Other Translations: Deutsch , ру́сский язы́к
From: ,
Saṁyutta Nikāya 55.23 Linked Discourses 55.23
3. Saraṇānivagga 3. About Sarakāni
Godhasakkasutta With Godhā the Sakyan
Kapilavatthunidānaṁ. At Kapilavatthu.
Atha kho mahānāmo sakko yena godhā sakko tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā godhaṁ sakkaṁ etadavoca: Then Mahānāma the Sakyan went up to Godhā the Sakyan, and said to her, There is a Sakyan lady named Kāḷīgodhā (“black iguana”), whose son is Bhaddhiya (see SN 55.48:1.2). She features in SN 55.39 and Thag 16.7, where she is addressed simply as godhā. In the current Sutta, the individual is referred to as godhā sakko, with the name in feminine but the clan in masculine. The same readings are found in BJT. Now, while Pali allows nominatives in apposition to be of different genders, it prefers agreement, as seen in kāḷigodhā sākiyānī of SN 55.39:1.3, where the masculine name of the clan has been adapted to the feminine name of the person. I suggest the inverse has happened here: the feminine name has been adapted to masculine in agreement with the clan. But the manuscript tradition shows that this is in flux, as seen in the Sinhalese manuscripts cited in footnotes in the PTS edition, which use the masculine vocative godha (with some variations and inconsistencies). They also insert the masculine honorific bho, which strikes me as a tell that that manuscript tradition edited the text to be masculine. This is, of course, inconclusive, but ultimately I think there was only one person, a woman called Kāḷīgodhā, or Godhā in brief, a Sakyan lady who was mother of Bhaddiya. Since here she is mentioned following Mahānāma, the form of her name was mistakenly adapted to his, creating a tension in the text, which editors have addressed inconsistently. Note too that in conversation the name alone is used; the clan is only mentioned in background narrative, which as a rule is added later. See SN 47.19:1.4, where the text’s female was made male in the commentary. In both cases, the person with a female name has a strong voice in the narrative.
“katihi tvaṁ, godhe, dhammehi samannāgataṁ sotāpannapuggalaṁ ājānāsi avinipātadhammaṁ niyataṁ sambodhiparāyaṇan”ti? “Godhā, how many things must an individual have for you to recognize them as a stream-enterer, not liable to be reborn in the underworld, assured, destined for awakening?”
“Tīhi khvāhaṁ, mahānāma, dhammehi samannāgataṁ sotāpannapuggalaṁ ājānāmi avinipātadhammaṁ niyataṁ sambodhiparāyaṇaṁ. “Mahānāma, an individual must have three things for me to recognize them as a stream-enterer.
Katamehi tīhi? What three?
Idha, mahānāma, ariyasāvako buddhe aveccappasādena samannāgato hoti—It’s when a noble disciple has experiential confidence in the Buddha …
itipi so bhagavā …pe… satthā devamanussānaṁ buddho bhagavāti.
Dhamme …pe… the teaching …
saṅghe aveccappasādena samannāgato hoti—and the Saṅgha …
suppaṭipanno bhagavato sāvakasaṅgho …pe… anuttaraṁ puññakkhettaṁ lokassāti.
Imehi khvāhaṁ, mahānāma, tīhi dhammehi samannāgataṁ sotāpannapuggalaṁ ājānāmi avinipātadhammaṁ niyataṁ sambodhiparāyaṇaṁ. When an individual has these three things I recognize them as a stream-enterer.
Tvaṁ pana, mahānāma, katihi dhammehi samannāgataṁ sotāpannapuggalaṁ ājānāsi avinipātadhammaṁ niyataṁ sambodhiparāyaṇan”ti? But Mahānāma, how many things must an individual have for you to recognize them as a stream-enterer?”
“Catūhi khvāhaṁ, godhe, dhammehi samannāgataṁ sotāpannapuggalaṁ ājānāmi avinipātadhammaṁ niyataṁ sambodhiparāyaṇaṁ. “Godhā, an individual must have four things for me to recognize them as a stream-enterer. Mahānāma is, of course, correct, but curiously the Buddha’s reply is not recorded.
