Introduction

With the present chapter, I explore the notion of a true recluse (samaṇa) in early Buddhist discourse. My study begins with a survey of selected occurrences of the term samaṇa in the Pāli discourses. Then I translate the Madhyama-āgama counterpart to the Samaṇamaṇḍikā-sutta,[n.1] Be and Se have the title Samaṇamuṇḍika-sutta. a discourse that contrasts the early Buddhist conception of a true recluse to the implications of the same notion from the perspective of a contemporary wanderer, followed by a study of the two parallel versions.

In the Pāli discourses, the term samaṇa stands for religious practitioners of various affiliations. As such, the term is also used by the monastic disciples of the Buddha to designate themselves. According to the Aggañña-sutta, on being asked who they are, the Buddhist monks should proclaim themselves to be samaṇas who are followers of the Buddha.[n.2] DN 27 at DN III 84,16: samaṇā sakyaputtiyā; cf. also AN 8.19 at AN IV 202,13 (= AN 8.20 at AN IV 206,27, Ud 5.5 at Ud 55,25 and Vin II 239,20). Bodhi 1989: 4 notes that the Buddha's monk disciples were as "samaṇas distinguished from others with a similar demeanour and lifestyle as 'the recluses who follow the son of the Sakyan clan'". According to Chakraborti 1973: 428, in inscriptions the term kṣamaṇa-śramaṇa appears to be used in a comparable manner to distinguish Digambara monks from other samaṇas. Similarly, the term samaṇa can function as an epithet for the Tathāgata,[n.3] AN 8.85 at AN IV 340,1: samaṇo ti ... tathāgatass' etaṃ adhivacanaṃ. Jaini 1970/ 2001: 48 notes that "in the Jaina texts also, Mahāvīra ... is called a śramaṇa". Wagle 1966: 56 points out, however, that when used as a mode of direct address the term samaṇa "denotes a certain indifference", unlike the more respectful address bhadanta (usually found in the vocative form bhante) or the honorific epithet bhagavant. who at times is referred to as "the great samaṇa".[n.4] The address mahāsamaṇa is used, e.g., by Uruvelakassapa at Vin I 24,21ff. Ray 1994: 65 sums up that "Gautama was himself a śramaṇa and was known as the Mahāśramaṇa (the great śramaṇa); his disciples were known as śramaṇas, and many of the features of early Buddhism reflect elements held in common by the various śramaṇas and śramaṇa groups".

As a group, the samaṇas are part of a standard listing in the early discourses that distinguishes assemblies into eight types. Four of these eight assemblies consist of human beings, which cover assemblies of samaṇas, brahmins, warriors, and householders.[n.5] Cf., e.g., DN 16 at DN II 109,6, DN 33 at DN III 260,3, MN 12 at MN I 72,18 and AN 8.69 at AN IV 307,11 (with the four assemblies of gods comprising gods of the realm of the four heavenly great kings, gods of the Tavatiṃsa realm, Māras and Brahmas); on the significance of the eight assemblies as a structural element underlying the Sagātha-vagga of the Saṃyutta-nikāya cf. Bucknell 2007. In what follows, I briefly survey the way the discourses describe the relationship between samaṇas and these other three human assemblies, before turning to the normative usage of the term samaṇa.

Some degree of tension between the brahmins and the samaṇas is reflected in several passages that portray a disdainful and even hostile attitude of the former towards the latter. In the Ambaṭṭha-sutta, a young brahmin explains that his impolite behaviour towards the Buddha is the way he generally treats those "baldpated petty recluses, menials, the swarthy offspring from Brahmā's foot".[n.6] DN 3 at DN I 90,14: ye ca kho te, bho gotama, muṇḍakā samaṇakā ibbhā kiṇhā bandhupādāpaccā, tehi pi me saddhiṃ evaṃ kathāsallāpo hoti, yathariva bhotā gotamena (Be, Ce and Se: kaṇhā; Se omits te and reads: bandhupādapaccā); on the term muṇḍa cf. Tedesco 1945. His attitude was apparently based on his teacher's opinion that these "baldpated petty recluses, menials, the swarthy offspring from Brahmā's foot" are not fit to converse with brahmins possessing the threefold knowledge (i.e. knowledge of the three Vedas). [n.7] DN 3 at DN I 103,16: ke ca muṇḍakā samaṇakā ibbhā kiṇhā bandhupadāpaccā, kā ca tevijjānaṃ brāhmaṇāṇam sākacchā (Se: keci; Be, Ce and Se: kaṇhā; Be and Ce: bandhupādāpaccā, Se: bandhupādapaccā). Other discourses similarly report that brahmins held those "baldpated petty recluses ... (etc.)" to be incapable of coming to know the Dharma,[n.8] MN 95 at MN II 177,8: ke ca dhammassa aññātāro. or to be ignorant regarding proper etiquette.[n.9] SN 7.22 at SN I 184,11: ke ca sabhādhammaṃ jānissanti. Spk I 267,1 explains that this remark was aimed at the Buddha, who had entered a public meeting from the front instead of entering from the side, as etiquette would have demanded.

The Aggañña-sutta records brahmins reviling those of their own class who go forth as Buddhist monks and thus relinquish their brahmin status and become samaṇas. This description provides further background to the notion of "menials" that are "swarthy" and the "offspring from Brahmā's foot" mentioned above: in contrast to samaṇas, brahmins lay claim to being the "highest" class, which is "fair" and "purified" in contrast to the darkness and lack of purity of other classes; in fact brahmins are "born from Brahmā's mouth", unlike members of other classes.[n.10] DN 27 at DN III 81,10: brāhmaṇo va seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo, brāhmaṇo va sukko vaṇṇo, kaṇho añño vaṇṇo, brāhmaṇā va sujjhanti no abrāhmaṇā, brāhmaṇā va brahmuno puttā orasā mukhato jātā (Be, Ce and Se: hīnā aññe vaṇṇā and kaṇhā aññe vaṇṇā; Se omits va before brahmuno). As noted by Gombrich 1990b: 13 and Norman 1991/1993: 272, the notion of being born from Brahmā's mouth is found in the Puruṣasūkta of the Ṛgveda 10.90.12.

Other passages depict brahmins expressing a hostile or even aggressive attitude towards samaṇas. Thus, a brahmin engaged in a fire sacrifice tells the Buddha in quite forceful terms to stay off, calling him an outcast.[n.11] [12] Sn I 21,11 (in the prose section before stanza 116). Shiraishi 1996: 146 comments that "these words" clearly express "contempt of Śākyamuni Buddha". Again, on seeing one of those "baldpated petty recluses" seated in meditation – in this case the Buddhist monk Mahākaccāna – young brahmins make noise close by and abuse him.[n.12] SN 35.132 at SN IV 117,5. Besides the apparent tension between some brahmins and samaṇas, several discourses indicate that samaṇas could also be quite quarrelsome amongst themselves, which according to AN 2.4.6 at AN I 66,16 is due to attachment to their respective views. A rather stark example occurs in a passage in the Udāna, according to which brahmins fill up a well with chaff in order to prevent those "baldpated recluses" from drinking any water – an action directed at the Buddha and a company of monks who are journeying by.[n.13] [14] Ud 7.9 at Ud 78,10; on this tale cf. also Anālayo 2008b: 379f.

An entertaining perspective on brahmin denigration of samaṇas emerges from the Māratajjanīya-sutta. This discourse reports brahmins pouring abuse on the monk disciples of the former Buddha Kakusandha as "baldpated petty recluses, menials, the swarthy offspring from Brahmā's foot" and deriding their meditation practice.[n.14] MN 50 at M I 334,16; on this passage from a comparative perspective cf. Anālayo 2005: 12–13. The same discourse reveals that the brahmins had acted in this way because they had been incited by Māra to do so. That is, from an early Buddhist perspective such abuse should be interpreted as an attempt by Māra to upset one's inner balance, a perspective that must have been of considerable assistance for developing an attitude of patience in such situations. According to the instructions given by the Buddha Kakusandha to his monks, such attacks by Māra are best faced by developing benevolence (mettā).

