Preface

This edition of the Visuddhimagga is based chiefly upon manuscripts, described by Professor C. R. Lanman as follows:

B1 is an excellent MS. from the library of the late King Thebaw of Burma at Mandalay and is described in the Journal of the Pali Text Society for 1896, page 40, under numbers 128 and 129. It is now a part of the India Office Library in London and was lent to Mr. Warren by the kindness of H. M’s Secretary of State for India in council. [In Burmese characters.]

B2 is a MS. procured by the late Henry Rigg, Esq., consulting engineer to the Government of India for railways. The leaves are about 19 inches wide and 2½ inches from top to bottom, and are between boards finished in red lacquer. [In Burmese characters.]

C1 is from the private collection of the late Professor T. W. Rhys-Davids, founder of the Pali Text Society. It was bought by him at Colombo in 1887. The leaves are about 17½″ × 2¼″. [In Singhalese characters.]

C2 belonged to the late Reverend Dr. Richard Morris, formerly the President of the English Philological Society. The leaves are 21¾″ × 2½″. [In Singhalese characters.]

Mr. Warren had these manuscripts typed in parallel lines, Roman characters, and in the order given above. The work fills fourteen folios. Moreover, he had prepared a typed manuscript of the whole book. Of this the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth chapters are in print. It seems that he intended to follow B1, giving all the variants of the other three.

The Harvard University Library possesses two other Singhalese manuscripts, the first from the late Venerable Waskaduwa Subhuti of Kalutara, Ceylon; the second procured for the late Dr. Paul Carus by the Anagarika H. Dharmapala. These two manuscripts, designated as C3 and C4, along with two Burmese and one Singhalese printed editions of the Visuddhimagga, were collated with Mr. Warren’s typed copies by Mr. Edwin W. Friend, under the direction of Professor Lanman.

The present edition, however, has not followed Mr. Friend’s collation. For the intention is to change Mr. Warren’s work as little as possible, and his manuscripts contain all the good readings. In just one case [Chap. XVII. 170] I have adopted a different reading, from the new Siamese (printed) edition of the Visuddhimagga. In some places all of Mr. Warren’s authorities needed correction on the authority of the Ṭīkā. With these exceptions, Mr. Warren’s four manuscripts have been followed, but his original plan of printing B1 with all the variants has not been followed. For, in many places, even the B1 reading is faulty. Such mistakes are not recorded, being obviously clerical errors or mistakes of pronunciation. In the Burmese script, ha becomes mā by the addition of a stroke; for tha, dha is often written, e.g. gantha “book” as gandha “perfume”; gūtha as gūdha. In the Singhalese, n and ṇ are frequently interchanged: vana “forest” and vaṇa “wound”; gahaṇa “accepting” and gahana “jungle”. It would be superfluous to give such readings or variants. The inclusion and criticism of these would add to the bulk, but not to the value of the volume. Therefore the reading that makes the best sense, and only those variants that give possible meanings, have been retained. Certain common words are always differently spelt in the Burmese and Singhalese versions. Such words are given in a list at the end of the book.

Mr. Warren’s paragraphs I found either too large or too small. I have recast and numbered them to facilitate references and comparison with the translation. Some of these paragraphs are sub-sections of long stories [I.117-121], or of long quotations [I.144-150]. Though the Burmese punctuation marks are the same for paragraph, period, or semicolon, they have helped me more than the Singhalese, which have very little punctuation. The quotations from the text of the Piṭakas and from the other Pali texts are put in inverted commas, and the references in the square brackets immediately following are to the book, volume, and page of the Pali Text Society edition, or of the other editions as described in the list of abbreviations. The Suttanipāta, Dhammapada and the Theragāthā are referred to by the numbers of the stanzas. This book, the Visuddhimagga, is referred to without a preceding letter, the Roman numeral being the chapter, the Arabic the paragraph. Unfilled brackets indicate that the quotations are not yet traced, most of these being from the old Singhalese aṭṭhakathās, now lost. The words upon which Buddhaghosa comments are italicized; so also the colophons to the chapters, and the headings of the pages. The omission of such indeclinables as pi, ti, eva, and ca when recorded in the footnotes, also removes the changes in the preceding consonants or vowels. For example, the Singhalese readings in I.138, III.43, III.114, and XI.9 are respectively, āhāraṃ, upacchijjati, pariggahavasena and kevalaṃ.

