[Buddha-l] Pudgalavada #2

[Stephen Hodge]

Dear Dan et al,

Here is my understanding of T1506, interleaved with Dan's version.  Some 
differences are stylistic in nature, but others are more significant.   If 
nothing else, these several versions will demonstrate to the uninitiated 
just how difficult it can be to make sense of these and similar sources for 
the Sammitiyas etc.

For those who do not have Thich Thien Chau's version to hand, the context of 
this short passage is an exposition of ignorance (avidyaa) -- which is 
divided into three aspects.  The first aspect is non-knowledge (aj~naana) 
with regards to three topics: the conditioned (sa.msk.rta), the 
unconditioned  (asa.msk.rta) and avaktavya.  It seems that avaktavya is may 
be posited as a third category, neither conditioned nor unconditioned.  In 
the section on avaktavya, I regard it as shorthand for avaktavya-pudgala.  I 
have left avaktavya untranslated because its usage needs more thought -- on 
my part, if nobody else's -- though I do not think that it means the 
"ineffable".   The three sets of prajnaptis are three aspects to the verbal 
/ conceptual use of the pudgala idea, hence I have spelt that out here.

My version is just based on my understanding of these difficult texts --  
Thien Chau's version skates over the difficult bits and also he has some 
obvious errors.  Priestley I have never seen  -- though it has been on my 
wish list for a long time.

Best wishes,
Stephen Hodge


DL: Why is it unsayable ?  A: The unsayable are the prajñaptis of 
appropriation-, the past-, and cessation.  [These are] prajñapti of 
appropriation, prajñapti of the past, prajñapti of cessation. If someone is 
not aware of [that], that means they're unaware of what's "unsayable."
-----
SH:  What is the avaktavya-[pudgala] ?   The avaktavya-[pudgala] refers to 
the prajñaptis concerning appropriation, the past and cessation.   When one 
does not understand prajñaptis concerning appropriation, the prajñaptis 
concerning the past and the prajñaptis concerning cessation, this is 
non-knowledge (ajñana) concerning the avaktavya-[pudgala].

DL:  Prajñapti of appropriation [involves] that sentient beings are analyzed 
[to be] the same or different from the skandhas, dhaatus and aayatanas they 
have already appropriated.
-----
SH:  Regarding prajñaptis concerning appropriation, they state whether the 
being (sattva) who has appropriated the skandhas, dhaatus and aayatanas is 
the same or different to them.

DL:  As to prajñapti of the past, one says "because of past skandhas, 
dhaatus, and aayatanas," such as when one says: "At that time I was named 
Ku'sendra."
----
SH:  Regarding prajñaptis concerning the past, it is based on them that one 
speaks of past skandhas, dhaatus, and aayatanas, as when [the Buddha] said 
"At that time, I was called *Ku'sendra".

DL:  As to prajñapti of cessation, one says "it is because appropriation has 
already ceased," such
as when one says: "The Bhagavat's Parinirva.na."
----
SH:  Regarding prajñaptis concerning cessation, they are spoken when these 
causal appropriations
have ceased, such as when it is said that "The Bhagavat has parinivana'ed".

DL:  Next, prajñapti of the past dispenses with [the idea] that sentient 
beings are annihilated.  Prajñapti of cessation dispenses with [the idea] 
that they exist permanently. Prajñapti of appropriation [of skandhas, etc.] 
dispenses with [the idea that the sentient being is] non-existent. Prajñapti 
of non-appropriation dispenses with [the idea that the sentient being qua 
self] exists.
----
SH:  Moreover, prajñaptis concerning the past counteract [the notion that] 
beings are annihilated, prajñaptis concerning cessation counteract [the 
notion that they] exist eternally, prajñaptis concerning appropriation 
counteract [the notion that] beings exists, and prajñaptis of 
non-appropriation counteract [the notion that] beings exist.  A lack of 
understanding of each of these is "ignorance concerning the 
avaktavya-[pudgala].