I've come across two passages which look very similar, and I'm wondering if they're just different translations of the same passage, or two completely distinct (though similar) passages.
The first passage, which I find beautiful and inspiring, is this:
If you really want freedom, happiness will arise. From happiness will come rapture. When your mind is enraptured, your body is tranquil. When your body is tranquil, you will know bliss. Because you are blissful, your mind will concentrate easily. Being concentrated, you will see things as they really are. In so seeing, you will become aware that life is a miracle. Being so aware, you will lose all your attachments. As you cease grasping, so you will be freed.
The second passage is this:
Discipline is for the sake of restraint, restraint for the sake of freedom from remorse, freedom from remorse for the sake of joy, joy for the sake of rapture, rapture for the sake of tranquillity, tranquillity for the sake of pleasure, pleasure for the sake of concentration, concentration for the sake of knowledge and vision of things as they are, knowledge and vision of things as they are for the sake of disenchantment, disenchantment for the sake of release, release for the sake of knowledge and vision of release, knowledge and vision of releasefor the sake of total unbinding without clinging.
— Parivaara.XII.2 (BMC p.1)
As you can see, the progression "joy-rapture-tranquility-bliss-concentration-right vision" is present in both passages, which suggests some sort of relation between them.
Clearly the second passage is from the Parivaara (a text from the Suttavibhanga in the Vinaya Pitaka), but I don't know where the first one comes from, so I'm not sure if they're a "match" or not.
Does anyone know?
Comments
I can always go back to the library and find the citation in the book; but I wanted to ask about it here as well, in case anyone might have some insight about why the two passages are so similar.
She may have paraphrased an extract from the suttas. Anyway it's a good quote.
P
That would make me glad, since the first version seems to me much more inspiring, and I would be disappointed to learn it was merely a reworded paraphrase of a monastic rule.
Anyway, I agree with you, it's a good quote. I may look into having it made into a colorful poster, and put it on the wall.
Well, it's only a possibility, but from my own experience, and from what I've seen time and time again on the net, people who find their quotes from secondary sources, rather than note that they are quoting someone elses quote, they'd use that books use of reference... for example, say we find a book called "the buddhas teaching" and in that book there are loads of quotes of the Buddha, like "Be nice to each other" by The Buddha. Then, when people use that quote, rather than referencing that quote as "Be nice to each other" By The Buddha taken from the book "the buddhas teaching", they instead just say "by the Buddha". Then someone else likes that quote and uses it on their web page, and then someone else and then someone else, etc. (Does that make sense? )
The quote that I found on the net referenced it as "Digha Nikaya" which is pretty vague considering the amount of suttas within the Digha Nikaya. The quote might very well be in the Digha Nikaya, and I might be completely wrong , I guess it's just I've just learnt to be skeptical of vague quotes. More often than not they've turn out to have been changed and twisted to suit the person quoting them.
Nios.
:smilec:
I think skepticism (a questioning state of mind, rather than taking things for granted) is in harmony with the Buddha's instructions to test everything for ourselves.
One key difference between the two passages is that the second one does not say "life is a miracle," which is one of my favorite parts of the first quote.
Therefore, it would seem that either the two passages are different, or (as Nios suggested) the passage may have been altered.
So it seems there are multiple distinct sutras with similar passages.
This makes sense, since they say the Buddha's teachings were memorized by 500 different monks, and therefore many similar (but slightly different) teachings must have come into being.
Therefore maybe the "miracle" passage isn't a modern paraphrase, but an original version.
I will keep searching it out.
Yes, it happens. Also sometimes people quote very selectively from suttas in order to support their opinion, conveniently removing the sections that don't support their point of view.
P