Another mode of contesting brahmin prejudice might underlie the sequence of listing the two main types of religieux in ancient India as samaṇas and brahmins,[n.15] [16] The distinction between these two types of ancient Indian religieux was apparently evident enough to be noticed by Megasthenes; cf. McCrindle 1877: 98. According to Patañjali's Vyākaraṇa-Mahābhāṣya, Kielhorn 1880/1962: 476,9 (2.4.12.2), these two groups are opposed to each other, yeṣāṃ ca virodha ityasyāvakāśaḥ: śramaṇabrāhmaṇam. Foucher 1955: 260 highlights that these two sections of ancient Indian society were not only opposed to each other on ideological grounds, but were also in direct competition for the material support they required for their sustenance from the population (Gräfe 1974: 37 notes that the support to be given to brahmins is reflected in references to the brāhmaṇabhojana at Vin I 44,22 and 60,25). Olivelle 1974: 6 explains that "according to the Viṣṇu-smṛti a householder must turn back if he has seen ... a recluse, and a punishment of 100 paṇas is ordained 'for hospitably entertaining ... a religious ascetic at an oblation to the gods or to the manes' ... the sight itself of ... [a recluse] was considered by many as inauspicious. There was also a corresponding hostility towards the brāhmaṇas on the part of the recluses. In heterodox literature the brāhmaṇas are depicted as greedy social parasites living on the superstitious generosity of the common people". Nevertheless, as pointed out by Ruegg 2008: 5 note 3, "whether ... the śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas are in fact opposed depends of course on the circumstance in each case". Ruegg remarks that it also needs to be taken into account that quite a number of bhikkhus were of brahmin descent (cf. the survey in Sarao 1989: 93–139, Chakravarti 1996: 198–220 and Nakamura 2000: 360–362, and the figures given in Gokhale 1980: 74). According to Vin I 71,25, jaṭilas were allowed to join the order without having to observe the usual probationary period; cf. also Bronkhorst 1998b: 84. Bailey 2003: 112 explains that "the jostling for status between brahmins and Buddhists ... should not necessarily be taken as antagonism. But it is competition". On the not invariably hostile relationships between brahmins and early Buddhists cf. also Tsuchida 1991. where the circumstance that the brahmins are put in second position could be on purpose to counter their claim to superiority.[n.16] [17] Warder 1963/1991: 97, however, takes samaṇa-brāhmaṇa to be an example for dvanda compounds where "the important or leading object ... occupies the second position, which is normally the dominant position in Pali". Another example of the same type provided by him is the expression Sāriputta-moggallāna. Yet, Sn 557 designates Sāriputta as the one who keeps rolling the wheel of Dharma set in motion by the Buddha; and Ud 2.8 at Ud 17,29 and Th 1083 refer to him as the "general of the Dharma", dhammasenāpati (cf. also the Divyāvadāna, Cowell 1886: 394,22, which presents Śāriputra as the second teacher and the general of the Dharma who keeps the wheel of the Dharma in motion, dvitīya śāstā dharmasenādhipatir dharmacakrapravartanaḥ; the last quality has a counterpart in Sn 557). Hence, if a hierarchical distinction between the two needs to be made, Sāriputta would take precedence over Mahāmoggallāna. From this it would follow that the position of honour in a dvanda – if there is to be a distinction between its two members – would be the first place. In the case of the compound samaṇa-brāhmaṇa, then, the first position accorded to the samaṇas would express precedence given to them over the brahmins. In fact, according to vārttika 3 on Pāṇini 2.2.34, Vasu 1891/1997: 273, the first member in dvandva compounds holds the place of honour, abhyarhitaṃ ca pūrvaṃ nipatati. Dutt (1962: 49) explains that while Buddhist and Jain texts use the expression "Samaṇa-Brāhmaṇa, in Asoka's edicts it appears as Brāhmaṇa-samaṇa, a plausible explanation of which is that ... those who themselves belong to the Samaṇa class ... wished to give it precedence [in their texts], while the Brāhmaṇa is put first in the edicts".

Yet, a closer inspection of the edicts shows a considerable degree of variation, where at times even within the same edict both sequences manifest.[n.17] This can be seen in the survey below, which shows references to "brahmins and samaṇas" (B) or else to "samaṇas and brahmins" (S) in Aśoka's Rock Edicts 3, 4, 8, 9, 11 and 13, listed according to their locations Girnār, Kālsī, Śāhbāzgarhī, Mānsehrā, Dhaulī, Jaugaḍa and Supārā. As this survey shows, though the Girnār edicts invariably mention the brahmins in first place (B), other locations show a considerable degree of variation and often put the samaṇas first (S). Particularly revealing is the fourth Rock Edict at Kālsī, Śāhbāzgarhī and Mānsehrā, where within the same edict from the same location the sequence changes (see the table below). Cf. Rock Edict 3 in Woolner 1924/1993: 4 and 5; Rock Edict 4 in ibid. 6 and 7, and again 6 and 7; Rock Edict 8 in ibid. 16 and 17; Rock Edict 9 in ibid. 18 and 19; Rock Edict 11 in ibid. 20 and 21; and Rock Edict 13 in ibid. 26 and 27. An occurrence not included in the above survey is the Delhi-Toprā Edict 7 in ibid. 50, 3rd column, where brahmins stand in the first place. Though the sequence of the two terms employed in the early Buddhist discourses may indeed be reflecting a revaluation of the samaṇa vis-à-vis the brahmin,[n.18] Deo 1956: 45 notes that Jain texts also tend to "raise the position of the Samaṇa equal to that of the Brāhmaṇa, if not superior to him". A defiant attitude towards the brahmin claim to superiority can be seen in the Śvetāmbara tale of how the embryo of Mahāvīra was transferred by Śakra from the womb of the brahmin lady Devāṇandā to that of the warrior lady Triśalā, because according to Jinacaritra §17, Jacobi 1879/1966: 38,9: na eyaṃ bhavissaṃ jaṇ ṇaṃ arahaṃtā ... aṃta-kulesu vā ... māhaṇa-kulesu vā ... āyāissaṃti, "it shall not come to be that [future] arhats will take birth in a lowly womb ... or a Brahmanical womb". Deleu 1996: 163 notes that in Viyāhapannatti 9.33 Mahāvīra admits that Devāṇandā is his real mother, devāṇandā māhaṇī mama ammā; cf. Lalwani 1985: 71,29. Von Glasenapp 1925/1999: 324 explains that according to tradition Mahāvīra originally took birth in a brahmin womb "as a consequence of the Karma ... of his arrogance" in a former life. Jaini 1979/2001: 7 comments that this tale reflects an attitude "contrary to the ordinary caste hierarchy which places brahmans at the apex". Schubring 1962/2000: 32 sums up that "tradition gave great importance to Mahāvīra's Kshatriya and not Brahman descent"; cf. also Pande 1978: 53. similar to the tendency in the same discourses to mention the warriors (khattiya/kṣatriya) before brahmins,[n.19] Bucknell 2007: 21 note 59 notes that though in general listing of classes in the discourses begin with the warrior class, an exception can be found in MN 96 at MN II 177,22 (and in its parallel MĀ 150 at T I 661a7) where such a listing begins with the brahmins. This departure from the usual sequence reflects the particular circumstances of this passage, where the speaker is a brahmin, who naturally puts his own class in first position. According to Fick 1897: 55– 56, the precedence given to the khattiyas in this way could be reflecting an actual hierarchy of power prevalent in north-eastern India of that time. In support of his suggestion he quotes DN 3 at DN I 91,11, where the brahmin Ambaṭṭha complains about the lack of respect with which the Sakyan khattiyas treated him on a former occasion; and DN 3 at DN I 103,21, according to which King Pasenadi did not allow the eminent brahmin Pokkharasādi a direct audience face to face, but would converse with him only through a curtain. in the case of Asoka's edicts the sequence of such listings may not always have been invested with a special importance.

