With Assalāyana

So I have heard.*This discourse records how the brahmin student Assalāyana took on the Buddha on the question of the four classes, an attempt that Assalāyana knew was doomed from the start. Like similar contests such as the Ambaṭṭhasutta (DN 3), it is rich in historical connections. At one time the BuddhaBuddhaEl nombre dado a quien redescubre por sí mismo el sendero liberador del Dhamma, tras un largo período de haber sido olvidado por el mundo. Según la tradición, una larga línea de Buddhas se extiende hasta el pasado distante. El Buddha más reciente nació como Siddhattha Gotama en la India alrededor del año 500 a.e.c. Un joven bien educado y acomodado, renunció a su familia y su herencia principesca en la flor de la vida para buscar la verdadera libertad y el fin del sufrimiento (dukkha). Después de siete años de austeridades en el bosque, redescubrió el «camino medio» y alcanzó su meta, convirtiéndose en el Buddha.Ver en el glosario was staying near Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery.

Evaṁ me sutaṁ— ekaṁ samayaṁ bhagavā sāvatthiyaṁ viharati jetavane anāthapiṇḍikassa ārāme.

So I have heard.*This discourse records how the brahmin student Assalāyana took on the Buddha on the question of the four classes, an attempt that Assalāyana knew was doomed from the start. Like similar contests such as the Ambaṭṭhasutta (DN 3), it is rich in historical connections.Evaṁ me sutaṁ—At one time the BuddhaBuddhaEl nombre dado a quien redescubre por sí mismo el sendero liberador del Dhamma, tras un largo período de haber sido olvidado por el mundo. Según la tradición, una larga línea de Buddhas se extiende hasta el pasado distante. El Buddha más reciente nació como Siddhattha Gotama en la India alrededor del año 500 a.e.c. Un joven bien educado y acomodado, renunció a su familia y su herencia principesca en la flor de la vida para buscar la verdadera libertad y el fin del sufrimiento (dukkha). Después de siete años de austeridades en el bosque, redescubrió el «camino medio» y alcanzó su meta, convirtiéndose en el Buddha.Ver en el glosario was staying near Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. ekaṁ samayaṁ bhagavā sāvatthiyaṁ viharati jetavane anāthapiṇḍikassa ārāme.

Now at that time around five hundred brahmins from abroad were residing in Sāvatthī on some business.*Similar gatherings were noted at Campā (DN 4:4.1) and Opāsāda (MN 95:7.1). Then those brahmins thought, “This ascetic Gotama advocates purification for all four classes. Who is capable of debating with him about this?”

Tena kho pana samayena nānāverajjakānaṁ brāhmaṇānaṁ pañcamattāni brāhmaṇasatāni sāvatthiyaṁ paṭivasanti kenacideva karaṇīyena. Atha kho tesaṁ brāhmaṇānaṁ etadahosi: “ayaṁ kho samaṇo gotamo cātuvaṇṇiṁ suddhiṁ paññapeti. Ko nu kho pahoti samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetun”ti?

Now at that time around five hundred brahmins from abroad were residing in Sāvatthī on some business.*Similar gatherings were noted at Campā (DN 4:4.1) and Opāsāda (MN 95:7.1).Tena kho pana samayena nānāverajjakānaṁ brāhmaṇānaṁ pañcamattāni brāhmaṇasatāni sāvatthiyaṁ paṭivasanti kenacideva karaṇīyena. Then those brahmins thought, Atha kho tesaṁ brāhmaṇānaṁ etadahosi: “This ascetic Gotama advocates purification for all four classes. “ayaṁ kho samaṇo gotamo cātuvaṇṇiṁ suddhiṁ paññapeti. Who is capable of debating with him about this?” Ko nu kho pahoti samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetun”ti?

Then those brahmins thought, “This Assalāyana is capable of debating with the ascetic Gotama about this.”*Assalāyana may be identified with Kauśalyaṣcāśvalāyana (“Assalāyana of Kosala”) who asked the sage Pippalāda about the nature of prāṇa (breath/life energy) in Praśna Upaniṣad 3. He was probably a grandson or further descendant (as indicated by the naḍādi formation of his name) of the Aśvala of Videha who debated Yājñavalkya (see note below).

Atha kho tesaṁ brāhmaṇānaṁ etadahosi: “ayaṁ kho assalāyano māṇavo sāvatthiyaṁ paṭivasati daharo, vuttasiro, soḷasavassuddesiko jātiyā, tiṇṇaṁ vedānaṁ pāragū …pe… anavayo. So kho pahoti samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetun”ti.

Then those brahmins thought, Atha kho tesaṁ brāhmaṇānaṁ etadahosi: “ayaṁ kho assalāyano māṇavo sāvatthiyaṁ paṭivasati daharo, vuttasiro, soḷasavassuddesiko jātiyā, tiṇṇaṁ vedānaṁ pāragū …pe… anavayo. “This Assalāyana is capable of debating with the ascetic Gotama about this.”*Assalāyana may be identified with Kauśalyaṣcāśvalāyana (“Assalāyana of Kosala”) who asked the sage Pippalāda about the nature of prāṇa (breath/life energy) in Praśna Upaniṣad 3. He was probably a grandson or further descendant (as indicated by the naḍādi formation of his name) of the Aśvala of Videha who debated Yājñavalkya (see note below).So kho pahoti samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetun”ti.

So they approached Assalāyana and said to him, “This ascetic Gotama advocates purification for all four classes. Please, worthy Assalāyana, debate with the ascetic Gotama about this.”