In the Burmese and sometimes in the Singhalese MSS., there is a punctuation sign before such sentences as “Cetiyapabbatavāsī Mahā-Tissatthero viya” [I.55]. Modern editors connect these with the preceding sentences. But from two examples in the Papañcasūdanī [M. Aṭṭh. i. 258], i.e. “Kāḷavallimaṇḍapavāsi-Mahā-Nāgatthero viya ca,” and “Galambatitthavihāre vassûpagatā paññāsa bhikkhū viya,” I came to the conclusion that such sentences were not only separate, but often began a new paragraph.

On the Life of Buddhaghosa

The accepted account of the life of Buddhaghosa is in the Mahāvaṃsa, chap. xxxvii, verses 215-246¹, of which the following is a summary:

Born near the Bodhi tree (near Gayā), a young Brahmin controversialist, well versed in all branches of the arts, in the Vedas, and in the doctrines of various sects, wandered about India for the purpose of debate. As he arrived one night at a Buddhist monastery, and had given a clear exposition of the doctrine of Patañjali, his arguments were refuted by a mahāthera named Revata. On the other hand, the young Brahmin was unable to follow the Buddhist’s arguments, and finally asked for instruction.

He entered the novitiate, learning and accepting the three Piṭakas. The name Buddhaghosa was given to him because his voice was deep like the Buddha’s. In the vihāra where he was converted, he composed a treatise called Ñāṇodaya; wrote the Aṭṭhasālinī, commentary upon the Dhammasaṅgaṇi; and finally undertook a short commentary on the Tipiṭaka. Whereupon the Thera Revata spoke:

‘Only the texts, not the commentaries, have been brought here [from Ceylon]; the traditions of the various teachers are not available. However, in Ceylon, the authoritative and quite orthodox commentaries compiled by Mahinda are extant in the Singhalese. Go there, study them, translate them into the Māgadhī language. They will benefit all.’

So Buddhaghosa arrived in Ceylon in the reign of King Mahānāma. In the Mahāpadhāna hall of the Mahāvihāra, he heard the Singhalese Commentary as well as the Theravāda tradition from Saṅghapāla. It seemed to him the doctrine of the Buddha. But when he demanded access to all the books, in order to write a commentary, the Order gave him two stanzas as a test. Upon these he wrote the Visuddhimagga, an epitome of the three Piṭakas with commentaries. At the first reading of this work, the gods hid the book away, and repeated the performance after he had done the work again. The third time, the deities produced the former copies to show the people his skill. And there was found after comparing the three books, not the least variation from the Theravāda, in composition, in meaning, in sequence, nor even in the very letters.

He was immediately acclaimed by the Order as a veritable Metteyya Bodhisattva, and the aṭṭhakathās were given to him. Living in that pure vihāra, rich in all such books, he translated them from Singhalese into the ‘original language’, Māgadhī. This work benefited people of all languages; all the teachers of the Theravāda honored it as a sacred text.

Thus, having finished his task, Buddhaghosa returned to the land of his birth, to reverence the great Bodhi tree.

This account so stated is subject to criticism. Buddhaghosa could not be a native of Buddhagayā. As a negative proof, we do not find that the scene of a single one of his numerous contemporary stories is set in Magadha. In the tale of Visākha [IX.64-69] who migrated from Pāṭaliputta, the starting-point is in Ceylon, not Magadha. In all his works there is no description of North India such as an eyewitness would give. More positive evidence is in the passage

“Uṇhassā ti aggisantāpassa. Tassa vanadāhâdisu sambhavo veditabbo” [I.86].
Heat: the heat of fire, such as occurs at the time of a forest fire, etc.

This is a comment upon the protection against heat given by a cīvara. His explanation is obviously ridiculous. It is not known to Indian southerners that a bare skin is sure to be sunburnt in the northern summer. Again, commenting upon the Gopālaka Sutta of the Majjhima Nikāya [Papañcasūdanī ii. 265-266], he seems to believe that sand bars are common in the Ganges between Magadha and Videha [Behar]². The “Gaṅgā” with which he was acquainted is evidently the Mahawalli-Gaṅga of Ceylon, and not the sacred river of India.

Buddhaghosa could not have been a Brahmin. From Vedic times, every Brahmin has been expected to know the famous Puruṣasūkta hymn:

Brāhmaṇo’sya mukham āsīd
bāhū rājanyaḥ kṛtaḥ
ūrū tad asya yad vaiṣyaḥ
padbhyāṃ śūdro ajāyata.

“Brāhmaṇa was his mouth,
Kshatriya his arms,
Vaishya his thighs;
Shūdra was born of his feet.”