Sequence of "Brahmins and Samaṇas" in Aśoka's Rock Edicts

Edict	Gir.	Kāl.	Śāh.	Mān.	Dhau.	Jaug.	Sup.
3	B	B	B	B	B	B	–
4	B	S	S	S	S	–	–
4	B	B	B	B	S	–	–
8	B	S	S	S	S	S	B
9	B	S	S	S	S	S	–
11	B	S	S	S	–	–	–
13	B	B	B	–	–	–	–

Judging from the picture painted in the early discourses, interrelations between samaṇas and members of the warrior class were less problematic than between samaṇas and brahmins. Respect for recluses was apparently so deeply entrenched in ancient Indian society that even a king felt that he should not openly contradict the teachings of a samaṇa living in his realm.[n.20] DN 2 at DN I 53,8: kathaṃ hi nāma mādiso samaṇaṃ ... vijite vasantaṃ apasādetabbaṃ maññeyya? Thapar 1984/2001: 154 explains that "śramaṇas ... had large followings. Their popularity would lead those in power to treat them with respect". It also seems to have been customary for kings to visit a samaṇa in order to receive religious instruction.[n.21] E.g., SN 44.1 at SN IV 374,11, where the teacher approached by the king of the country is the Buddhist nun Khemā.

Nevertheless, a king certainly has the power to banish a sama- ṇa from his realm.[n.22] MN 90 at MN II 131,5. This ambivalence between respect and control could underlie the famous inquiry of King Ajātasattu in the Sāmaññaphala-sutta regarding the purpose and benefits of being a samaṇa.[n.23] DN 2 at DN I 51,19 reports the king's inquiry about a "fruit of recluse-ship visible here and now", diṭṭhe va dhamme sandiṭṭhikaṃ sāmaññaphalaṃ. Macqueen (1988: 206) comments: "Ajātaśatru was king and overseer of a region apparently much frequented by śramaṇas, and it may be that he was interested in having the status of this sizeable group of people clarified".[n.24] Macqueen 1988: 206, 207 and 209 further comments that "it may in fact be the case that, like others of his time, he [the king] was annoyed at their [the śramaṇas'] pretensions ... so he presents the Buddha with a dilemma. If, on the one hand, the śramaṇa's work brings him concrete, present and visible results, then his occupation is like those of ordinary folk and ... he would not in this case be exempt from the duties that kings felt free to impose upon people in secular occupations. If, on the other hand, the śramaṇa does not win such fruits ... one may question his right to receive the donations (concrete and visible) of the populace". Given that "criticism of the śramaṇa's parasitical mode of life is well attested in the literature of this period", "Ajātaśatru puts the śramaṇa on the same level as the ordinary man and asks him to stand up and give account of himself". Thapar 1976/1978: 86 explains that "the authoritarian trends in the states emerging in the mid-first millennium B.C. were not always sympathetic to wanderers. They were often seen as people escaping social responsibility or socio-political demands. Their survival as free thinkers was dependent on their being able to assert the right to an alternative life". Cf. also Warder 1956: 55, who notes that the śramaṇa lifestyle was "threatened by political changes in the Ganges region".

For the householder in general, to see a samaṇa can be considered a blessing,[n.25] Sn 266: samaṇānañ ca dassanaṃ ... etaṃ maṅgalam uttamaṃ. as it affords an occasion for religious instruction. A male or female householder who approaches samaṇas and inquires about proper moral conduct will be endowed with wisdom even in the next life.[n.26] MN 135 at MN III 206,1. The function of samaṇas as teachers would have been a common notion, since a standard listing of sources for knowledge mentions respect for a particular samaṇa as a basis for holding a particular opinion or view.[n.27] [28] E.g., AN 3.65 at AN I 190,17: samaṇo no garu. According to Bhagat 1976: 328, "the Buddhist and Jaina literature assign an important part to the śramaṇa ... whose function was intellectual guidance and spiritual instruction". Dutt 1957: 30 explains that "the position of a samaṇa ... was equally that of a preceptor, preacher and religious leader".

While a samaṇa is expected to provide instruction and religious inspiration to laity, a householder should be respectful towards samaṇas and supply them with their daily needs.[n.28] E.g., SN 3.21 at SN I 96,12. Jain 1947: 192 indicates that samaṇas "were highly respected ... the common people paid them respects, called on them ... put them their queries, offered them food, provided them with shelter ... and other necessities of life". On lay support of samaṇas, especially in the case of Buddhist monks; cf., e.g., Spiro 1970/1982: 103–111, Strenski 1983: 471–476 and Freiberger 2000: 168–195. The need to behave respectfully extends even to family members, as a samaṇa can expect worship from his mother, father or brother.[n.29] SN 1.81 at SN I 45,6. Jain 1990: 346 notes that in Buddhist and Jain circles samaṇas "are accorded high honour both within their circles and without". Dutt 1924/1996: 55 explains that the samaṇa "is honoured as much as a Brāhmaṇa because his function is the same, namely, intellectual guidance and spiritual instruction". Karunaratna 2006: 660 adds that it was also "by the practice of austerities [that] the samaṇas came to be a highly respected category on a par with the mainstream brāhmaṇa religieux".

This nuance of respect leads me over to the more normative use of the term, where samaṇa as an honorific epithet stands representative for some degree of accomplishment. An important requirement for living up to the status of a samaṇa was, according to ancient Indian standards, harmlessness. A recluse should never retaliate when being abused,[n.30] AN 6.54 at AN III 371,10: samaṇo akkosantaṃ na paccakkosati, rosantaṃ na paṭirosati, bhaṇḍantaṃ na paṭibhaṇḍati, evaṃ ... samaṇo samaṇadhamme ṭhito hoti (Ce: rosentaṃ and paṭiroseti). and should quite literally 'put away the rod' in regard to all living beings.[n.31] Dhp 142: sabbesu bhūtesu nidhāya daṇḍaṃ ... so samaṇo. A true samaṇa is intent on patience and gentleness,[n.32] AN 6.52 at AN III 363,24: samaṇā ... khantisoraccādhippāyā, adding as other qualities of samaṇas that they apply themselves to wisdom, are determined on [maintaining] moral conduct, adhere to 'nothing' and have Nirvāṇa as their goal. hence one who harms others is not a true samaṇa.[n.33] [34] Dhp 184: na ... samaṇo hoti paraṃ viheṭhayanto.

Other aspects of a true samaṇa's mode of conduct can be deduced from a listing of the types of happiness associated with the lifestyle of a samaṇa, which are contentment with any requisite and delight in a life of celibacy.[n.34] [35] AN 5.128 at AN III 146,18. Another related aspect is taken up in AN 10.101 at AN V 210,8, according to which as a samaṇa one should repeatedly reflect on one's status as an outcast (on the samaṇa vis-à-vis the four classes cf. also DN 27 at DN III 95,22), on one's livelihood depending on others, and on the need to behave differently [compared to earlier, when still being a householder]. For a survey of qualities that are appropriate for a samaṇa cf. also Th 587–596. Another element in the proper conduct of a samaṇa is truthfulness, hence one who utters falsehood cannot claim to be a samaṇa, even if he has a shaven head.[n.35] [36] Dhp 264: na muṇḍakena samaṇo ... alikaṃ bhaṇaṃ ... samaṇo kiṃ bhavissati?; cf. also Ud 3.6 at Ud 29,4: yamhi na māyā ... so samaṇo (Be: yamhī). That shaving alone does not suffice for becoming a true samaṇa is similarly stated in the Jain Uttarādhyayana-sūtra 25.31, Charpentier 1922: 184. Those who are not true to the basic requirements of the samaṇa ideal are therefore a "corruption of a recluse", the "chaff of a recluse", not worthy of associating with true samaṇas.[n.36] AN 8.10 at AN IV 169,9: samaṇadūsī and samaṇapalāpo; on the idea of not being worthy to associate with true samaṇas cf. the event described in AN 8.20 at AN IV 206,4 (= Ud 5.5 at Ud 52,26 and Vin II 237,8). The notion of "corruption" recurs in a listing of four types of samaṇas at Sn 84, one of which is a corrupter of the path, maggadūsī. On the expression asamaṇa, "not a true recluse", cf. Horner 1938/1982: lii.