Atha kho te brāhmaṇā yena assalāyano māṇavo tenupasaṅkamiṁsu; upasaṅkamitvā assalāyanaṁ māṇavaṁ etadavocuṁ: “ayaṁ, bho assalāyana, samaṇo gotamo cātuvaṇṇiṁ suddhiṁ paññapeti. Etu bhavaṁ assalāyano samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetū”ti.*paṭimantetū”ti → patimantetunti (bj, pts1ed); paṭimantetunti (mr)

So they approached Assalāyana and said to him, Atha kho te brāhmaṇā yena assalāyano māṇavo tenupasaṅkamiṁsu; upasaṅkamitvā assalāyanaṁ māṇavaṁ etadavocuṁ: “This ascetic Gotama advocates purification for all four classes. “ayaṁ, bho assalāyana, samaṇo gotamo cātuvaṇṇiṁ suddhiṁ paññapeti. Please, worthy Assalāyana, debate with the ascetic Gotama about this.” Etu bhavaṁ assalāyano samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetū”ti.*paṭimantetū”ti → patimantetunti (bj, pts1ed); paṭimantetunti (mr)

When they said this, Assalāyana said to them, “They say that the ascetic Gotama is a speaker of principle. But speakers of principle are hard to debate. I’m not capable of debating with the ascetic Gotama about this.”*This dialogue is modeled after the debate at Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 3.1 between Yājñavalkya and Aśvala. Foreign brahmins had come to Videha from Kuru and Pañcāla, the older-established and more prestigious Brahmanical lands (cf. the “western brahmins” of SN 42.6:2.1 and AN 10.176:1.5). King Janaka offered an extravagant prize of a thousand cows with gold-tipped horns for the greatest brahmin among them. But none dared step forward, so Yājñavalkya started to drive the cows home. Aśvala, the priest in charge of litany (hotṛ) for Janaka, challenged him to a debate, but was ultimately silenced.

Evaṁ vutte, assalāyano māṇavo te brāhmaṇe etadavoca: “samaṇo khalu, bho, gotamo dhammavādī; dhammavādino ca pana duppaṭimantiyā bhavanti. Nāhaṁ sakkomi samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetun”ti.

When they said this, Assalāyana said to them, Evaṁ vutte, assalāyano māṇavo te brāhmaṇe etadavoca: “They say that the ascetic Gotama is a speaker of principle. “samaṇo khalu, bho, gotamo dhammavādī; But speakers of principle are hard to debate. dhammavādino ca pana duppaṭimantiyā bhavanti. I’m not capable of debating with the ascetic Gotama about this.”*This dialogue is modeled after the debate at Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 3.1 between Yājñavalkya and Aśvala. Foreign brahmins had come to Videha from Kuru and Pañcāla, the older-established and more prestigious Brahmanical lands (cf. the “western brahmins” of SN 42.6:2.1 and AN 10.176:1.5). King Janaka offered an extravagant prize of a thousand cows with gold-tipped horns for the greatest brahmin among them. But none dared step forward, so Yājñavalkya started to drive the cows home. Aśvala, the priest in charge of litany (hotṛ) for Janaka, challenged him to a debate, but was ultimately silenced.Nāhaṁ sakkomi samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetun”ti.

For a second time, those brahmins said to him “This ascetic Gotama advocates purification for all four classes. Please, worthy Assalāyana, debate with the ascetic Gotama about this. For you have lived as a wanderer.”*This agrees with Praśna Upaniṣad 1.2, where Assalāyana, along with his fellow-seekers, is asked to live another year in fervor, spiritual practice, and faith (bhūya eva tapasā brahmacaryeṇa śraddhayā saṁvatsaraṁ). And for a second time, Assalāyana refused.

Dutiyampi kho te brāhmaṇā assalāyanaṁ māṇavaṁ etadavocuṁ: “ayaṁ, bho assalāyana, samaṇo gotamo cātuvaṇṇiṁ suddhiṁ paññapeti. Etu bhavaṁ assalāyano samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetu.*paṭimantetu → patimantetuṁ (bj, pts1ed); paṭimantetuṁ (mr) Caritaṁ kho pana bhotā assalāyanena paribbājakan”ti. Dutiyampi kho assalāyano māṇavo te brāhmaṇe etadavoca: “samaṇo khalu, bho, gotamo dhammavādī; dhammavādino ca pana duppaṭimantiyā bhavanti. Nāhaṁ sakkomi samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetun”ti.

For a second time, those brahmins said to him Dutiyampi kho te brāhmaṇā assalāyanaṁ māṇavaṁ etadavocuṁ: “This ascetic Gotama advocates purification for all four classes. “ayaṁ, bho assalāyana, samaṇo gotamo cātuvaṇṇiṁ suddhiṁ paññapeti. Please, worthy Assalāyana, debate with the ascetic Gotama about this. Etu bhavaṁ assalāyano samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetu.*paṭimantetu → patimantetuṁ (bj, pts1ed); paṭimantetuṁ (mr)For you have lived as a wanderer.”*This agrees with Praśna Upaniṣad 1.2, where Assalāyana, along with his fellow-seekers, is asked to live another year in fervor, spiritual practice, and faith (bhūya eva tapasā brahmacaryeṇa śraddhayā saṁvatsaraṁ).Caritaṁ kho pana bhotā assalāyanena paribbājakan”ti. And for a second time, Assalāyana refused. Dutiyampi kho assalāyano māṇavo te brāhmaṇe etadavoca: “samaṇo khalu, bho, gotamo dhammavādī; dhammavādino ca pana duppaṭimantiyā bhavanti. Nāhaṁ sakkomi samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetun”ti.