Yet Buddhaghosa, supposed to be a learned Brahmin, was not acquainted with this. Commenting on “Bandhupādâpaccā” — “children of Brahma’s feet” — he says, “The Brahmins are of this opinion: Brahmins came out of Brahma’s mouth, Kshatriyas from his breast, Vaishyas from his navel, Shūdras from the legs, and Shramaṇas from his soles.”³

The word “Bhūnahu” occurs in Pali as “Bhrūṇahā” in Brahminical literature to signify “embryo-killer”⁴. In the Māgandiya Sutta [M. i. 502] Māgandiya reproaches Buddha as a Bhrūṇahā for having ceased to have intercourse with his wife. It is clear from his comment that Buddhaghosa did not understand the real meaning of this word. He explains it as ‘hatavaḍḍhi, mariyādakāraka’⁵. Finally, it is also to be noticed that Buddhaghosa makes fun of the Brahmins [I.93]. This in itself is inconclusive, as it might be the jeering of an apostate.

Of Patañjali, or any northern tradition, Buddhaghosa knew little. Out of all Patañjali, only the terms aṇimā and laghimā are mentioned [VII.61], without any further knowledge of the Yogasūtra. There is no comparative study, nor even a single reference to the work or name of Patañjali. The term “Prakṛtivāda” [Sāṅkhya] is mentioned in the 17th chapter⁶, where a rudimentary acquaintance with Nyāya, the Indian system of logic, is shown by reference to the structure of a syllogism⁷. All his knowledge of other sects does not exceed that of a learned Singhalese monk of today, or of a southern Bhikkhu of about the 11th century A.D. [Such as Anuruddha or Dhammapāla]. The methods, principles, or even the existence of the great Mahāyāna teachers such as Nāgârjuna and Ashvaghoṣa, seem to be unknown to him. He does mention the epics Rāmayāṇa and Mahābhārata, without showing any familiarity with them: “Legend means Bhārata and Rāmāyaṇa, etc. It is not proper to go to the places where they are recited”⁸, also “the Bhārata war and the abduction of Sītā, such fruitless stories”⁹.

Accordingly the greater part of the Mahāvaṃsa story appears to be legendary. It is said that the Aṭṭhasālinī was written by Buddhaghosa in India. From the style, content, and the introduction, it is doubtful whether Buddhaghosa wrote the book. That he could have written it before the Visuddhimagga is impossible, since the Visuddhimagga is referred to in the opening stanzas of the Aṭṭhasālinī¹⁰. Whoever wrote that part of the Mahāvaṃsa had not opened the Aṭṭhasālinī. That Buddhoaghosa, while desiring access to the commentaries should prove his fitness to work upon them by epitomizing the Piṭakas together with their commenaries, is surprising. Many quotations from the commentaries are fully and accurately given in the Visuddhimagga. In fact, he says in all his aṭṭhakathās that he has prepared the Visuddhimagga as an illuminative comment upon all four Nikāyas. If the Mahāvaṃsa chronicler did try to verify the legend about Buddhaghosa by examining Buddhaghosa’s works, he got no further than the two ‘fundamental’ gāthās at the beginning of the Visuddhimagga. If the Ñāṇodaya had existed, it alone would not have been lost while all the other works of Buddhaghosa survive. It is nowhere mentioned in Pali literature, the Mahāvaṃsa excepted. Possibly, this may be a book which the gods hid and forgot to restore!

From the narrative of the Mahāvaṃsa, one fact remains: that Buddhaghosa came from India to Ceylon in the reign of Mahānāma [end of 4th century A.D.]. This is confirmed by Burmese authorities¹¹; but the latter say that he went to Ceylon from Thaton, being a Talaing by birth. The tradition has an element of truth. I believe that he was a Telanga, from the Telagu country of Southern India, not a Burmese Talaing. The Telangas colonized extensively in Burma and Indo-China, the term Talaing being a corruption of their original name. His birthplace was the village of Moraṇdakheṭaka [Peacock-egg-village], as is very clear from the colophon of this book, where he is called “Moraṇdakheṭaka-vattabbena”, or Moraṇdakheṭaka Buddhaghosa. The method of nomenclature is still followed in Dravidian India and Ceylon. His surname vanished when his fame had made him The Buddhaghosa. It is to be noticed that the usually clever scribe of B1 changes the word moraṇdakheṭaka to mudantakhedaka [gladness ending in sorrow]; the Singhalese manuscripts read ceṭaka for kheṭaka, a possible confusion of letters. Kheṭaka is Sanskrit for village and remains in the modern South Indian vernaculars as Kheḍā.