While these requirements of moral conduct would have been commonly accepted standards among samaṇas in ancient India, other qualities of a true samaṇa acquire a more distinctly Buddhist flavour. Thus according to the two Assapura-suttas in the Majjhima-nikāya, in addition to adherence to the basics of ethical conduct, other qualities more closely related to mental cultivation and the growth of wisdom are required for living up to being a true samaṇa.

The recommendations given in the first of these two discourses, the Mahā-assapura-sutta, proceed from purity of conduct – via restraint of the senses, moderation in regard to food, wakefulness, the development of mindfulness, and the attainment of deep stages of concentration – to the realization of the three higher knowledges (tevijjā).[n.37] MN 39 at MN I 271,6 to 280,34. Chaudhary 1994: 127 explains that "in order to be a real samaṇa, one has to have inner qualities, one has to be pure in respect of all actions mental, vocal and physical". The Cūḷa-assapura-sutta builds on the same theme by specifying that one who is under the influence of defilements is not a true samaṇa, in spite of having adopted external modes of conduct or forms of asceticism in vogue among ancient Indian samaṇas.[n.38] MN 40 at MN I 281,1 to 284,30. In sum, what makes one a true samaṇa from an early Buddhist perspective is, besides higher virtue, training in the higher mind and in higher wisdom.[n.39] AN 3.81 at AN I 229,3: adhisīlasikkhāsamādānaṃ adhicittasikkhāsamādānaṃ adhipaññāsikkhāsamādānaṃ. Wiltshire 1990: 295 relates the threefold training to the concept of harmlessness so central to the notion of a samaṇa, suggesting that "in its proper articulation, avihiṃsā entailed discipline of the triple faculties of 'body', 'mind' and 'speech'".

The training in higher wisdom for becoming a true samaṇa could be undertaken by developing various aspects of wisdom, such as insight into:

• impermanence,[n.40] AN 6.102 at AN III 443,12.
• honours and gains,[n.41] SN 17.25 at SN II 237,4, SN 17.26 at SN II 237,11 and SN 17.27 at SN II 237,21 (here and elsewhere, the relevant section is abbreviated in Ee).
• the world,[n.42] [43] AN 3.102 at AN I 260,26.
• feelings,[n.43] SN 36.26 at SN IV 234,29, SN 36.27 at SN IV 235,7 and SN 36.28 at SN IV 235,13. Cf. also SN 48.34 at SN V 208,16 and SN 48.35 at SN V 209,3, where insight is directed to the five faculties of sukha, dukkha, somanassa, domanassa and upe(k)khā.
• the four elements,[n.44] SN 14.37 at SN II 176,6, SN 14.38 at SN II 176,21 and SN 14.39 at SN II 177,10.
• the five aggregates,[n.45] [46] SN 22.50 at SN III 50,18, SN 23.5 at SN III 192,8 and SN 23.6 at SN III 192,25.
• the five faculties,[n.46] [47] SN 48.6 at SN V 195,4 and SN 48.7 at SN V 195,25.
• the six senses and their objects,[n.47] SN 48.29 at SN V 206,15 and SN 48.30 at SN V 207,1.
• the links of dependent arising,[n.48] SN 12.13 at SN II 15,6, SN 12.29 at SN II 45,25 and SN 12.71 at SN II 129,13.
• the four noble truths.[n.49] SN 56.22 at SN V 432,23 and It 4.4 at It 105,10.

From the perspective of developing insight into the four noble truths, then, only a teaching that contains the noble eightfold path can produce the four types of true samaṇas.[n.50] DN 16 at DN II 151,10; a statement also made in MN 11 at MN I 63,26, on which cf. also Freiberger 2000: 89–92 and Anālayo 2009b. These four represent the four stages of awakening,[n.51] [52] AN 4.239 at AN II 238,11. Another set of four types of samaṇa is mentioned in DN 33 at DN III 233,11, distinguishing between those who are "unshakeable", acala, "blue lotus", paduma, "white lotus", puṇḍarīka, and "refined", sukhumāla. According to AN 4.88 at AN II 88,ult., these four correspond to the four levels of awakening and would thus be illustrating the same division as in AN 4.239. Other modes of understanding these four can be found in AN 4.87 at AN II 86,30 and AN 4.89 at AN II 89,27, where the first of the four stands for a disciple in higher training, sekha, while the other three represent different types of arahants; a distinction that appears to also be implicit in AN 4.90 at AN II 90,20, though here the second and third are not explicitly designated as arahants. which are elsewhere also reckoned as the true fruits of recluse-ship.[n.52] SN 45.35 at SN V 25,7. Whereas here the notion of a true samaṇa stands for all levels of awakening, in other passages the same term represents the highest stage of full awakening alone.[n.53] [54] E.g., MN 40 at MN I 284,19, which makes a point of proclaiming that this status can be reached by members of any of the four classes. Another instance would be SN 45.36 at SN V 25,16, which indicates that the destruction of rāga, dosa and moha is the essence of being a samaṇa. In sum, once all unwholesome states have been pacified, samita, a monk becomes a true samaṇa,[n.54] MN 39 at MN I 280,12: samitāssa honti pāpaka akusalā dhammā saṅkilesikā ponobhavikā sadarā dukkhavipākā āyatiṃ jātijarāmaraṇiyā, evaṃ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu samaṇo hoti (Be and Se: ponobbhavikā, Ce and Se: jātijarāmaraṇīyā); cf. also Dhp 265 (quoted at the end of the present chapter); and AN 7.82 at AN IV 144,22 which after listing seven types of defilements – among them the root defilements of rāga, dosa and moha – indicates that pacifying them makes one a recluse, samitattā samaṇo hoti. According to Franke 1913: 305 and note 2, the term samaṇa/śramaṇa derives from √śram, "to endeavour", hence the relation to √śam, "to pacify" (alluded at in the present passages) is only a playful etymology of the type often employed in the early discourses. who has gone beyond birth and death.[n.55] Sn 520: jātimaraṇaṃ upātivatto samaṇo tādi pavuccate tathattā.

These passages indicate that, in spite of a general code of moral conduct shared among most ancient Indian samaṇas, the notion of what makes one a true recluse was invested in early Buddhism with a specific set of values.

This becomes particularly evident in some discourses that portray how contemporary practitioners, who are depicted as holding themselves to be accomplished samaṇas already, encounter the Buddha, go forth under him and eventually reach full liberation. According to these discourses, such converts thereon proclaim that they had earlier been deluding themselves, since only now have they really become true samaṇas.[n.56] E.g., MN 27 at MN I 177,20 or MN 89 at MN II 123,19; cf. also DN 8 at DN I 167,14, where the Buddhist notion of being a true samaṇa is contrasted to the qualities associated with this concept among contemporary ascetics.

The underlying contrast in these passages between the notion of a true samaṇa held among contemporary practitioners and its implications in early Buddhist circles forms the central theme of the Samaṇamaṇḍikā-sutta of the Majjhima-nikāya.

---

Translation

Discourse to the Carpenter Pañcakaṅga[n.57] The translated text is MĀ 179 at T I 720a28 to 721c19, which at T I 720a28 gives the discourse's title as 五支物主, literally "Master Five-limb", where 物 主 would correspond to thapati, which according to the Pāli commentary, Ps III 114,5, qualifies Pañcakaṅga as a "foremost carpenter", vaḍḍhakījeṭṭhaka. A reference to the present discourse in the Vyākhyāyukti in Lee 2001: 14,12 gives the title as yan lag lnga pa’i phya mkhan gyi mdo, which Skilling 2000: 342 reconstructs as *Pañcāṅgasthapati-sūtra. A comparative study of MN 78 and MĀ 179 can be found in Anālayo 2011a: 424–431.