For a third time, those brahmins said to him, “This ascetic Gotama advocates purification for all four classes. Please, worthy Assalāyana, debate with the ascetic Gotama about this. For you have lived as a wanderer. Don’t admit defeat before going into battle!”

Tatiyampi kho te brāhmaṇā assalāyanaṁ māṇavaṁ etadavocuṁ: “ayaṁ, bho assalāyana, samaṇo gotamo cātuvaṇṇiṁ suddhiṁ paññapeti. Etu bhavaṁ assalāyano samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetu.*paṭimantetu → patimantetuṁ (bj, pts1ed); paṭimantetuṁ (mr) Caritaṁ kho pana bhotā assalāyanena paribbājakaṁ. Mā bhavaṁ assalāyano ayuddhaparājitaṁ parājayī”ti.

For a third time, those brahmins said to him, Tatiyampi kho te brāhmaṇā assalāyanaṁ māṇavaṁ etadavocuṁ: “This ascetic Gotama advocates purification for all four classes. “ayaṁ, bho assalāyana, samaṇo gotamo cātuvaṇṇiṁ suddhiṁ paññapeti. Please, worthy Assalāyana, debate with the ascetic Gotama about this. Etu bhavaṁ assalāyano samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetu.*paṭimantetu → patimantetuṁ (bj, pts1ed); paṭimantetuṁ (mr)For you have lived as a wanderer. Caritaṁ kho pana bhotā assalāyanena paribbājakaṁ. Don’t admit defeat before going into battle!” Mā bhavaṁ assalāyano ayuddhaparājitaṁ parājayī”ti.

When they said this, Assalāyana said to them, “Clearly, good fellows, I’m not getting through to you when I say: ‘They say that the ascetic Gotama is a speaker of principle. But speakers of principle are hard to debate. I’m not capable of debating with the ascetic Gotama about this.’ Nevertheless, I shall go at your bidding.”

Evaṁ vutte, assalāyano māṇavo te brāhmaṇe etadavoca: “addhā kho ahaṁ bhavanto na labhāmi. Samaṇo khalu, bho, gotamo dhammavādī; dhammavādino ca pana duppaṭimantiyā bhavanti. Nāhaṁ sakkomi samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetunti. Api cāhaṁ bhavantānaṁ vacanena gamissāmī”ti.

When they said this, Assalāyana said to them, Evaṁ vutte, assalāyano māṇavo te brāhmaṇe etadavoca: “Clearly, good fellows, I’m not getting through to you when I say: “addhā kho ahaṁ bhavanto na labhāmi. ‘They say that the ascetic Gotama is a speaker of principle. Samaṇo khalu, bho, gotamo dhammavādī; But speakers of principle are hard to debate. dhammavādino ca pana duppaṭimantiyā bhavanti. I’m not capable of debating with the ascetic Gotama about this.’ Nāhaṁ sakkomi samaṇena gotamena saddhiṁ asmiṁ vacane paṭimantetunti. Nevertheless, I shall go at your bidding.” Api cāhaṁ bhavantānaṁ vacanena gamissāmī”ti.

Then Assalāyana together with a large group of brahmins went to the Buddha and exchanged greetings with him. When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to one side and said to the Buddha:

Atha kho assalāyano māṇavo mahatā brāhmaṇagaṇena saddhiṁ yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavatā saddhiṁ sammodi. Sammodanīyaṁ kathaṁ sāraṇīyaṁ vītisāretvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. Ekamantaṁ nisinno kho assalāyano māṇavo bhagavantaṁ etadavoca:

Then Assalāyana together with a large group of brahmins went to the Buddha and exchanged greetings with him. Atha kho assalāyano māṇavo mahatā brāhmaṇagaṇena saddhiṁ yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavatā saddhiṁ sammodi. When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to one side and said to the Buddha: Sammodanīyaṁ kathaṁ sāraṇīyaṁ vītisāretvā ekamantaṁ nisīdi. Ekamantaṁ nisinno kho assalāyano māṇavo bhagavantaṁ etadavoca:

“Worthy Gotama, the brahmins say: ‘Only brahmins are the best class; other classes are inferior.*This verse is also at DN 27:3.6 and MN 84:9.19. Only brahmins are the light class; other classes are dark. Only brahmins are purified, not others. Only brahmins are true-born sons of divinity, born from his mouth, born of divinity, created by divinity, heirs of divinity.’ What do you say about this?”

“brāhmaṇā, bho gotama, evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo; brāhmaṇova sukko vaṇṇo, kaṇho añño vaṇṇo; brāhmaṇova sujjhanti, no abrāhmaṇā; brāhmaṇāva brahmuno puttā orasā mukhato jātā brahmajā brahmanimmitā brahmadāyādā’ti. Idha bhavaṁ gotamo kimāhā”ti?

“Worthy Gotama, the brahmins say: “brāhmaṇā, bho gotama, evamāhaṁsu: ‘Only brahmins are the best class; other classes are inferior.*This verse is also at DN 27:3.6 and MN 84:9.19.‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo; Only brahmins are the light class; other classes are dark. brāhmaṇova sukko vaṇṇo, kaṇho añño vaṇṇo; Only brahmins are purified, not others. brāhmaṇova sujjhanti, no abrāhmaṇā; Only brahmins are true-born sons of divinity, born from his mouth, born of divinity, created by divinity, heirs of divinity.’ brāhmaṇāva brahmuno puttā orasā mukhato jātā brahmajā brahmanimmitā brahmadāyādā’ti. What do you say about this?” Idha bhavaṁ gotamo kimāhā”ti?