Katamehi catūhi? What four?
Idha, godhe, ariyasāvako buddhe aveccappasādena samannāgato hoti—It’s when a noble disciple has experiential confidence in the Buddha …
itipi so bhagavā …pe… satthā devamanussānaṁ buddho bhagavāti.
Dhamme …pe… the teaching …
saṅghe …pe… the Saṅgha …
ariyakantehi sīlehi samannāgato hoti akhaṇḍehi …pe… samādhisaṁvattanikehi. And they have the ethical conduct loved by the noble ones … leading to immersion.
Imehi khvāhaṁ, godhe, catūhi dhammehi samannāgataṁ sotāpannapuggalaṁ ājānāmi avinipātadhammaṁ niyataṁ sambodhiparāyaṇan”ti. When an individual has these four things I recognize them as a stream-enterer.”
“Āgamehi tvaṁ, mahānāma, āgamehi tvaṁ, mahānāma. “Hold on, Mahānāma, hold on!
Bhagavāva etaṁ jāneyya etehi dhammehi samannāgataṁ vā asamannāgataṁ vā”ti. Only the Buddha would know whether or not they have these things.”
“Āyāma, godhe, yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkameyyāma; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavato etamatthaṁ ārocessāmā”ti. “Come, Godhā, let’s go to the Buddha and inform him about this.”
Atha kho mahānāmo sakko godhā ca sakko yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkamiṁsu; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavantaṁ abhivādetvā ekamantaṁ nisīdiṁsu. Ekamantaṁ nisinno kho mahānāmo sakko bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: Then Mahānāma and Godhā went to the Buddha, bowed, and sat down to one side. Mahānāma told the Buddha all that had happened, and then said:
“Idhāhaṁ, bhante, yena godhā sakko tenupasaṅkamiṁ; upasaṅkamitvā godhaṁ sakkaṁ etadavocaṁ:
‘katihi tvaṁ, godhe, dhammehi samannāgataṁ sotāpannapuggalaṁ ājānāsi avinipātadhammaṁ niyataṁ sambodhiparāyaṇaṁ’?
Evaṁ vutte, bhante, godhā sakko maṁ etadavoca—
Tīhi khvāhaṁ, mahānāma, dhammehi samannāgataṁ sotāpannapuggalaṁ ājānāmi avinipātadhammaṁ niyataṁ sambodhiparāyaṇaṁ.
Katamehi tīhi?
Idha, mahānāma, ariyasāvako buddhe aveccappasādena samannāgato hoti—
itipi so bhagavā …pe… satthā devamanussānaṁ buddho bhagavāti.
Dhamme …pe…
saṅghe aveccappasādena samannāgato hoti—
suppaṭipanno bhagavato sāvakasaṅgho …pe… anuttaraṁ puññakkhettaṁ lokassāti.
Imehi khvāhaṁ, mahānāma, tīhi dhammehi samannāgataṁ sotāpannapuggalaṁ ājānāmi avinipātadhammaṁ niyataṁ sambodhiparāyaṇaṁ.
Tvaṁ pana, mahānāma, katamehi dhammehi samannāgataṁ sotāpannapuggalaṁ ājānāsi avinipātadhammaṁ niyataṁ sambodhiparāyaṇan’ti?
Evaṁ vuttāhaṁ, bhante, godhaṁ sakkaṁ etadavocaṁ:
‘catūhi khvāhaṁ, godhe, dhammehi samannāgataṁ sotāpannapuggalaṁ ājānāmi avinipātadhammaṁ niyataṁ sambodhiparāyaṇaṁ.
Katamehi catūhi?
Idha, godhe, ariyasāvako buddhe aveccappasādena samannāgato hoti—
itipi so bhagavā …pe… satthā devamanussānaṁ buddho bhagavāti.
