Difference between revisions of "Avijja Sutta"
m (1 revision: Samyutta Nikaya) |
m (Text replacement - "one thing" to "one thing") |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Avijja Sutta: Ignorance | + | {{DisplayImages|2030|2785}} |
| + | {{Centre|{{Big2x|Avijja Sutta: Ignorance }}<br/> | ||
| + | translated from the [[Pali]] by <br/> | ||
| + | [[Thanissaro Bhikkhu]]}}<br/><br/> | ||
| − | + | Then a certain [[monk]] went to the [[Blessed One]] and, on arrival, having [[bowed]] down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the [[Blessed One]]: | |
| − | + | "[[Lord]], is there any one thing with whose [[abandoning]] in a [[monk]] [[ignorance]] is abandoned and clear [[knowing]] arises?" | |
| − | + | "Yes [[monk]], there is one thing with whose [[abandoning]] in a [[monk]] [[ignorance]] is abandoned and clear [[knowing]] arises." | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | "Yes monk, there is one thing with whose abandoning in a monk ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises." | ||
"What is that one thing?" | "What is that one thing?" | ||
| − | "Ignorance, monk, is the one thing with whose abandoning in a monk ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises." [1] | + | "[[Ignorance]], [[monk]], is the one thing with whose [[abandoning]] in a [[monk]] [[ignorance]] is abandoned and clear [[knowing]] arises." [1] |
| − | "But how does a monk know, how does a monk see, so that ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises?" | + | "But how does a [[monk]] know, how does a [[monk]] see, so that [[ignorance]] is abandoned and clear [[knowing]] arises?" |
| − | "There is the case, monk, where a monk has heard, 'All things are unworthy of attachment.' Having heard that all things are unworthy of attachment, he directly knows every thing. Directly knowing every thing, he comprehends every thing. Comprehending every thing, he sees all themes[2] as something separate. [3] | + | "There is the case, [[monk]], where a [[monk]] has heard, 'All things are unworthy of [[attachment]].' Having heard that all things are unworthy of [[attachment]], he directly [[knows]] every thing. Directly [[knowing]] every thing, he comprehends every thing. Comprehending every thing, he sees all themes[2] as something separate. [3] |
| − | "He sees the eye as something separate. He sees forms as something separate. He sees eye-consciousness as something separate. He sees eye-contact as something separate. And whatever arises in dependence on eye-contact experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain that too he sees as something separate. | + | "He sees the [[eye]] as something separate. He sees [[forms]] as something separate. He sees [[eye-consciousness]] as something separate. He sees [[eye-contact]] as something separate. And whatever arises in [[dependence]] on [[eye-contact]] [[experienced]] either as [[pleasure]], as [[pain]], or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain that too he sees as something separate. |
| − | "He sees the ear as something separate... | + | "He sees the {{Wiki|ear}} as something separate... |
| − | "He sees the nose as something separate... | + | "He sees the {{Wiki|nose}} as something separate... |
| − | "He sees the tongue as something separate... | + | "He sees the {{Wiki|tongue}} as something separate... |
| − | "He sees the body as something separate... | + | "He sees the [[body]] as something separate... |
| − | "He sees the intellect as something separate. He sees ideas as something separate. He sees intellect-consciousness as something separate. He sees intellect contact as something separate. And whatever arises in dependence on intellect contact experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither pleasure nor pain that too he sees as something separate. | + | "He sees the {{Wiki|intellect}} as something separate. He sees [[ideas]] as something separate. He sees [[intellect-consciousness]] as something separate. He sees {{Wiki|intellect}} [[contact]] as something separate. And whatever arises in [[dependence]] on {{Wiki|intellect}} [[contact]] [[experienced]] either as [[pleasure]], as [[pain]], or as neither [[pleasure]] nor [[pain]] that too he sees as something separate. |
| − | "This is how a monk knows, this is how a monk sees, so that ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises." | + | "This is how a [[monk]] [[knows]], this is how a [[monk]] sees, so that [[ignorance]] is abandoned and clear [[knowing]] arises." |
==Notes== | ==Notes== | ||
| − | 1. In other words, ignorance is so fundamental that it has to be attacked directly. | + | 1. In other words, [[ignorance]] is so fundamental that it has to be attacked directly. |
| − | 2. Or: "all objects." | + | 2. Or: "all [[objects]]." |
| − | 3. Aññato: literally, "as other." The Commentary explains this as "in another way" or "differently" from the way ordinary beings view things, but that does not fit with the syntax of the Pali, nor does it really answer the monk's question. | + | 3. Aññato: literally, "as other." The Commentary explains this as "in another way" or "differently" from the way [[ordinary beings]] [[view]] things, but that does not fit with the [[syntax]] of the [[Pali]], nor does it really answer the [[monk's]] question. |
| − | [[Category: | + | {{R}} |
| + | [http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Category:Samyutta_Nikaya dhammawiki.com] | ||
| + | [[Category:Avijja Sutta]] | ||
Latest revision as of 09:04, 4 February 2016
Avijja Sutta: Ignorance
translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One:
"Lord, is there any one thing with whose abandoning in a monk ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises?"
"Yes monk, there is one thing with whose abandoning in a monk ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises."
"What is that one thing?"
"Ignorance, monk, is the one thing with whose abandoning in a monk ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises." [1]
"But how does a monk know, how does a monk see, so that ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises?"
"There is the case, monk, where a monk has heard, 'All things are unworthy of attachment.' Having heard that all things are unworthy of attachment, he directly knows every thing. Directly knowing every thing, he comprehends every thing. Comprehending every thing, he sees all themes[2] as something separate. [3]
"He sees the eye as something separate. He sees forms as something separate. He sees eye-consciousness as something separate. He sees eye-contact as something separate. And whatever arises in dependence on eye-contact experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain that too he sees as something separate.
"He sees the ear as something separate...
"He sees the nose as something separate...
"He sees the tongue as something separate...
"He sees the body as something separate...
"He sees the intellect as something separate. He sees ideas as something separate. He sees intellect-consciousness as something separate. He sees intellect contact as something separate. And whatever arises in dependence on intellect contact experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither pleasure nor pain that too he sees as something separate.
"This is how a monk knows, this is how a monk sees, so that ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises."
Notes
1. In other words, ignorance is so fundamental that it has to be attacked directly.
2. Or: "all objects."
3. Aññato: literally, "as other." The Commentary explains this as "in another way" or "differently" from the way ordinary beings view things, but that does not fit with the syntax of the Pali, nor does it really answer the monk's question.