“But Assalāyana, brahmin women are seen menstruating, being pregnant, giving birth, and breastfeeding. Yet even though they’re born from a brahmin womb they say: ‘Only brahmins are the best class; other classes are inferior. Only brahmins are the light class; other classes are dark. Only brahmins are purified, not others. Only brahmins are true-born sons of divinity, born from his mouth, born of divinity, created by divinity, heirs of divinity.’”

“Dissanti kho pana, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ brāhmaṇiyo utuniyopi gabbhiniyopi vijāyamānāpi pāyamānāpi.*Dissanti → dissante (bj, sya-all, km, pts1ed) Te ca brāhmaṇiyonijāva samānā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo; brāhmaṇova sukko vaṇṇo, kaṇho añño vaṇṇo; brāhmaṇāva sujjhanti, no abrāhmaṇā; brāhmaṇāva brahmuno puttā orasā mukhato jātā brahmajā brahmanimmitā brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“But Assalāyana, brahmin women are seen menstruating, being pregnant, giving birth, and breastfeeding. “Dissanti kho pana, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ brāhmaṇiyo utuniyopi gabbhiniyopi vijāyamānāpi pāyamānāpi.*Dissanti → dissante (bj, sya-all, km, pts1ed)Yet even though they’re born from a brahmin womb they say: Te ca brāhmaṇiyonijāva samānā evamāhaṁsu: ‘Only brahmins are the best class; other classes are inferior. ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo; Only brahmins are the light class; other classes are dark. brāhmaṇova sukko vaṇṇo, kaṇho añño vaṇṇo; Only brahmins are purified, not others. brāhmaṇāva sujjhanti, no abrāhmaṇā; Only brahmins are true-born sons of divinity, born from his mouth, born of divinity, created by divinity, heirs of divinity.’” brāhmaṇāva brahmuno puttā orasā mukhato jātā brahmajā brahmanimmitā brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.”

“Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.” “Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“What do you think, Assalāyana? Have you heard that in Greece and Persia and other foreign lands there are only two classes, masters and bonded servants; and that masters may become servants, and servants masters?”*“Greece” (yona, from “Ionia”) and “Persia” (kamboja) are loose exonyms indicating the regions dominated by Greek and Iranian culture. | The Greeks and other foreigners are mentioned in Ashokan edicts, but this is the only reference to Greece in an early Buddhist text. The Sanskrit yavana appears shortly after the Buddha in Pāṇini 4.1.49. The Indic terms are derived from the Persian yauna, first attested in an inscription of Darius I (522–486 BCE), who conquered three Indian realms: gandāra (Gandhāra), hindush (Indus valley), and thataguš (Sattagydia, around modern Bannu in Pakistan). Soldiers from these realms served under Achaemenid kings from this time. Moreover, several Greek and Achaemenid coins dating back as far as Darius I have been found in the Kabul hoard as well as the Shaikhan Dheri hoard at the site of Puṣkalāvatī, capital of Gandhāra. | “Persia” is one of the sixteen great nations (AN 3.70:28.2). It was the home of horses, lying to the west of Gandhāra (Pakistan) in modern Afghanistan. This was the easternmost extent of Iranian culture, and the passage here shows how different it was considered compared to the other nations. At this date, I think kamboja meant not just the specific location in Afghanistan, but more generally the Iranian peoples west of Gandhāra, just as yona (“Ionian”) is used for all people of Greek culture. | The perceived difference in slave culture mirrors the Greek ambassador Megasthenes who, writing over a century later, said there were no slaves in India.

“Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, sutaṁ te: ‘yonakambojesu aññesu ca paccantimesu janapadesu dveva vaṇṇā—ayyo ceva dāso ca; ayyo hutvā dāso hoti, dāso hutvā ayyo hotī’”ti?

“What do you think, Assalāyana? “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, Have you heard that in Greece and Persia and other foreign lands there are only two classes, masters and bonded servants; and that masters may become servants, and servants masters?”*“Greece” (yona, from “Ionia”) and “Persia” (kamboja) are loose exonyms indicating the regions dominated by Greek and Iranian culture. | The Greeks and other foreigners are mentioned in Ashokan edicts, but this is the only reference to Greece in an early Buddhist text. The Sanskrit yavana appears shortly after the Buddha in Pāṇini 4.1.49. The Indic terms are derived from the Persian yauna, first attested in an inscription of Darius I (522–486 BCE), who conquered three Indian realms: gandāra (Gandhāra), hindush (Indus valley), and thataguš (Sattagydia, around modern Bannu in Pakistan). Soldiers from these realms served under Achaemenid kings from this time. Moreover, several Greek and Achaemenid coins dating back as far as Darius I have been found in the Kabul hoard as well as the Shaikhan Dheri hoard at the site of Puṣkalāvatī, capital of Gandhāra. | “Persia” is one of the sixteen great nations (AN 3.70:28.2). It was the home of horses, lying to the west of Gandhāra (Pakistan) in modern Afghanistan. This was the easternmost extent of Iranian culture, and the passage here shows how different it was considered compared to the other nations. At this date, I think kamboja meant not just the specific location in Afghanistan, but more generally the Iranian peoples west of Gandhāra, just as yona (“Ionian”) is used for all people of Greek culture. | The perceived difference in slave culture mirrors the Greek ambassador Megasthenes who, writing over a century later, said there were no slaves in India.sutaṁ te: ‘yonakambojesu aññesu ca paccantimesu janapadesu dveva vaṇṇā—ayyo ceva dāso ca; ayyo hutvā dāso hoti, dāso hutvā ayyo hotī’”ti?

“Then what is the source of the brahmins’ certainty and forcefulness in this matter that they make this claim?”

“Ettha, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ kiṁ balaṁ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti?

“Then what is the source of the brahmins’ certainty and forcefulness in this matter that they make this claim?” “Ettha, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ kiṁ balaṁ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti?