Dhamme …pe…
saṅghe …pe…
ariyakantehi sīlehi samannāgato hoti akhaṇḍehi …pe… samādhisaṁvattanikehi.
Imehi khvāhaṁ, godhe, catūhi dhammehi samannāgataṁ sotāpannapuggalaṁ ājānāmi avinipātadhammaṁ niyataṁ sambodhiparāyaṇan’ti.
Evaṁ vutte, bhante, godhā sakko maṁ etadavoca:
‘āgamehi tvaṁ, mahānāma, āgamehi tvaṁ, mahānāma.
Bhagavāva etaṁ jāneyya etehi dhammehi samannāgataṁ vā asamannāgataṁ vā’ti.
Idha, bhante, kocideva dhammo samuppādo uppajjeyya, ekato assa bhagavā ekato bhikkhusaṅgho ca. “Sir, some instigation of a legal proceeding might come up. The Buddha might take one side, and the Saṅgha of monks the other. “Instigation of a legal proceeding” (dhammo samuppādo) is glossed with kāraṇa (here, “argument, disciplinary case”). See AN 10.33:1.9, “the instigation and settlement of disciplinary issues” (adhikaraṇa-samuppāda-vūpasama).
Yeneva bhagavā tenevāhaṁ assaṁ. I’d side with the Buddha.
Evaṁ pasannaṁ maṁ, bhante, bhagavā dhāretu. May the Buddha remember me as having such confidence.
Idha, bhante, kocideva dhammo samuppādo uppajjeyya, ekato assa bhagavā ekato bhikkhusaṅgho bhikkhunisaṅgho ca. Some instigation of a legal proceeding might come up. The Buddha might take one side, and the Saṅgha of monks and the Saṅgha of nuns the other. …
Yeneva bhagavā tenevāhaṁ assaṁ.
Evaṁ pasannaṁ maṁ, bhante, bhagavā dhāretu.
Idha, bhante, kocideva dhammo samuppādo uppajjeyya, ekato assa bhagavā ekato bhikkhusaṅgho bhikkhunisaṅgho ca upāsakā ca. The Buddha might take one side, and the Saṅgha of monks and the Saṅgha of nuns and the laymen the other. …
Yeneva bhagavā tenevāhaṁ assaṁ.
Evaṁ pasannaṁ maṁ, bhante, bhagavā dhāretu.
Idha, bhante, kocideva dhammo samuppādo uppajjeyya, ekato assa bhagavā ekato bhikkhusaṅgho bhikkhunisaṅgho upāsakā upāsikāyo ca. The Buddha might take one side, and the Saṅgha of monks and the Saṅgha of nuns and the laymen and the laywomen the other. …
Yeneva bhagavā tenevāhaṁ assaṁ.
Evaṁ pasannaṁ maṁ, bhante, bhagavā dhāretu.
Idha, bhante, kocideva dhammo samuppādo uppajjeyya, ekato assa bhagavā ekato bhikkhusaṅgho bhikkhunisaṅgho upāsakā upāsikāyo sadevako ca loko samārako sabrahmako sassamaṇabrāhmaṇī pajā sadevamanussā. The Buddha might take one side, and the Saṅgha of monks and the Saṅgha of nuns and the laymen and the laywomen and the world—with its gods, Māras, and divinities, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, gods and humans—the other.
Yeneva bhagavā tenevāhaṁ assaṁ. I’d side with the Buddha.
Evaṁ pasannaṁ maṁ, bhante, bhagavā dhāretū”ti. May the Buddha remember me as having such confidence.”
“Evaṁvādī tvaṁ, godhe, mahānāmaṁ sakkaṁ kiṁ vadesī”ti? “Godhā, what do you have to say to Mahānāma when he speaks like this?”
“Evaṁvādāhaṁ, bhante, mahānāmaṁ sakkaṁ na kiñci vadāmi, aññatra kalyāṇā aññatra kusalā”ti. “Sir, I have nothing to say to Mahānāma when he speaks like this, except what is good and wholesome.”
Tatiyaṁ.