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

2. At that time, the carpenter Pañcakaṅga had left Sāvatthī at dawn and was approaching the place where the Buddha was staying, with the intention to see and pay respects to the Blessed One. [Then] the carpenter Pañcakaṅga had the following thought: "For the time being [it would be better] to put off going to see the Buddha, [as] the Blessed One and the venerable monks would probably [still] be sitting in meditation. I might now rather visit Mallikā's Single-hall Park of heterodox practitioners.[n.58] [62] MĀ 179 at T I 720b5: 一娑邏末利異學園, which would correspond to the ekasālaka mallikāya ārāma mentioned in MN 78 at MN II 23,8. A reference to this location in Sanskrit fragments of the Pṛṣṭhapāla-sūtra, folio 416r4 in Melzer 2006: 244, reads yenaikasālamālikānyatīrthikaparivrājakānāmārāma; cf. also the unnumbered Hoernle fragment (photograph 179), no. 132 in Hartmann 1991: 236 V2: [li]kā any(a)[t](īr)[th](ikaparivrājakāḥ) and V3: ekasālam [ā](rāmam). Thereon the carpenter Pañcakaṅga, to entertain and amuse [himself],[n.59] MĀ 179 at T I 720b6: 遊戲歡樂; MN 78 does not mention that he had the intention to entertain or amuse himself. took the path to Tinduka plantation,[n.60] MĀ 179 at T I 720b6: 巾頭阿梨, which has its counterpart in the tindukācīra in MN 78 at MN II 23,7. in order to visit Mallikā's Single-hall Park of heterodox practitioners.

3. At that time, in Mallikā's Single-hall Park of heterodox practitioners there was the heterodox practitioner Samaṇamuṇḍikāputta, [n.61] [65] MĀ 179 at T I 720b8: 沙門文礽子, literally "recluse mun gji's son", (cf. the Early Middle Chinese pronunciation given in Pulleyblank 1991: 323 and 244 for 文 and 礽). This is closer to the name given in Be and Se as Samaṇamuṇḍikāputta, as against Samaṇamaṇḍikāputta in Ce and Ee. a great leader, teacher of a congregation, esteemed by the people, a teacher who was presiding over a great community of five hundred heterodox practitioners.[n.62] Be and Se agree with MĀ 179 on the count of disciples, whereas Ce counts seven hundred and Ee (MN II 23,1) only three hundred disciples.

He was with a tumultuous company that was creating a great clamour, being very noisy and discussing various types of irrelevant talk,[n.63] [67] MĀ 179 at T I 720b11: 畜生之論, literally "animal talk", equivalent to tiracchānakathā in MN 78 at MN II 23,14; cf. also above page 83 note 6. namely talk about kings, talk about thieves, talk about battles and quarrels, talk about drinks and food, talk about robes and blankets, talk about married women, talk about girls, talk about adulterous women, talk about the world, talk about wrong practice, talk about the contents of the ocean, having gathered in this way to talk various types of irrelevant talk.[n.64] The listings in the two versions differ, paralleling in several respects the differences noted above page 83 note 7. Both mention talk about: kings, thieves, battles, food, drink, clothes, women, the world and the ocean. Unlike MĀ 207, MĀ 179 at T I 720b13 also mentions "talk about wrong practice" or perhaps "talk about [those who] practice wrongly", 論邪道 (which may correspond to the expression micchāpaṭipanna found in other contexts in the Pāli discourses). For a study of the listings of such talks in DN 2 in comparison with the Saṅghabhedavastu version cf. Ramers 1996: 238–253.

Seeing from afar the carpenter Pañcakaṅga coming, the heterodox practitioner Samaṇamuṇḍikāputta admonished his own congregation: "Keep silent! Be silent and do not speak another word! It is proper for you to collect and control yourselves. There is a disciple of the recluse Gotama coming, the carpenter Pañcakaṅga. Of those who are householder disciples of the recluse Gotama living in Sāvatthī, none surpasses the carpenter Pañcakaṅga.[n.65] [69] MN 78 at MN II 23,27 indicates only that Pañcakaṅga is one of the Buddha's disciples at Sāvatthī, not that he is unsurpassed among them. Why [should you be silent]? [Because] he delights in silence and praises silence. If he sees that this congregation is silent, perhaps he will come forward." At that time, after the heterodox practitioner Samaṇamuṇḍikāputta had stopped [the talking of] his congregation, he remained silent himself.

4. Then the carpenter Pañcakaṅga approached the heterodox practitioner Samaṇamuṇḍikāputta, exchanged greetings with him and stepped back to sit to one side. The heterodox practitioner Samaṇamuṇḍikāputta said:

5. "Carpenter, if [someone] is endowed with four qualities, I designate him as accomplished in wholesomeness, supreme in wholesomeness, an unsurpassable person who has attained the supreme essence and has the nature of a genuine recluse. What are the four? With the body he does not do evil deeds, with the mouth he does not speak evil words, he does not engage in wrong livelihood and does not think evil thoughts.[n.66] A difference in the sequence of listing these four is that MN 78 at MN II 24,8 mentions thoughts before livelihood. Carpenter, if [someone] is endowed with these four qualities I designate him as accomplished in wholesomeness, supreme in wholesomeness, an unsurpassable person who has attained the supreme essence and has the nature of a genuine recluse."

6. On hearing the proposition made by the heterodox practitioner Samaṇamuṇḍikāputta, the carpenter Pañcakaṅga neither agreed nor disagreed. [Instead], he got up from his seat and left, [thinking]: "I shall personally approach the Buddha and inquire about the meaning of what has been said like this [by Samaṇamuṇḍikāputta]."

7. He approached the Buddha, bowed down with his head to pay respects and stepped back to sit to one side. Then he reported the entire conversation with the heterodox practitioner Samaṇamuṇḍikāputta to the Buddha. Having heard it, the Blessed One said:

8. "Carpenter, if what the heterodox practitioner Samaṇamuṇḍikāputta proposes were indeed the case, then a small infant with tender limbs, lying on his back asleep,[n.67] MN 78 at MN II 24,23 does not specify that the child is asleep. would also be accomplished in wholesomeness, foremost in wholesomeness, an unsurpassable person who has attained the supreme essence and has the nature of a genuine recluse.

"Carpenter, a small infant has not yet a perception of the body, what to say of him engaging in evil bodily deeds, [when he] is only able to move the body [a little]? Carpenter, a small infant has not yet a perception of the mouth, what to say of him speaking evil words, [when he] is only able to cry? Carpenter, a small infant has not yet a perception of livelihood, what to say of him engaging in wrong livelihood, [when he] is only moaning?[n.68] [72] MN 78 at MN II 25,1 instead refers to the mother's milk, mātuthañña, as 'livelihood'. Carpenter, a small infant has not yet a perception of thoughts, what to say of him engaging in evil thoughts, [when he] only thinks of the mother's milk?[n.69] [73] MN 78 at MN II 24,33 instead mentions merely sulking, vikujjitamatta (Be: vikūjitaº, Ce: vikujitaº) as 'intention'.

"Carpenter, if it were as the heterodox practitioner Samaṇamuṇḍikāputta proposes, then a small infant would be accomplished in wholesomeness, foremost in wholesomeness, an unsurpassable person who has attained the supreme essence and has the nature of a genuine recluse.

9. "Carpenter, if someone is endowed with four qualities, I designate him as accomplished in wholesomeness, supreme in wholesomeness, but he is not yet an unsurpassable person, has not attained the supreme essence, does not have the nature of a genuine recluse.[n.70] According to MN 78 at MN II 25,7, someone endowed with these four qualities is not accomplished in wholesomeness and not supreme in wholesomeness, na c'eva sampannakusalaṃ na paramakusalaṃ.