He lived for some time at Mayūrasuttapaṭṭana or Mayūrarūpapaṭṭana, as he says in the colophon at the end of the M. Aṭṭh. “I am writing [this aṭṭhakathā] at the request of the venerable Buddhamitta, who lived with me at Mayūrasuttapaṭṭana (or Mayūrarūpapaṭṭana).” I cannot locate this, nor his birthplace, but an archaeologist familiar with the Telagu country should be able to identify it; here, at least a small monastery existed.

The next bit of information is from the colophon of the A. Aṭṭh. “I am writing [this aṭṭhakathā] at the request of the venerable Jotipāla, who lived with me at Kañcīpura and other places.”

Travelling perhaps in the order mentioned, he came to Ceylon with the definite aim of studying the Singhalese commentaries. The vast upheavals in government and religious culture from the death of Asoka to the Gupta period had left Ceylon untouched. The isolated fragments of Buddhist learning scattered throughout Southern India were much inferior to the continuous tradition of Ceylon. To learn this tradition of Ceylon must have been the purpose of Buddhaghosa’s journey.

After studying the commentaries, perhaps under Saṅghapāla, he conceived the plan of translating them into Pali for the convenience of those readers who did not know the Singhalese language. Jotipāla is credited with the suggestion that Buddhaghosa write the S. Aṭṭh., and also his last authentic work, the A. Aṭṭh.; Buddhamitta suggested the writing of the M. Aṭṭh. But the very first of this series, the D. Aṭṭh. was, according to Buddhaghosa, suggested by the Saṅghathera Dāṭhānāga, of the Sumaṅgala College at Anurādhapura. However, before writing any of these works, he, at the suggestion of the venerable Saṅghapāla composed the Visuddhimagga as a general illuminative work. This is referred to in the other works, and indeed is counted as an integral part of each one of them.

All these facts are gleaned from the colophons. One conjecture may be made from his writings, that he was of the farmer [gahapati] class. He says in the M. Aṭṭh. [ii. 204]: “Why does the Buddha mention the farmer caste first? Because they have the least pride and they are the most in number. Often the monks from a Kshatriya family are proud of their caste; those from a Brahmin family are proud of their learning; those from the low castes, because of their low birth, are unable to continue long in the Order. But the young farmers plough their land while their whole body is running with sweat. This then dries and forms salt on their backs. Therefore they are not proud … From the other families, not very many become monks; of the farmers many …”¹²

The Burmese tradition that Buddhaghosa came from Thaton may be founded upon a fact; possibly Buddhaghosa went there from Ceylon. His works are better preserved in Burma than in Ceylon, and though they show no particular acquaintance with Burma, the last years of his life might have been spent in Thaton.

Those stanzas found in the introductions and colophons of the Aṭṭhakathās of the four Nikāyas, which refer to the Visuddhimagga or throw some light on the life of Buddhaghosa are given below.

The following stanzas are found in the introductions of all the four Aṭṭhakathās, except the word “Dīghâgamanissitaṃ” in the last line, which belongs to the D. Aṭṭh. It is replaced by “Majjhimasaṅgītiyā” in M. Aṭṭh., by “Saṃyuttakanissitaṃ” in S. Aṭṭh., and by “Aṅguttaranissitaṃ” in A. Aṭṭh.

Sīlakathā dhutadhammā kammaṭṭhānāni c’eva sabbāni
cariyāvidhānasahito jhānasamāpattivitthāro

Sabbā ca abhiññāyo paññāsaṅkalananicchayo c’eva
khandhā dhātâyatanindriyāni ariyāni c’eva cattāri

Saccāni, paccayâkāradesanā suparisuddhanipuṇanayā,
avimuttatantimaggā vipassanābhāvanā c’eva

Iti pana sabbaṃ yasmā Visuddhimagge mayā suparisuddhaṃ
vuttaṃ, tasmā bhiyyo na taṃ idha vicārayissāmi.

Majjhe Visuddhimaggo esa catunnam pi āgamānañ hi
ṭhatvā pakāsayissati tattha yathābhāsitaṃ atthaṃ

Icc eva kato, tasmā tam pi gahetvāna saddhim etāya
aṭṭhakathāya vijānatha Dīghâgamanissitaṃ atthan ti.