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.”

“Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.” “Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“What do you think, Assalāyana? Suppose an aristocrat were to kill living creatures, steal, and commit sexual misconduct; to use speech that’s false, backbiting, harsh, or nonsensical; and to be covetous, malicious, with wrong view. When their body breaks up, after death, they’d be reborn in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell. Would this happen only to an aristocrat, and not to a brahmin? Or suppose a peasant, or a menial were to act in the same way. Would that result befall only a peasant or a menial, and not to a brahmin?”

“Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, khattiyova nu kho pāṇātipātī adinnādāyī kāmesumicchācārī musāvādī pisuṇavāco pharusavāco samphappalāpī abhijjhālu byāpannacitto micchādiṭṭhi kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā apāyaṁ duggatiṁ vinipātaṁ nirayaṁ upapajjeyya, no brāhmaṇo? Vessova nu kho …pe… suddova nu kho pāṇātipātī adinnādāyī kāmesumicchācārī musāvādī pisuṇavāco pharusavāco samphappalāpī abhijjhālu byāpannacitto micchādiṭṭhi kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā apāyaṁ duggatiṁ vinipātaṁ nirayaṁ upapajjeyya, no brāhmaṇo”ti?

“What do you think, Assalāyana? “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, Suppose an aristocrat were to kill living creatures, steal, and commit sexual misconduct; to use speech that’s false, backbiting, harsh, or nonsensical; and to be covetous, malicious, with wrong view. When their body breaks up, after death, they’d be reborn in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell. Would this happen only to an aristocrat, and not to a brahmin? khattiyova nu kho pāṇātipātī adinnādāyī kāmesumicchācārī musāvādī pisuṇavāco pharusavāco samphappalāpī abhijjhālu byāpannacitto micchādiṭṭhi kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā apāyaṁ duggatiṁ vinipātaṁ nirayaṁ upapajjeyya, no brāhmaṇo? Or suppose a peasant, Vessova nu kho …pe… or a menial were to act in the same way. Would that result befall only a peasant or a menial, and not to a brahmin?” suddova nu kho pāṇātipātī adinnādāyī kāmesumicchācārī musāvādī pisuṇavāco pharusavāco samphappalāpī abhijjhālu byāpannacitto micchādiṭṭhi kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā apāyaṁ duggatiṁ vinipātaṁ nirayaṁ upapajjeyya, no brāhmaṇo”ti?

“No, worthy Gotama. If they acted the same way, the same result would befall an aristocrat, a brahmin, a peasant, or a menial. For if any of the four classes were to kill living creatures, steal, and commit sexual misconduct; to use speech that’s false, backbiting, harsh, or nonsensical; and to be covetous, malicious, with wrong view, then, when their body breaks up, after death, they’d be reborn in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell.”

“No hidaṁ, bho gotama. Khattiyopi hi, bho gotama, pāṇātipātī adinnādāyī kāmesumicchācārī musāvādī pisuṇavāco pharusavāco samphappalāpī abhijjhālu byāpannacitto micchādiṭṭhi kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā apāyaṁ duggatiṁ vinipātaṁ nirayaṁ upapajjeyya. Brāhmaṇopi hi, bho gotama …pe… vessopi hi, bho gotama …pe… suddopi hi, bho gotama …pe… sabbepi hi, bho gotama, cattāro vaṇṇā pāṇātipātino adinnādāyino kāmesumicchācārino musāvādino pisuṇavācā pharusavācā samphappalāpino abhijjhālū byāpannacittā micchādiṭṭhī kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā apāyaṁ duggatiṁ vinipātaṁ nirayaṁ upapajjeyyun”ti.

“No, worthy Gotama. “No hidaṁ, bho gotama. If they acted the same way, the same result would befall an aristocrat, a brahmin, a peasant, or a menial. Khattiyopi hi, bho gotama, pāṇātipātī adinnādāyī kāmesumicchācārī musāvādī pisuṇavāco pharusavāco samphappalāpī abhijjhālu byāpannacitto micchādiṭṭhi kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā apāyaṁ duggatiṁ vinipātaṁ nirayaṁ upapajjeyya. Brāhmaṇopi hi, bho gotama …pe… vessopi hi, bho gotama …pe… suddopi hi, bho gotama …pe… For if any of the four classes were to kill living creatures, steal, and commit sexual misconduct; to use speech that’s false, backbiting, harsh, or nonsensical; and to be covetous, malicious, with wrong view, then, when their body breaks up, after death, they’d be reborn in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell.” sabbepi hi, bho gotama, cattāro vaṇṇā pāṇātipātino adinnādāyino kāmesumicchācārino musāvādino pisuṇavācā pharusavācā samphappalāpino abhijjhālū byāpannacittā micchādiṭṭhī kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā apāyaṁ duggatiṁ vinipātaṁ nirayaṁ upapajjeyyun”ti.

“Then what is the source of the brahmins’ certainty and forcefulness in this matter that they make this claim?”

“Ettha, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ kiṁ balaṁ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti?

“Then what is the source of the brahmins’ certainty and forcefulness in this matter that they make this claim?” “Ettha, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ kiṁ balaṁ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti?

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.”

“Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.” “Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“What do you think, Assalāyana? Suppose a brahmin were to refrain from killing living creatures, stealing, and sexual misconduct; from using speech that’s false, backbiting, harsh, or nonsensical; and from covetousness, malice, and wrong view. When their body breaks up, after death, they’d be reborn in a good place, a heavenly realm. Would this happen only to a brahmin, and not to an aristocrat, a peasant, or a menial?”

“Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, brāhmaṇova nu kho pāṇātipātā paṭivirato adinnādānā paṭivirato kāmesumicchācārā paṭivirato musāvādā paṭivirato pisuṇāya vācāya paṭivirato pharusāya vācāya paṭivirato samphappalāpā paṭivirato anabhijjhālu abyāpannacitto sammādiṭṭhisammādiṭṭhiConocimiento de dukkha, conocimiento del origen de dukkha, conocimiento del cese de dukkha y conocimiento del camino que conduce al cese de dukkha.Ver en el glosario kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā sugatiṁ saggaṁ lokaṁ upapajjeyya, no khattiyo, no vesso, no suddo”ti?*no → no ca (mr)

“What do you think, Assalāyana? “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, Suppose a brahmin were to refrain from killing living creatures, stealing, and sexual misconduct; from using speech that’s false, backbiting, harsh, or nonsensical; and from covetousness, malice, and wrong view. When their body breaks up, after death, they’d be reborn in a good place, a heavenly realm. Would this happen only to a brahmin, and not to an aristocrat, a peasant, or a menial?” brāhmaṇova nu kho pāṇātipātā paṭivirato adinnādānā paṭivirato kāmesumicchācārā paṭivirato musāvādā paṭivirato pisuṇāya vācāya paṭivirato pharusāya vācāya paṭivirato samphappalāpā paṭivirato anabhijjhālu abyāpannacitto sammādiṭṭhisammādiṭṭhiConocimiento de dukkha, conocimiento del origen de dukkha, conocimiento del cese de dukkha y conocimiento del camino que conduce al cese de dukkha.Ver en el glosario kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā sugatiṁ saggaṁ lokaṁ upapajjeyya, no khattiyo, no vesso, no suddo”ti?*no → no ca (mr)

“No, worthy Gotama. If they acted the same way, the same result would befall an aristocrat, a brahmin, a peasant, or a menial. For if any of the four classes were to refrain from killing living creatures, stealing, and sexual misconduct; from using speech that’s false, backbiting, harsh, or nonsensical; and from covetousness, malice, and wrong view, then, when their body breaks up, after death, they’d be reborn in a good place, a heavenly realm.”

“No hidaṁ, bho gotama. Khattiyopi hi, bho gotama, pāṇātipātā paṭivirato adinnādānā paṭivirato kāmesumicchācārā paṭivirato musāvādā paṭivirato pisuṇāya vācāya paṭivirato pharusāya vācāya paṭivirato samphappalāpā paṭivirato anabhijjhālu abyāpannacitto sammādiṭṭhi kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā sugatiṁ saggaṁ lokaṁ upapajjeyya. Brāhmaṇopi hi, bho gotama …pe… vessopi hi, bho gotama …pe… suddopi hi, bho gotama …pe… sabbepi hi, bho gotama, cattāro vaṇṇā pāṇātipātā paṭiviratā adinnādānā paṭiviratā kāmesumicchācārā paṭiviratā musāvādā paṭiviratā pisuṇāya vācāya paṭiviratā pharusāya vācāya paṭiviratā samphappalāpā paṭiviratā anabhijjhālū abyāpannacittā sammādiṭṭhī kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā sugatiṁ saggaṁ lokaṁ upapajjeyyun”ti.

“No, worthy Gotama. “No hidaṁ, bho gotama. If they acted the same way, the same result would befall an aristocrat, a brahmin, a peasant, or a menial. Khattiyopi hi, bho gotama, pāṇātipātā paṭivirato adinnādānā paṭivirato kāmesumicchācārā paṭivirato musāvādā paṭivirato pisuṇāya vācāya paṭivirato pharusāya vācāya paṭivirato samphappalāpā paṭivirato anabhijjhālu abyāpannacitto sammādiṭṭhi kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā sugatiṁ saggaṁ lokaṁ upapajjeyya. Brāhmaṇopi hi, bho gotama …pe… vessopi hi, bho gotama …pe… suddopi hi, bho gotama …pe… For if any of the four classes were to refrain from killing living creatures, stealing, and sexual misconduct; from using speech that’s false, backbiting, harsh, or nonsensical; and from covetousness, malice, and wrong view, then, when their body breaks up, after death, they’d be reborn in a good place, a heavenly realm.” sabbepi hi, bho gotama, cattāro vaṇṇā pāṇātipātā paṭiviratā adinnādānā paṭiviratā kāmesumicchācārā paṭiviratā musāvādā paṭiviratā pisuṇāya vācāya paṭiviratā pharusāya vācāya paṭiviratā samphappalāpā paṭiviratā anabhijjhālū abyāpannacittā sammādiṭṭhī kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā sugatiṁ saggaṁ lokaṁ upapajjeyyun”ti.

“Then what is the source of the brahmins’ certainty and forcefulness in this matter that they make this claim?”

“Ettha, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ kiṁ balaṁ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti?

“Then what is the source of the brahmins’ certainty and forcefulness in this matter that they make this claim?” “Ettha, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ kiṁ balaṁ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti?

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.”

“Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.” “Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“What do you think, Assalāyana? Is only a brahmin capable of developing a heart of love, free of enmity and ill will for this region, and not an aristocrat, peasant, or menial?”*The next three examples are (1) meditating on love, (2) bathing, and (3) starting a fire. All of these reflect activities characteristic of brahmins: (1) the “divine meditations” (brahmavihāra) that originated as contemplation on the qualities of divinity, (2) ritual bathing to wash away sin, and (3) worship of Agni on the fire altar.

“Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, brāhmaṇova nu kho pahoti asmiṁ padese averaṁ abyābajjhaṁ mettacittaṁ bhāvetuṁ, no khattiyo, no vesso, no suddo”ti?