"What are the four? With the body he does not do evil deeds, with the mouth he does not speak evil words, he does not engage in wrong livelihood and does not think evil thoughts.

"Carpenter, if someone is endowed with these four qualities, I designate him as accomplished in wholesomeness, supreme in wholesomeness, but he is not yet an unsurpassable person, has not attained the supreme essence, does not have the nature of a genuine recluse.[n.71] [75] At this juncture, MN 78 at MN II 25,18 announces that one endowed with ten qualities is a true recluse, an announcement taken up again at the end of the discourse, MN 78 at MN II 28,34.

"Carpenter, bodily deeds and verbal deeds I designate as conduct (sīla). Carpenter, thoughts I designate as belonging to the mind and being related to the mind's characteristics.[n.72] [76] This paragraph has no counterpart in MN 78.

"Carpenter, I say one should know unwholesome conduct, one should know from where unwholesome conduct arises, one should know where unwholesome conduct is eradicated without remainder, where it is destroyed without remainder, and one should know: 'By what practice does a noble disciple eradicate unwholesome conduct?'

"Carpenter, I say one should know wholesome conduct, one should know from where wholesome conduct arises, one should know where wholesome conduct is eradicated without remainder, where it is destroyed without remainder, and one should know: 'By what practice does a noble disciple eradicate wholesome conduct?'

"Carpenter, I say one should know unwholesome thoughts, one should know from where unwholesome thoughts arise, one should know where unwholesome thoughts are eradicated without remainder, where they are destroyed without remainder, and one should know: 'By what practice does a noble disciple eradicate unwholesome thoughts?'

"Carpenter, I say one should know wholesome thoughts, one should know from where wholesome thoughts arise, one should know where wholesome thoughts are eradicated without remainder, where they are destroyed without remainder, and one should know: 'By what practice does a noble disciple eradicate wholesome thoughts?'

10. "Carpenter, what is unwholesome conduct? Unwholesome bodily conduct, unwholesome verbal [conduct], [unwholesome] mental conduct – this is reckoned to be unwholesome conduct.[n.73] [77] MN 78 at MN II 26,10 instead defines unwholesome conduct as covering unwholesome bodily action, unwholesome verbal action and evil forms of livelihood.

"Carpenter, from where does this unwholesome conduct arise? I declare the place from which it arises: One should know that it arises from the mind. What kind of mind?[n.74] [78] MN 78 at MN II 26,14 precedes its listing of a mind with sensual desire, etc., by indicating that the mind can be of many and various types and of different aspects, cittam pi hi bahu anekavidhaṃ nānappakārakaṃ (Be and Ce: bahuṃ). A mind with sensual desire, with ill will [or] with delusion – one should know that unwholesome conduct arises from this kind of mind.

"Carpenter where is unwholesome conduct eradicated without remainder, where is it destroyed without remainder? [When] a learned noble disciple abandons unwholesome bodily conduct and develops wholesome bodily conduct, abandons unwholesome verbal and mental conduct and develops wholesome verbal and mental conduct, [n.75] MN 78 at MN II 26,21 also mentions the need to abandon wrong livelihood. this is where unwholesome conduct is eradicated without remainder, destroyed without remainder.

"Carpenter, by what practice does a noble disciple eradicate unwholesome conduct? When a learned noble disciple in regard to the body contemplates the internal body ... (up to) ... feelings ... states of mind ... in regard to dharmas contemplates dharmas – practising like this a noble disciple eradicates unwholesome conduct.[n.76] MN 78 at MN II 26,24 instead mentions the four right efforts for eradicating unwholesome conduct; for a discussion of their relevance to the present discourse cf. Gethin 1992: 76–78.

11. "Carpenter, what is wholesome conduct? Wholesome bodily conduct, wholesome verbal [conduct], [wholesome] mental conduct – this is reckoned to be wholesome conduct.[n.77] MN 78 at MN II 27,3 instead defines wholesome conduct in terms of wholesome bodily action, wholesome verbal action and purified livelihood.

"Carpenter, from where does this wholesome conduct arise? I declare the place from which it arises: One should know that it arises from the mind. What kind of mind?[n.78] [82] MN 78 at MN II 27,8 precedes its listing of a mind free from sensual desire etc. by indicating that the mind can be of many kinds, of various kinds and of different aspects. A mind free from sensual desire, free from ill will [and] free from delusion – one should know that wholesome conduct arises from this kind of mind.[n.79] Skilling 2000: 342 notes that a counterpart to this passage is preserved as a discourse quotation in the Vyākhyāyukti; cf. Lee 2001: 14,13: dge ba’i tshul khrims ’di dag ni sems kyis kun nas bslang ba dag ste, sems de gang zhe na, dod chags dang bral ba dang zhe sdang dang bral ba dang, gti mug dang bral ba yin no.

"Carpenter, where is wholesome conduct eradicated without remainder, destroyed without remainder? When a learned noble disciple practises virtue without being attached to this virtue,[n.80] MN 78 at MN II 27,12 adds that the noble disciple understands as it really is the liberation of the mind and liberation by wisdom where wholesome conduct ceases, tañ ca cetovimuttiṃ paññāvimuttiṃ yathābhūtaṃ pajānāti, yatth' assa te kusalasīlā aparisesā nirujjhanti. this is where wholesome conduct is eradicated without remainder, destroyed without remainder.

"Carpenter, by what practice does a noble disciple eradicate wholesome conduct? When a learned noble disciple in regard to the body contemplates the internal body ... (up to) ... feelings ... states of mind ... in regard to dharmas contemplates dharmas – practising like this a noble disciple eradicates wholesome conduct.[n.81] [85] MN 78 at MN II 27,15 instead mentions the four right efforts for eradicating wholesome conduct.

12. "Carpenter, what are unwholesome thoughts? Thoughts of sensuality, thoughts of ill will and thoughts of harming – these are reckoned to be unwholesome thoughts.

"Carpenter, from where do unwholesome thoughts arise? I declare the place from which they arise: One should know that they arise from perception. What kind of perception? I say, perceptions are of many kinds, of numberless kinds, with several kinds of volitional formations, such as perceptions of sensuality, perceptions of ill will and perceptions of harming.

"Carpenter, because of perceptions based on the element of sensual desire in living beings, unwholesome thoughts arise that are in conformity with the element of sensual desire. If there are [such] perceptions, then because of those perceptions unwholesome thoughts arise in conformity with the element of sensual desire. Carpenter, because of perceptions based on the elements of ill will and harming in living beings, unwholesome thoughts arise that are in conformity with the elements of ill will and harming. If there are [such] perceptions, then because of those perceptions unwholesome thoughts arise in conformity with the elements of ill will and harming. This is [how] unwholesome thoughts arise from this kind of perception.[n.82] [86] This paragraph, relating unwholesome thoughts to the corresponding 'elements', is without a counterpart in MN 78.

"Carpenter, where are unwholesome thoughts eradicated without remainder, where are they destroyed without remainder? When a learned noble disciple, secluded from sensual desires and secluded from evil and unwholesome qualities, with [directed] awareness and contemplation,[n.83] MĀ 179 at T I 721b2: 有覺, 有觀, which in the present context are counterparts to vitakka and vicāra in the standard description of the first jhāna in Pāli discourses; cf., e.g., DN 1 at DN I 37,2 (MN 78 at MN II 28,1 abbreviates this part). with joy and happiness born of seclusion, dwells having attained the first absorption. This is [how] unwholesome thoughts are eradicated without remainder, destroyed without remainder.

"Carpenter, by what practice does a noble disciple eradicate unwholesome thoughts? When a learned noble disciple in regard to the body contemplates the internal body ... (up to) ... feelings ... states of mind ... in regard to dharmas contemplates dharmas – practising like this a noble disciple eradicates unwholesome thoughts.[n.84] [88] MN 78 at MN II 28,4 instead mentions the four right efforts for eradicating unwholesome thoughts.

