur in several individual translations, for example in a parallel to the Mahāpadāna-sutta,[n.11] [19] T 3 at T I 157a8 (attributed to 法天), parallel to DN 14 at DN II 41,15, which only refers to dukkha, its arising, its cessation, and the path, and then sums up that these are the "four truths". in two parallels to the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta,[n.12] [20] T 6 at T I 188b9 (by an unknown translator; cf. also Park 2010), parallel to DN 16 at DN II 155,23, and T 7 at T I 204b3 (attributed to 法顯), parallel to DN 16 at DN II 153,7. In both instances the Pāli passages do not refer to the four noble truths at all. in a parallel to the Dasuttara-sutta,[n.13] [21] T 13 at T I 234a29 (attributed to 安世高), parallel to DN 34 at DN III 277,8. in a parallel to the Mahāgopālaka-sutta,[n.14] [22] T 123 at T II 546b21 (attributed to Kumārajīva), parallel to MN 33 at MN I 221,33, which instead refers to the noble eightfold path. and in a parallel to the Dhammacakkapavattana-sutta.[n.15] [23] T 109 at T II 503c9 (attributed to 安世高), parallel to SN 56.11 at SN V 422,30: imesu catusu ariyasaccesu.

References to the four truths that do not use the qualification "noble" can additionally be found in the Dharmaguptaka, Mahīśāsaka, and Sarvāstivāda Vinayas. The same Vinayas, however, do employ the qualification "noble" in their version of what according to the traditional account was the first discourse given by the Buddha in the Deer Park at Vārāṇasī, which I study in the next chapter but one.[n.16] [24] The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya speaks only of the "four truths" in T 1428 at T XXII 606a19 and 910a4, but then uses the qualification "noble" in its version of the Buddha's first discourse at T XXII 788a14; cf. also below p. 267ff. The Mahīśāsaka Vinaya speaks of the "four truths" in T 1421 at T XXII 105b12, but then uses the qualification "noble" in its version of the first discourse at T XXII 104b28. The Sarvāstivāda Vinaya refers to the "four truths" in T 1435 at T XXIII 122b23, 122c1+9, 131c25, 193a11, 244b12, and 368b16, but then uses the qualification "noble" in its version of the first discourse at T XXIII 448b19.

A closer examination of the Pāli version of this discourse brings to light that the Dhammacakkapavattana-sutta presents the second noble truth as something that needs to be abandoned.[n.17] [25] SN 56.11 at SN V 422,12: tam kho pan' idaṃ dukkhasamudayam ariyasaccaṃ pahātabbaṃ, which Bodhi 2000: 1845 translates as: "this noble truth of the origin of suffering is to be abandoned." Yet, what needs to be abandoned is the origin of dukkha, not the noble truth itself. This statement would be more meaningful without the expression "noble truth".[n.18] [26] Woodward 1930/1979: 358 note 1 observes that a Burmese manuscript has a variant reading without ariya and comments: "but we must omit ariya-saccaṃ, otherwise the text would mean 'the Ariyan truth about the arising of Ill is to be put away'." Norman 1984: 385 explains that "what the Buddha said was that pain should be known, its origin given up, its cessation realised, and the path to its cessation practised. Woodward did not, therefore, go far enough. He should have suggested the removal of the word ariya-saccaṃ from all four" truth statements.

From a grammatical viewpoint, the readings dukkhasamudayaṃ ariyasaccaṃ and dukkhanirodhaṃ ariyasaccaṃ, found in the PTS edition of the Dhammacakkapavattana-sutta and the Saccavibhaṅga-sutta,[n.19] [27] SN 56.11 at SN V 421,25+29 (cf. also Be) and MN 141 at MN III 250,33 and 251,3 (cf. also Be). are puzzling, as one would rather have expected dukkhasamudayo and dukkhanirodho.[n.20] [28] The corresponding passages in the Ce and Se editions do in fact read dukkhasamudayo and dukkhanirodho.

Weller takes dukkhasamudayaṃ and dukkhanirodhaṃ to be a faulty transformation of an earlier Māgadhī nominative dukkhasamudaye and dukkhanirodhe, undertaken in analogy to the correct transformation of the neuter dukkhe to dukkhaṃ and without taking into account that a Māgadhī nominative in -e could also be a masculine form and thus should not be transformed into -aṃ, but into -o.[n.21] Weller 1940: 77; cf. also Johansson 1973/1998: 24 and Harvey 2009: 218f.

