In this paper, I examine philologically all the nibbāna-related words in Suttanipāta (Sn), a unique and famous Pāli sutta that contains the oldest strata of Pāli Buddhist texts. And the meanings of the nibbāna-related words in Sn are compared with their interpretations of the commentary, Paramatthajotikā (Pj). In analyzing each nibbāna-related word, when it is about the state of a person, I also focus on whether each word in the context of the sutta [I] implies nibbāna in the present life, [II] implies nibbāna at and after the end of life, or [III] does not make clear the timing of nibbāna. As a result, I find that a relatively large number of nibbāna-related words in Sn, although the contexts clearly indicate a living person, [III] do not make clear the timing of nibbāna. This suggests a new understanding that the Sn author, unlike the commentator, does not intend to differentiate between [I] nibbāna in the present life and [II] nibbāna at and after the end of life, but only intends to show, with no concern of its timing, the fact of the attainment of nibbāna. Pj takes these “two types of nibbāna” as a premise and reflects orthodox Theravada ideas of nibbāna, which are evidently a later development. The two are called “nibbāna with remainder” (in life) and “nibbāna without remainder,” and in this case, the remainder means khandha (Skt. skandha), the constituents of the person, or roughly speaking, the body.

View full abstract

The Gospel of Buddha, written and published in English by Paul Carus in 1894, was translated into Japanese by Daisetsu Suzuki the following year and was subsequently translated into various languages and read by many people. Despite this widespread interest, its content was severely criticized by Western philologists. This is because the book, which is a combination of both the Pali Canon and Mahāyāna writings, was considered inappropriate as a representation of Buddhist philosophy. Carus argued that his writings reflected the original ideas of Śākyamuni. This paper establishes that Carus was trying to show “the Religion of Science” he advocated by arbitrarily selecting Buddhist books, including translations of the Pali Canon. Next, using materials such as related works and letters, this paper shows that Carus had experience interacting with Japanese monks and preferred them to Christian clergymen because they were “not hampered by any creed.” This attitude of Carus’, who regarded Japanese Buddhism as a kind of philosophy rather than as a religion and expected it to develop into a scientific religion, was well received not only by Japanese Buddhists who were trying to establish modern Buddhism, but also by other Japanese intellectuals.

View full abstract

In this paper, I examined the character of adhimutti (Skt. adhimukti) by paying attention to the examples of hīnādhimuttika / hīnādhimutta used in the Pali literature of the Theravāda Buddhism. Looking at the example of using hīnadhimuttika / hīnadhimutta as a word derived from Tatpuruṣa, it is considered that “inferior” (hīna) refers to something that does not lead to liberation or nirvana (Brahmaloka, kāmaguṇa, etc.). And I also pointed out that Vibh-a et al. understand ajjhāsaya ( 􃲈 adhimutti) as a mental element rather than an act or a work of the mind by referring to the Dhātusaṃyutta in the Pali Canon. According to Pali commentaries, it is adhimutti that determines, for example, that a person sīlavant approaches only sīlavant. The cases of hīnādhimuttika / hīnādhimutta in the Pali literature show the following. adhimutti has the aspect of “work of the mind” that sets one’s mind to the inferior thing (hīna) and has the aspect of “mental element” of a person who proactively approaches only those who have the same inferior (hīna) adhimutti. In short, adhimutti in the Pali literature is used from two different aspects: mental behavior and temperament.

View full abstract