13. "Carpenter, what are wholesome thoughts? Thoughts free from sensuality, thoughts free from ill will and thoughts free from harming – these are reckoned to be wholesome thoughts.

"Carpenter, from where do wholesome thoughts arise? I declare the place from which they arise: One should know that they arise from perception. What kind of perception? I say, perceptions are of many kinds, of numberless kinds, with several kinds of volitional formations, such as perceptions free from sensuality, perceptions free from ill will and perceptions free from harming.

"Carpenter, because of perceptions based on the element of absence of sensual desire in living beings, wholesome thoughts arise that are in conformity with the element of absence of sensual desire. If there are [such] perceptions, because of those perceptions wholesome thoughts arise in conformity with the element of absence of sensual desires. Carpenter, because of perceptions based on the elements of non-ill will and nonharming in living beings, wholesome thoughts arise that are in conformity with the elements of non-ill will and non-harming. If there are [such] perceptions, then because of those perceptions wholesome thoughts arise in conformity with the elements of non-ill will and non-harming. This is [how] wholesome thoughts arise from this kind of perception.[n.85] [89] This paragraph, relating wholesome thoughts to the corresponding 'elements', is without a counterpart in MN 78.

"Carpenter, where are wholesome thoughts eradicated without remainder, where are they destroyed without remainder? When a learned noble disciple, with the cessation of pleasure and pain, and with the earlier cessation of joy and displeasure, with neither-pain-nor-pleasure, equanimity, mindfulness and purity, dwells having attained the fourth absorption.[n.86] According to MN 78 at MN II 28,22, the cessation of wholesome thoughts takes place already with the second jhāna, a position probably taken with reference to the cessation of vitakka and vicāra that is characteristic of this level of absorption.

This is [how] wholesome thoughts are eradicated without remainder, destroyed without remainder.

"Carpenter, by what practice does a noble disciple eradicate wholesome thoughts? When a learned noble disciple in regard to the body contemplates the internal body ... (up to) ... feelings ... states of mind ... in regard to dharmas contemplates dharmas – practising like this a noble disciple eradicates wholesome thoughts.[n.87] [91] MN 78 at MN II 28,25 instead mentions the four right efforts for eradicating wholesome thoughts.

"Carpenter, by wisely contemplating a learned noble disciple knows unwholesome conduct as it really is, knows as it really is from where unwholesome conduct arises, and by wisely contemplating knows as it really is how this unwholesome conduct is eradicated without remainder, destroyed without remainder. A noble disciple who practises like this comes to know the cessation of unwholesome conduct as it really is.

"By wisely contemplating [a noble disciple] knows wholesome conduct as it really is, knows as it really is from where wholesome conduct arises, and by wisely contemplating knows as it really is how this wholesome conduct is eradicated without remainder, destroyed without remainder. A noble disciple who practises like this comes to know the cessation of wholesome conduct as it really is.

"By wisely contemplating [a noble disciple] knows unwholesome thoughts as they really are, knows as it really is from where unwholesome thoughts arise, and by wisely contemplating knows as it really is how these unwholesome thoughts are eradicated without remainder, are destroyed without remainder. A noble disciple who practises like this comes to know the cessation of unwholesome thoughts as it really is.

"By wisely contemplating [a noble disciple] knows wholesome thoughts as they really are, knows as it really is from where wholesome thoughts arise, and by wisely contemplating knows as it really is how these wholesome thoughts are eradicated without remainder, are destroyed without remainder. A noble disciple who practises like this comes to know the cessation of wholesome thoughts as it really is.

"Why? Based on right view arises right intention, based on right intention arises right speech, based on right speech arises right action, based on right action arises right livelihood, based on right livelihood arises right effort, based on right effort arises right mindfulness, based on right mindfulness arises right concentration.[n.88] A similar sequential linking of the path factors can be found in MN 117 at MN III 76,1, where it covers all ten path factors. With a mind concentrated like this, a noble disciple attains liberation from all desire, anger and delusion.

"Carpenter, a noble disciple with a mind that has been rightly liberated like this comes to know that all [forms of] births have been extinguished, the holy life has been established, what had to be done has been done, [for him] there will be no no experiencing of a further existence – he knows this as it really is.

"One who is reckoned to be training and to have acquired vision is endowed with eight factors, while an arahant who has destroyed the influxes is endowed with ten factors.

"Carpenter, what are the eight factors with which one who is training and who has acquired vision is endowed? To wit, the right view of one in training ... (up to) ... the right concentration of one in training – these are reckoned the eight factors with which one who is training and who has acquired vision is endowed.[n.89] [93] This whole section of MĀ 179, beginning with "Carpenter, a learned noble disciples by wise contemplation knows unwholesome conduct as it really is", up to the present juncture, is without a counterpart in MN 78.

14. "Carpenter, what are the ten factors with which an arahant who has destroyed the influxes is endowed? To wit, the right view of one beyond training ... (up to) ... the right knowledge of one beyond training – these are reckoned the ten factors with which an arahant who has destroyed the influxes is endowed.

"Carpenter, when someone possesses these ten factors, I reckon him as accomplished in wholesomeness, supreme in wholesomeness, an unsurpassable person who has attained the supreme essence and has the nature of a genuine recluse."

The Buddha spoke like this. The carpenter Pañcakaṅga and the monks, having listened to what the Buddha said, were delighted and received it respectfully.[n.90] [94] MN 78 at MN II 29,13 does not mention the presence of monks listening to the Buddha's exposition.

---

Study

A comparison of the above translated Madhyama-āgama discourse with the Samaṇamaṇḍika-sutta of the Majjhima-nikāya brings to light several differences that point to the vicissitudes of oral transmission. In what follows, I will take up only selected differences for discussion, in particular those that have a direct bearing on the notion of a true samaṇa.

In the early discourses in general, the effects of oral transmission can be seen particularly well in regard to the sequence of listings which, unless a particular list is so much standardized that it has become thoroughly fixed, can easily change. An example is the presentation of the four qualities that according to the Buddha's critique do not suffice to make one a true recluse. The Pāli and Chinese versions differ in as much as they have the themes of thoughts and livelihood in the opposite sequence. Nevertheless, when illustrating these themes through the simile of the infant they present the respective manifestations of thoughts and livelihood in the same sequence, in that both mention the infant sulking or moaning as their third, and the mother's milk as the fourth, as can be seen in table 5 below.

Table 5: Sequences of Listing the 3^rd and 4^th Qualities

	MN 78	MĀ 179
3rd	thoughts: sulking	livelihood: moaning
4th	livelihood: mother's milk	thoughts: mother's milk

The net result of this is a somewhat different presentation, as in the Pāli version the infant's thoughts express themselves by sulking, while in the Chinese parallel the infant's thoughts are concerned with the mother's milk. Conversely, in the Pāli version the child's livelihood is [to drink] the mother's milk, while in the Chinese parallel its livelihood is to moan [as a way of demanding nourishment]. Since both presentations make sense, it remains open to conjecture which of the two versions has preserved the original order of exposition.

A somewhat more important difference manifests in regard to the Buddha's assessment of the notion of a true recluse proposed by Samaṇamaṇḍikāputta. According to the Majjhima-nikāya version, the Buddha rejected the entire proposal. This is not the case in the Madhyama-āgama presentation, where he instead makes the finer distinction that someone endowed with purity of bodily and verbal activities and pure livelihood is indeed "accomplished in wholesomeness", though such a one nevertheless fails to be a true recluse in the highest sense.[n.91] [96] See §9 of the translation and above note 70.