Norman suggests that the expression ariyasaccaṃ was added later, an addition during which an -m- was inserted in order to avoid hiatus, producing dukkhasamudaya-m-ariyasaccaṃ and dukkhanirodha-m-ariyasaccaṃ. Norman envisages the development that led to this to have taken place in two stages:

The original form … was … idaṃ dukkhaṃ, ayaṃ dukkhasamudayo, ayaṃ dukkha-nirodho, ayaṃ dukkha-nirodhagāminī-paṭipadā … Their designation as saccānī led to the introduction of the word -sacca into each item: cattāri saccāni – dukkha-saccaṃ samudaya-saccaṃ nirodha-saccaṃ magga saccaṃ … When the truths became known as ariyasaccāni, then this word was added … The introduction of the word ariya- … gave a set: *dukkha-ariya-saccaṃ etc.[n.22] Norman 1984: 385f. This proposed development puts into perspective the argument by Harvey 2009: 198 that, since according to SN 56.11 at SN V 422,9 "the second ariya-sacca is to be abandoned", the expression sacca should be understood to carry the sense of "reality" rather than "truth". Since this formulation appears to be the result of an interpolation of the term ariya-sacca, the original point of the passage would of course have been that the origin of dukkha is to be abandoned. Harvey 2013a: 28 or 2013b: 51 then lists three passages as contrary to the meaning "truth", which in addition to the above formulation are that according to SN 56.11 at SN V 422,7 the Buddha understood that "this is the noble truth of dukkha", where again the apparent interpolation of ariya-sacca would be responsible for the formulation (which originally might just have been "this is dukkha"), and that SN 56.13 at SN V 425,17 (a discourse without parallels) identifies the five aggregates with the first ariya-sacca. The last passage is probably best read as a truncated version of a standard phrase found, e.g., at SN 56.11 at SN V 421,23, according to which the gist of the first ariya-sacca is that the five aggregates are dukkha, a formulation that is unproblematic as a truth statement. In sum, the three passages mentioned by Harvey seem to reflect problems or developments that occurred during the transmission of the texts, instead of enabling us to assess the original intention behind the usage of the term sacca in early Buddhist discourse. In view of SN 56.27 and its parallel SĀ 417 (cf. below notes 24 and 25), the nuance of "truth" does in fact seem to be quite relevant for sacca; cf. also Pandita 2015 who argues for considering both nuances of meaning as relevant, "truth" and "reality".

Norman's suggestion finds support in a substantial number of references to "four truths" in Chinese discourses and Vinayas, which appear to reflect the second stage described by him, when the qualification "noble" had not yet been added to all truth statements. These passages support the impression that the qualification "noble" could have originally been found just in some selected instances, and only during the process of oral transmission the same qualification would have been applied to all references to the four (noble) truths, in line with a natural tendency of oral transmission to standardize.

A discourse where this qualification must have been present from the outset can be found in the Saṃyutta-nikāya, according to which the four truths are called noble because they are taught by the Tathāgata, who is a noble one.[n.23] [29] SN 56.28 at SN V 435,28: tathāgato ariyo, tasmā ariyasaccānī ti vuccanti. This discourse does not seem to have a known parallel. Without the qualification "noble", the statement in this discourse would no longer be meaningful.

Another discourse in the Saṃyutta-nikāya explains that the four noble truths are so called because they are such and not otherwise.[n.24] [30a] SN 56.27 at SN V 435,18: tathāni avitathāni anaññathāni, tasmā ariyasaccānī ti vuccanti. Norman 1990/1993: 172 comments that the qualification avitathāni anaññathāni "would seem … to be the reason why they are called 'truths'". This explanation does not seem to be concerned with the qualification "noble", but rather with the reason why the term "truth" is used. Therefore the statement made in this discourse would be meaningful even without the qualification "noble", but not without the term "truth".

The same does not hold for its Saṃyukta-āgama parallel, however, which alongside specifying that the four noble truths are such and not otherwise also mentions that they are truths for noble ones. [n.25] [30b] SĀ 417 at T II 110c5: 是聖所諦, 是名苦聖諦, thereby additionally indicating that this is a truth for noble ones. In the case of this Saṃyukta-āgama discourse the term "noble truth" is required for its definition to work, similarly to the case of the Saṃyutta-nikāya discourse just mentioned, according to which the four noble truths are taught by the Tathāgata.

According to yet another Saṃyutta-nikāya discourse and its Saṃyukta-āgama parallel, a Tathāgata is so called because of his insight into the four noble truths.[n.26] [31] SN 56.23 at SN V 433,21: catunnaṃ ariyasaccānaṃ yathābhūtaṃ abhisambuddhattā tathāgato arahaṃ sammāsambuddho ti vuccati, a statement found similarly in its parallel SĀ 402 at T II 107c26: 於四聖諦平等正覺, 名為如來, 應, 等正覺. This explanation would work even if the statement were to use merely the expression "four truths". The same is the case for the Saccavibhaṅga-sutta and the Dhammacakkapavattana-sutta.

In this way it seems that, with most of the occurrences of the expression "four noble truths", the passages in question would remain meaningful even if one were to assume that at an earlier stage these passages only spoke of the "four truths". Given that by realizing these truths through the attainment of stream-entry, as depicted in the Ekottarika-āgama discourse translated above, the ennobling potential of the four truths manifests, it is perhaps not surprising if the term "noble" came to be used with increasing frequency to qualify the four truths.

Needless to say, leaving aside the qualification "noble" need not in any way belittle the indubitable importance of the four (noble) truths. In the end, their status as truths and their awakening potential remains the same, independent of whether or not they explicitly receive the epithet "noble".[n.27] I will come back to the topic of the significance of Norman's finding in the next but one chapter on the Dhammacakkappavattana-sutta; cf. below p. 274f.