{"collection":"Buddhism","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/bud/sbe10/sbe1009.htm","path":"bud/sbe10/sbe1009.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/bud/sbe10/sbe1009.htm","text":"Sacred Books of the East, Vol. 10: The Dhammapada and Sutta Nipata, by Max M\u00fcller and Max Fausb\u00f6ll, [1881]\np. 27\nTHE VENERABLE (ARHAT).\n90. There is no suffering for him who has finished his journey, and abandoned grief, who has freed himself on all sides, and thrown off all fetters.\n91. They depart with their thoughts well-collected, they are not happy in their abode; like swans who have left their lake, they leave their house and home.\n92. Men who have no riches, who live on recognised food, who have perceived void and unconditioned freedom (Nirv\u00e2na), their path is difficult to understand, like that of birds in the air.\n[91. Sat\u00eemanto, Sanskrit smrimantah, 'possessed of memory,' but here used in the technical sense of sati, the first of the Bodhyangas. See Burnouf, Introduction, p. 797. Clough translates it by 'intense thought,' and this is the original meaning of smar, even in Sanskrit. See Lectures on the Science of Language, vol, ii. p. 332.\nUyyu\u00f1ganti, which Buddhaghosa explains by 'they exert themselves,' seems to me to signify in this place 'they depart,' i.e. they leave their family, and embrace an ascetic life. See note to verse 235. See also Rhys Davids, Mah\u00e2parinibb\u00e2na-sutta, Sacred Books of the East, vol. xi. p. 22.\n92. Su\u00f1\u00f1ato and animitto are adjectives belonging to vimokho, one of the many names of Nirv\u00e2na, or, according to Childers, s.v. nibb\u00e2na, p, 270, Arhatship; see Burnouf, Introduction, pp. 442, 462, on s\u00fbnya. The Sanskrit expression s\u00fbnyat\u00e2nimitt\u00e2pranihitam occurs in L'enfant egar\u00e9, 5 a, l. 4. Nimitta is cause in the most general sense, i.e, what causes existence. The commentator explains it chiefly in a moral sense: R\u00e2g\u00e2dinimitt\u00e2bh\u00e2vena animittam, tehi ka vimuttan ti animitto vimokho, i.e. owing to the absence of passion and other causes, without causation; because freed from these causes, therefore it is called freedom without causation. See Childers, P\u00e2li Dictionary, p. 270, col. 2, line 1.\nThe simile is intended to compare the ways of those who have obtained spiritual freedom to the flight of birds, it being difficult to understand how the birds move on without putting their feet on anything. This, at least, is the explanation of the commentator; The same metaphor occurs Mah\u00e2bh. XII, 6763. Childers translates, 'leaving no more trace of existence than a bird in the air.']\np. 28\n93. He whose appetites are stilled, who is not absorbed in enjoyment, who has perceived void and unconditioned freedom (Nirv\u00e2na), his path is difficult to understand, like that of birds in the air.\n94. The gods even envy him whose senses, like horses well broken in by the driver, have been subdued, who is free from pride, and free from appetites.\n95. Such a one who does his duty is tolerant like the earth, like Indra's bolt; he is like a lake without mud; no new births are in store for him.\n96. His thought is quiet, quiet are his word and deed, when he has obtained freedom by true knowledge, when he has thus become a quiet man.\n[95. Without the hints given by the commentator, we should probably take the three similes of this verse in their natural sense, as illustrating the imperturbable state of an Arahanta, or venerable person. The earth is always represented as an emblem of patience; the bolt of Indra, if taken in its technical sense, as the bolt of a gate, might likewise suggest the idea of firmness; while the lake is a constant representative of serenity and purity. The commentator, however, suggests that what is meant is, that the earth, though flowers are cast on it, does not feel pleasure, nor the bolt of Indra displeasure, although less savoury things are thrown upon it; and that in like manner a wise person is indifferent to honour and dishonour.\n96. That this very natural threefold division, thought, word, and deed, the trividha-dv\u00e2ra or the three doors of the Buddhists (Hardy, Manual, p. 494), was not peculiar to the Buddhists or unknown to the Brahmans, has been proved against Dr. Weber by Professor K\u00f6ppen in his 'Religion des Buddha,' I, p. 445. He particularly called attention to Manu XII, 4-8; and he might have added Mah\u00e2bh. XII, 4059, 6512, 6549, 6554; XIII, 5677, &c. Dr. Weber has himself afterwards brought forward a passage from the Atharva-veda, VI, 96, 3 (yak kakshush\u00e2 manas\u00e2 yak ka v\u00e2k\u00e2 up\u00e2rima), which, however, has a different meaning. A better one was quoted by him from the Taitt. Ar. X, 1, 12 (yan me manas\u00e2, v\u00e2k\u00e2, karman\u00e2 v\u00e2 dushkritam kritam). Similar expressions have been shown to exist in the Zend-avesta, and among the Manich\u00e6ans (Lassen, Indische Alterthumskunde, III, p. 414; see also Boehtlingk's Dictionary, s.v. k\u00e2ya, and Childers, s.v. k\u00e2yo). There was no ground, therefore, for supposing that this formula had found its way into the Christian liturgy from Persia, for, as Professor Cowell remarks (Journal of Philology, vol. vii, p. 215), Greek writers, such as Plato, employ very similar expressions, e.g. Protag. p. 348, 30, {Greek: pr\u00f2s apan ergon ka\u00ec l\u00f3gon ka\u00ec dian\u00f3hma}. In fact, the opposition between words and deeds occurs in almost every writer, from Homer downwards; and the further distinction between thoughts and words is clearly implied even in such expressions as, 'they say in their heart.' That the idea of sin committed by thought was not a new idea, even to the Jews, may be seen from Prov. xxiv. 9, 'the thought of foolishness is sin.' In the \u00c2pastamba-s\u00fbtras, lately edited by Professor B\u00fchler, we find the expression, atho yatki\u00f1ka manas\u00e2 v\u00e2k\u00e2 kakshush\u00e2 v\u00e2 sankalpayan dhy\u00e2yaty \u00e2h\u00e2bhivipasyati v\u00e2 tathaiva tad bhavat\u00eetyupadisanti, 'they say that whatever a Brahman intending with his mind, voice, or eye, thinks, says, or looks, that will be.' This is clearly a very different division, and it is the same which is intended in the passage from the Atharva-veda, quoted above. In the mischief done by the eye, we have, perhaps, the first indication of the evil eye. (Mah\u00e2bh. XII, 3417. See Dhammapada, vv. 231-234.)\nOn the technical meaning of t\u00e2di, see Childers, s.v. D'Alwis (p. 78) has evidently received the right interpretation, but has not understood it. M\u00e2drisa also is used very much like t\u00e2drisa, and from it m\u00e2riso, a venerable person, in Sanskrit m\u00e2rsha.]\np. 29\n97. The man who is free from credulity, but knows the uncreated, who has cut all ties, removed all temptations, renounced all desires, he is the greatest of men.\np. 30\n98. In a hamlet or in a forest, in the deep water or on the dry land, wherever venerable persons (Arhanta) dwell, that place is delightful.\n99. Forests are delightful; where the world finds no delight, there the passionless will find delight, for they look not for pleasures.","title":"Sacred Books of the East, Vol. 10: The Dhammapada and Sut...","type":"page"}