In this way, the Madhyama-āgama version gives proper place to the importance of ethical conduct by avoiding unwholesome deeds, which is somewhat lost sight of with the Majjhima-nikāya version's sweeping dismissal. Elsewhere the Pāli discourses regularly emphasize the importance of ethical purity of conduct,[n.92] [97] Cf., e.g., AN 4.116 at AN II 119,30, a whole discourse dedicated to the importance of developing wholesome bodily, verbal and mental conduct, together with right view. passages that would support the Madhyama-āgama version's presentation that someone who has achieved such purity is indeed "accomplished in wholesomeness". Yet, more is required to become a 'true recluse' in the Buddhist sense, since ethical purity is only a means to an end – at least in early Buddhist thought – and this end, according to both versions of the present discourse, is reached when a samaṇa becomes fully liberated (thereby becoming the epitome of ethical perfection).

Another instance of sequential variation can be found in regard to the depiction of the qualities that do suffice to make one a true samaṇa: the ten path factors of an arahant. The Pāli version briefly mentions these ten at the outset of its exposition, right after the Buddha has rejected Samaṇamaṇḍikāputta's proposal with the help of the simile of the infant. The passage reads:

"Carpenter, [on] possessing ten qualities I designate a person as endowed with wholesomeness and foremost in wholesomeness, as one who has reached the supreme and is an invincible recluse".[n.93] MN 78 at MN II 25,18: dasahi kho, ahaṃ, thapati, dhammehi samannāgataṃ purisapuggalaṃ paññāpemi sampannakusalaṃ paramakusalaṃ uttamapattipattaṃ samaṇaṃ ayojjhaṃ (Be: paññapemi).

The Pāli discourse does not continue with this theme at this point, but instead takes up the subject of unwholesome conduct. The transition to this topic is somewhat abrupt in the original, so much so that in his translation Bhikkhu Bodhi in Ñāṇamoli (1995/ 2005: 650) adds "[But first of all]" in order to provide a lead-over from the announcement of the ten qualities to the treatment of unwholesome conduct.

An exposition of these ten qualities occurs only at the end of the Majjhima-nikāya discourse, where the corresponding passage in the Madhyama-āgama version is found as well. In the Majjhima-nikāya version, this exposition begins with:

"Carpenter, [on] possessing what ten qualities do I designate a person as endowed with wholesomeness and foremost in wholesomeness, as one who has reached the supreme and is an invincible recluse?"[n.94] MN 78 at MN II 28,34: katamehi cāhaṃ, thapati, dasahi dhammehi samannāgataṃ purisapuggalaṃ paññāpemi sampannakusalaṃ paramakusalaṃ uttamapattipattaṃ samaṇaṃ ayojjhaṃ? (Be: paññapemi; Se does not have cāhaṃ).

In other Pāli discourses, it is a standard procedure that a first announcement (such as "possessing ten qualities I designate a person as ...") is immediately followed by a question worded in the same terms (such as "possessing what ten qualities do I designate a person as ..."). This then leads over to a detailed exposition of the qualities mentioned in the first announcement.

In view of this standard pattern, the fact that in the present case most of the actual discourse intervenes between the first announcement of the ten qualities and the corresponding inquiry and exposition of these ten qualities gives the impression that a textual error may have occurred during transmission.

This impression is further strengthened by the fact that the inquiry and exposition of the ten qualities in the Majjhima-nikāya version sets in somewhat abruptly, just as its earlier announcement of the ten qualities ends in a somewhat abrupt manner. The Madhyama-āgama discourse provides instead a gradual build-up to the theme of the ten qualities (see table 6).

Table 6: Sequence of the Exposition

MN 78	MĀ 179
simile of infant	simile of infant
↓	↓
examination of 4 qualities	examination of 4 qualities
↓	|
announcement of 10 qualities	|
↓	↓
unwholesome conduct	unwholesome conduct
↓	↓
wholesome conduct	wholesome conduct
↓	↓
unwholesome thought	unwholesome thought
↓	↓
wholesome thought	wholesome thought
|	↓
|	understanding conduct & thought
|	↓
|	development of 8 path factors
|	↓
|	liberation
|	↓
|	8 qualities of a sekha
↓	↓
10 qualities of an arahant	10 qualities of an arahant
= true recluse	= true recluse

This gradual build-up begins by indicating that a noble disciple through wise contemplation acquires knowledge of conduct and thoughts in all their aspects as described in the body of the discourse. Such wise contemplation then leads to a development of the eight factors of the path of one in training. This in turn issues in full liberation, at which point a recapitulation of the eight path factors of a disciple in higher training (sekha) and of the ten path factors of an arahant fall naturally into place.

Such a gradual build-up is not found at all in the Majjhima-nikāya version. In view of the abrupt and somewhat disconnected way of the Majjhima-nikāya version's exposition of the ten qualities, it seems quite probable that the Madhyama-āgama discourse has preserved a presentation closer to the original exposition in this respect. That is, an error during the oral transmission of the Pāli version may have caused a loss of the exposition on understanding conduct and thoughts, of the eight path factors leading to liberation and of the recapitulation of the eight qualities of a sekha. Possibly the same error may also be responsible for the disruption of the exposition on the ten qualities of a true recluse, with the introductory statement shifted to an earlier part of the discourse.

The gradual build-up in the Madhyama-āgama discourse provides a better conclusion to the main theme of the true recluse, by at first turning to an understanding of conduct and thoughts in their wholesome and unwholesome manifestations, followed by indicating that based on such an understanding a noble disciple practices the noble eightfold path and eventually reaches liberation.

In this way, the Madhyama-āgama parallel to the Samaṇamaṇḍikā-sutta offers significant perspectives on the Majjhima-nikāya version's presentation, perspectives that accord well with the range of implications of the term samaṇa in other Pāli discourses.

In sum, then, becoming a true samaṇa from an early Buddhist perspective requires a basis in ethical purity and progress through the four stages of awakening until complete liberation is reached.

"One who pacifies evil [states] altogether, be they small or great, because of the pacification of evil [states] is reckoned a [true] recluse."[n.95] [100] Dhp 265: yo ca sameti pāpāni, anuṃ thūlāni sabbaso, samitattā hi pāpānaṃ, samaṇo ti pavuccati; with a partial counterpart in Gāndhārī Dharmapada 189, Brough 1962/2001: 149): śamadhare va pa[va]ṇi, śramaṇo di pravucadi; and full counterparts in the Patna Dharmapada 236, Cone 1989: 164 or Roth 1980: 118: yo tu śameti pāpāni, aṇutthūlāni sabbaśo, śamaṇā eva pāpānaṃ, śamaṇo ti pravuccati; and in Uv 11.14 c-f, Bernhard 1965: 190: śamitaṃ yena pāpaṃ syād, aṇusthūlaṃ hi sarvaśaḥ, śamitatvāt tu pāpānāṃ, śramaṇo hi nirucyate (on this edition cf. the study by Schmithausen 1970), translated by Hahn 2007: 46. The corresponding stanza 11.15 in the Tibetan Uv, Beckh 1911: 39 or Zongtse 1990: 127, reads similarly: gang dag sdig pa che phra dag, kun la brtags nas byed pa dang, sdig pa zhi ba de dag ni, dge sbyong nyid ces brjod par bya, translated by Rockhill 1883/1975: 48, Sparham 1983/1986: 75 and Iyer 1986: 269. In the Chinese Dharmapadas and Udānavargas the second part of the stanza can be found; cf. T 210 at T IV 569a4: 謂能止惡 ... 是為沙門, translated by Dhammajoti 1995: 208 (27.10 a+d); T 211 at T IV 597b2: 謂能止惡 ... 是謂沙門, translated by Willemen 1999: 152, (27.8 a+d); T 212 at T IV 681a19: 謂能捨惡, 是謂沙門; T 213 at T IV 783a5: 所言沙門者 ... 穢垢盡消除, translated by Willemen 1978: 47 (11.17 a+c), though the stanza relates the eradication of defilements to being reckoned one who has "gone forth", 出家/pravrajya, whereas the notion of a 'śramaṇa' stands only for pacifying the mind.