[Zapper]

So I was reading this sutta MN 44: Cūḷavedallasutta—Bhikkhu Sujato

and I got very confused about it.

____

Here is the text in Pali:

“Sukhā kho, āvuso visākha, vedanā ṭhitisukhā vipariṇāmadukkhā;

dukkhā vedanā ṭhitidukkhā vipariṇāmasukhā;

adukkhamasukhā vedanā ñāṇasukhā aññāṇadukkhā”ti.

Translated:

“Pleasant feeling is pleasant when it remains and painful when it perishes.

Painful feeling is painful when it remains and pleasant when it perishes.

Neutral feeling is pleasant in the presence of knowledge, and painful in the presence of ignorance.”

 

Apparently viparinama is translated as perishing, now I know that Lal’s interpretation of viparninama is different (viparinama is the opposite of evolution) from 2 posts of his, so I am assuming the sutta’s interpretation is wrong. But I don’t understand how sukha vedana leads directly to dukkha vedana due to viparinama.

 

Another part of the sutta that confuses me is this:

“Sukhāya panāyye, vedanāya kiṁ paṭibhāgo”ti?

“Sukhāya kho, āvuso visākha, vedanāya dukkhā vedanā paṭibhāgo”ti.

“Dukkhāya pannāyye, vedanāya kiṁ paṭibhāgo”ti?

“Dukkhāya kho, āvuso visākha, vedanāya sukhā vedanā paṭibhāgo”ti.

Translated:

“But ma’am, what is the counterpart of a pleasant feeling?”
“Painful feeling.”
“What is the counterpart of painful feeling?”
“Pleasant feeling.”

 

It seems like they translate paṭibhāgo as counterpart (paṭi-bhāga, which literally translates to counter-part), but I am not sure if this is correct, because counterpart doesn’t mean something that is opposite to the previous, but something that is parallel to it (they cause eachother). But if it really means counterpart, that would mean that sukha vedana is the direct cause of dukkha vedana and dukkha is the direct cause of sukha vedana (due to viparinama).

 

And the last part that I wonder about is this one:

“Avijjāya panāyye, kiṁ paṭibhāgo”ti?

“Avijjāya kho, āvuso visākha, vijjā paṭibhāgo”ti.

Translated:

“What is the counterpart of ignorance?”

“Knowledge.”

 

I don’t see how vijja can be a supplementary part to avijja, That makes no sense to me.

 

So my three questions are:

1. Does an exact amount of sensory sukha lead to that exact same amount of dukkha due to viparinama?
2.  Does paṭibhāgo really mean counterpart (something that supplements another thing)?
3. And if that is so, how does avijja supplement vijja?

[Lal]

I think the issue here is the interpretation of paṭibhāgo.

• It means the counterpart, but does not imply “supplement” (it means the opposite or in the other direction). It also does not mean the counterpart must be “the exact same amount.”

[Zapper]

Well if that’s true the sutta would have a correct interpretation in my opinion.

However I looked up the definition of counterpart

COUNTERPART | English meaning – Cambridge Dictionary

 

and it says

“a person or thing that has the same purpose as another one in a different place or organization”

So if it literally meant counterpart, wouldn’t that mean that sukha is a direct cause of dukkha?

I think the problem is that in Pali the compound word is counter-part but not the counterpart as a single word as in English.

[Lal]

I should have written my comment a bit differently. Let me rewrite it:

It means something like a counterpart, but does not imply ‘supplement’ (it means the opposite or in the other direction). It also does not mean the counterpart must be ‘the exact same amount.’

 

[Zapper]

Alright, that makes sense.

[Author]

Posts