The following stanzas are taken from the colophons of the four Aṭṭhakathās, printed in Siamese characters. Except in A. Aṭṭh., they are printed as prose. Having compared them with the available Burmese and Singhalese text, I have made a few unimportant changes to follow the meter.

At the end of D. Aṭṭh.:

Āyācito Sumaṅgala-pariveṇanivāsinā thiraguṇena
Dāṭhānāgasaṅghatherena theravaṃsanvayena

Dīghâgamavarassa Dasabala-guṇagaṇaparidīpanassa aṭṭhakathaṃ
yaṃ ārabhiṃ Sumaṅgalavilāsiniṃ nāma nāmena,

Sā hi Mahā-aṭṭhakathāya sāram ādāya niṭṭhitā esā
ekâsītipamāṇāya pāḷiyā bhāṇavārehi.

Ekūnasaṭṭhimatto Visuddhimaggo pi bhāṇavārehi
atthappakāsanatthāya āgamānaṃ kato yasmā,

Tasmā tena sahâyaṃ aṭṭhakathā bhāṇavāra-gaṇanāya
suparimita-paricchinnaṃ cattālīsasataṃ hoti.

At the end of M. Aṭṭh.:

Āyācito sumatinā therena bhadanta-Buddhamittena
pubbe Mayūrasuttapaṭṭanamhi¹³ saddhiṃ vasantena

Paravādivādavidhaṃsanassa Majjhimanikāyaseṭṭhassa
yam ahaṃ Papañcasūdanim aṭṭhakathaṃ kātum āraddho,

Sā hi Mahā-aṭṭhakathāya sāram ādāya niṭṭhitā esā
sattuttarasatamattāya pāḷiyā bhāṇavārehi.

Ekūnasaṭṭhimatto Visuddhimaggo pi bhāṇavārehi
atthappakāsanatthāya āgamānaṃ kato yasmā,

Tasmā tena sahâyaṃ gāthā-gaṇanānayena aṭṭhakathā
samadhika-chasaṭṭhisataṃ viññeyyā bhāṇavārehi.

At the end of S. Aṭṭh.:

Bahûpakāraṃ yatinaṃ vipassanâharaṇa-puññabuddhīnaṃ
Saṃyuttavaranikāyassa atthasaṃvaṇṇanaṃ kātuṃ

Saddhammassa ciraṭṭhitim abhilasamānena yā mayā nipuṇā
aṭṭhakathā āraddhā Sāratthappakāsinī nāma,

Sā hi Mahā-aṭṭhakathāya sāram ādāyo niṭṭhitā esā
aṭṭhasattatimattāya pāḷiyā bhāṇavārehi.

Ekūnasaṭṭhimatto Visuddhimaggo pi bhāṇavārehi
atthappakāsanatthāya āgamānaṃ kato yasmā,

Tasmā tena sahâyaṃ aṭṭhakathā bhāṇavāragaṇanāya
thokena aparipūraṃ sasattatiṃsatisataṃ hoti.

At the end of A. Aṭṭh.:

Āyācito sumatinā therena bhadanta-Jotipālena
Kañcīpurâdīsu mayā pubbe saddhiṃ vasantena,

Vara-Tambapaṇṇidīpe Mahāvihāramhi vasanakāle pi,
vātâhate viya dume palujjamānamhi saddhamme

Pāraṃ Piṭakattayasāgarassa gantvā ṭhitena subbatinā;
parisuddhâjīvenâbhiyācito Jīvakenâpi,

Dhammakathānayanipuṇehi dhammakathikehi aparimāṇehi
parikīḷitassa paṭipajjitassa [saka-]samayacitrassa

Aṭṭhakathaṃ Aṅguttara-mahānikāyassa kātum āraddho
yam ahaṃ cirakālaṭṭhitim icchanto sāsanavarassa,

Sā hi Mahā-aṭṭhakathāya sāram ādāya niṭṭhitā esā
catunavutipparimāṇāya pāḷiyā bhāṇavārehi.

Sabbâgamasaṃvaṇṇana-manoratho pūrito ca me yasmā
etāya Manorathapūraṇī ti nāmaṃ tato assā.

Ekūnasaṭṭhimatto Visuddhimaggo pi bhāṇavārehi
atthappakāsanatthāya āgamānaṃ kato yasmā,

Tasmā tena sahâyaṃ gathāgaṇanānayena aṭṭhakathā
tīh’adhikadiyaḍḍhasataṃ viññeyyā bhāṇavārānaṃ.