The Root Sequence Mūlapariyṅya Sutta (MN 1) · 莲华归心开放中文佛学资料库

- suttas - - evening talks - short morning talks - lectures - guided meditations - talk collections - other themes - chants - - - - à¹à¸à¸¢ - Franā§ais - Espaā±ol - - Portuguāªs - Ð ÑÑÑÐºÐ¸Ð¹ - - - Ð£ÐºÑÐ°ÑÐ½ÑÑÐºÐ° Submit Search - Home - Suttas - MN - MN 1 The Root Sequence ## Browse Suttas Go to Majjhima Nikṅya index MN index Show outline show outline ## Outline - (Top) - Introduction - The Trainee - The Arahant - The Tathṅgata const prefersTocHidden = window.sessionStorage.getItem('user-prefers-toc-hidden') ?? window.localStorage.getItem('user-prefers-toc-hidden') ?? false; if (prefersTocHidden) { const tocToggleButton = document.getElementById("tocToggle"); const bookToc = document.getElementById("bookToc"); bookToc.classList.remove("show"); tocToggleButton.setAttribute("aria-expanded", false); tocToggleButton.querySelectorAll("[data-show-text]").forEach(el => { el.setAttribute("data-hide-text", el.innerText); el.innerText = el.getAttribute("data-show-text"); }); } ## The Root Sequence Mūlapariyṅya SuttaÂ Â (MNÂ 1) ## Introduction The Buddha listed clinging to views as one of the four forms of clinging that tie the mind to the processes of suffering. He thus recommended that his followers relinquish their clinging, not only to views in their full-blown form as specific positions, but also in their rudimentary form as the categories & relationships that the mind reads into experience. This is a point he makes in the following discourse, which is apparently his response to a particular school of Brahmanical thought that was developing in his time—the Sṅṃkhya, or classification school. This school had its beginnings in the thought of Uddṅlaka, a ninth-century B.C. philosopher who posited a "root": an abstract principle out of which all things emanate and which remains immanent in all things. Philosophers who carried on this line of thinking offered a variety of theories, based on logic and meditative experience, about the nature of the ultimate root and about the hierarchy of the emanation. Many of their theories were recorded in the Upaniṃ£ads and eventually developed into the classical Sṅṃkhya system around the time of the Buddha. Although the present discourse says nothing about the background of the monks listening to it, the Commentary states that before their ordination they were brahmans, and that even after their ordination they continued to interpret the Buddhaâs teachings in light of their previous training, which may well have been proto-Sṅṃkhya. If this is so, then the Buddhaâs opening lines —"I will teach you the sequence of the root of all phenomena"—would have them prepared to hear his contribution to their line of thinking. And, in fact, the list of topics he covers reads like a Buddhist Sṅṃkhya. Paralleling the classical Sṅṃkhya, it contains 24 items, begins with the physical world (here, the four physical properties), and leads back through ever more refined & inclusive levels of being & experience, culminating with the ultimate Buddhist concept: unbinding (nibbṅna). In the pattern of Sṅṃkhya thought, unbinding would thus be the ultimate "root" or ground of being immanent in all things and out of which they all emanate. However, instead of following this pattern of thinking, the Buddha attacks it at its very root: the notion of a principle in the abstract, the "in" (immanence) & "out of" (emanation) superimposed on experience. Only an uninstructed run of the mill person, he says, would read experience in this way. In contrast, a person in training should look for a different kind of "root"—the root of suffering experienced in the present—and find it in the act of delight. Developing dispassion for that delight, the trainee can then comprehend the process of coming-into-being for what it is, drop all participation in it, and thus achieve true awakening. If the listeners present at this discourse were indeed interested in fitting Buddhist teachings into a Sṅṃkhyan mold, then itâs small wonder that they were displeased—one of the few places where we read of a negative reaction to the Buddhaâs words. They had hoped to hear his contribution to their project, but instead they hear their whole pattern of thinking & theorizing attacked as ignorant & ill-informed. The Commentary tells us, though, they were later able to overcome their displeasure and eventually attain awakening on listening to the discourse reported in ANÂ 3:126. Although at present we rarely think in the same terms as the Sṅṃkhya philosophers, there has long been—and still is—a common tendency to create a "Buddhist" metaphysics in which the experience of emptiness, the Unconditioned, the Dharma-body, Buddha-nature, rigpa, etc., is said to function as the ground of being from which the "All"—the entirety of our sensory & mental experience—is said to spring and to which we return when we meditate. Some people think that these theories are the inventions of scholars without any direct meditative experience, but actually they have mos