“What do you think, Assalāyana? “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, Is only a brahmin capable of developing a heart of love, free of enmity and ill will for this region, and not an aristocrat, peasant, or menial?”*The next three examples are (1) meditating on love, (2) bathing, and (3) starting a fire. All of these reflect activities characteristic of brahmins: (1) the “divine meditations” (brahmavihāra) that originated as contemplation on the qualities of divinity, (2) ritual bathing to wash away sin, and (3) worship of Agni on the fire altar.brāhmaṇova nu kho pahoti asmiṁ padese averaṁ abyābajjhaṁ mettacittaṁ bhāvetuṁ, no khattiyo, no vesso, no suddo”ti?

“No, worthy Gotama. Aristocrats, brahmins, peasants, and menials can all do so. For all four classes are capable of developing a heart of love, free of enmity and ill will for this region.”

“No hidaṁ, bho gotama. Khattiyopi hi, bho gotama, pahoti asmiṁ padese averaṁ abyābajjhaṁ mettacittaṁ bhāvetuṁ; brāhmaṇopi hi, bho gotama … vessopi hi, bho gotama … suddopi hi, bho gotama … sabbepi hi, bho gotama, cattāro vaṇṇā pahonti asmiṁ padese averaṁ abyābajjhaṁ mettacittaṁ bhāvetun”ti.

“No, worthy Gotama. “No hidaṁ, bho gotama. Aristocrats, brahmins, peasants, and menials can all do so. Khattiyopi hi, bho gotama, pahoti asmiṁ padese averaṁ abyābajjhaṁ mettacittaṁ bhāvetuṁ; brāhmaṇopi hi, bho gotama … vessopi hi, bho gotama … suddopi hi, bho gotama … For all four classes are capable of developing a heart of love, free of enmity and ill will for this region.” sabbepi hi, bho gotama, cattāro vaṇṇā pahonti asmiṁ padese averaṁ abyābajjhaṁ mettacittaṁ bhāvetun”ti.

“Then what is the source of the brahmins’ certainty and forcefulness in this matter that they make this claim?”

“Ettha, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ kiṁ balaṁ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti?

“Then what is the source of the brahmins’ certainty and forcefulness in this matter that they make this claim?” “Ettha, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ kiṁ balaṁ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti?

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.”

“Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.” “Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“What do you think, Assalāyana? Is only a brahmin capable of taking some bathing cleanser, going to the river, and rinsing off dust and dirt, and not an aristocrat, peasant, or menial?”

“Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, brāhmaṇova nu kho pahoti sottisināniṁ ādāya nadiṁ gantvā rajojallaṁ pavāhetuṁ, no khattiyo, no vesso, no suddo”ti?

“What do you think, Assalāyana? “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, Is only a brahmin capable of taking some bathing cleanser, going to the river, and rinsing off dust and dirt, and not an aristocrat, peasant, or menial?” brāhmaṇova nu kho pahoti sottisināniṁ ādāya nadiṁ gantvā rajojallaṁ pavāhetuṁ, no khattiyo, no vesso, no suddo”ti?

“No, worthy Gotama. All four classes are capable of doing this.”

“No hidaṁ, bho gotama. Khattiyopi hi, bho gotama, pahoti sottisināniṁ ādāya nadiṁ gantvā rajojallaṁ pavāhetuṁ, brāhmaṇopi hi, bho gotama … vessopi hi, bho gotama … suddopi hi, bho gotama … sabbepi hi, bho gotama, cattāro vaṇṇā pahonti sottisināniṁ ādāya nadiṁ gantvā rajojallaṁ pavāhetun”ti.

“No, worthy Gotama. “No hidaṁ, bho gotama. Khattiyopi hi, bho gotama, pahoti sottisināniṁ ādāya nadiṁ gantvā rajojallaṁ pavāhetuṁ, brāhmaṇopi hi, bho gotama … vessopi hi, bho gotama … suddopi hi, bho gotama … All four classes are capable of doing this.” sabbepi hi, bho gotama, cattāro vaṇṇā pahonti sottisināniṁ ādāya nadiṁ gantvā rajojallaṁ pavāhetun”ti.

“Then what is the source of the brahmins’ certainty and forcefulness in this matter that they make this claim?”

“Ettha, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ kiṁ balaṁ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti?

“Then what is the source of the brahmins’ certainty and forcefulness in this matter that they make this claim?” “Ettha, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ kiṁ balaṁ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti?

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.”

“Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.” “Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“What do you think, Assalāyana? Suppose an anointed aristocratic king were to gather a hundred people of various births and say to them:*Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 11.5 relates how Purūravas, longing to be reunited with his queen, the nymph Urvaśī, was required by the Gandharvas to make a special fire. It must be generated by wood from a tree that grew from the ashes of celestial fire provided by themselves, the upper drill-stick of aśvattha (i.e. Bodhi tree) and the lower stick of śamī. In that legend, the essence of the fire is determined by its divine origin, against which the Buddha poses a naturalistic explanation. ‘Please gentlemen, let anyone here who was born in a family of aristocrats, brahmins, or chieftains take a drill-stick made of teak, sal, salaḷa, sandalwood, or cherry wood, light a fire and produce heat.*This seems to be the only mention of the padumaka tree in Pali. It may be the Sanskrit padmaka, for which one possible identification is Prunus cerasoides, the wild Himalayan cherry. | Here we find both sāka and sāla, so I translate sāka as “teak”, whereas at DN 3:1.15.10 I have sakhua, an alternate name for the sal tree.| For salaḷa see note on SN 52.8:1.1. And let anyone here who was born in a family of corpse-workers, hunters, bamboo-workers, chariot-makers, or scavengers take a drill-stick made from a dog’s drinking trough, a pig’s trough, a dustbin, or castor-oil wood, light a fire and produce heat.’*Caṇḍālas (“corpse-workers”) are frequently depicted as the lowest of untouchables as seen by Brahmins. However, the usual rendering of “outcast” is unsatisfactory, as all the groups here are defined positively by their occupation, and moreover some, such as the scavengers, would also have been untouchable. The Pali commentaries equate the caṇḍāla with the chavaka (or chapaka) of Bu Sk 69:1.12.1, a “corpse disposer” (chavachaḍḍakacaṇḍālā; see also chavakacaṇḍālo at Mil 5.4.7:2.4). They were known for their “bone-washing” ceremony (DN 1:1.13.2, AN 10.107:1.1). This agrees with Rāmāyana 1.58.10, which describes a caṇḍāla as dark-complexioned, dirty, with disheveled hair, his body smeared with graveyard ash. Mahāvaṁsa 10.91–94 tells how King Paṇḍukābhaya employed caṇḍālas for cleaning streets and toilets, bearing the dead, and watching over cemeteries, with their village adjoining the cemetery.

“Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, idha rājā khattiyo muddhāvasitto nānājaccānaṁ purisānaṁ purisasataṁ sannipāteyya: ‘āyantu bhonto ye tattha khattiyakulā brāhmaṇakulā rājaññakulā uppannā, sākassa vā sālassa vā salaḷassa vā candanassa vā padumakassa vā uttarāraṇiṁ ādāya, aggiṁ abhinibbattentu, tejo pātukarontu.*sākassa vā sālassa vā → uppannā sālassa vā (bj, pts1ed) Āyantu pana bhonto ye tattha caṇḍālakulā nesādakulā venakulā rathakārakulā pukkusakulā uppannā, sāpānadoṇiyā vā sūkaradoṇiyā vā rajakadoṇiyā vā eraṇḍakaṭṭhassa vā uttarāraṇiṁ ādāya, aggiṁ abhinibbattentu, tejo pātukarontū’ti.*venakulā → veṇakulā (bj, pts1ed); veṇukulā (sya-all, km)

“What do you think, Assalāyana? “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, Suppose an anointed aristocratic king were to gather a hundred people of various births and say to them:*Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 11.5 relates how Purūravas, longing to be reunited with his queen, the nymph Urvaśī, was required by the Gandharvas to make a special fire. It must be generated by wood from a tree that grew from the ashes of celestial fire provided by themselves, the upper drill-stick of aśvattha (i.e. Bodhi tree) and the lower stick of śamī. In that legend, the essence of the fire is determined by its divine origin, against which the Buddha poses a naturalistic explanation.idha rājā khattiyo muddhāvasitto nānājaccānaṁ purisānaṁ purisasataṁ sannipāteyya: ‘Please gentlemen, let anyone here who was born in a family of aristocrats, brahmins, or chieftains take a drill-stick made of teak, sal, salaḷa, sandalwood, or cherry wood, light a fire and produce heat.*This seems to be the only mention of the padumaka tree in Pali. It may be the Sanskrit padmaka, for which one possible identification is Prunus cerasoides, the wild Himalayan cherry. | Here we find both sāka and sāla, so I translate sāka as “teak”, whereas at DN 3:1.15.10 I have sakhua, an alternate name for the sal tree.| For salaḷa see note on SN 52.8:1.1.‘āyantu bhonto ye tattha khattiyakulā brāhmaṇakulā rājaññakulā uppannā, sākassa vā sālassa vā salaḷassa vā candanassa vā padumakassa vā uttarāraṇiṁ ādāya, aggiṁ abhinibbattentu, tejo pātukarontu.*sākassa vā sālassa vā → uppannā sālassa vā (bj, pts1ed)And let anyone here who was born in a family of corpse-workers, hunters, bamboo-workers, chariot-makers, or scavengers take a drill-stick made from a dog’s drinking trough, a pig’s trough, a dustbin, or castor-oil wood, light a fire and produce heat.’*Caṇḍālas (“corpse-workers”) are frequently depicted as the lowest of untouchables as seen by Brahmins. However, the usual rendering of “outcast” is unsatisfactory, as all the groups here are defined positively by their occupation, and moreover some, such as the scavengers, would also have been untouchable. The Pali commentaries equate the caṇḍāla with the chavaka (or chapaka) of Bu Sk 69:1.12.1, a “corpse disposer” (chavachaḍḍakacaṇḍālā; see also chavakacaṇḍālo at Mil 5.4.7:2.4). They were known for their “bone-washing” ceremony (DN 1:1.13.2, AN 10.107:1.1). This agrees with Rāmāyana 1.58.10, which describes a caṇḍāla as dark-complexioned, dirty, with disheveled hair, his body smeared with graveyard ash. Mahāvaṁsa 10.91–94 tells how King Paṇḍukābhaya employed caṇḍālas for cleaning streets and toilets, bearing the dead, and watching over cemeteries, with their village adjoining the cemetery.Āyantu pana bhonto ye tattha caṇḍālakulā nesādakulā venakulā rathakārakulā pukkusakulā uppannā, sāpānadoṇiyā vā sūkaradoṇiyā vā rajakadoṇiyā vā eraṇḍakaṭṭhassa vā uttarāraṇiṁ ādāya, aggiṁ abhinibbattentu, tejo pātukarontū’ti.*venakulā → veṇakulā (bj, pts1ed); veṇukulā (sya-all, km)

What do you think, Assalāyana? Would only the fire produced by the high class people with good quality wood have flames, color, and radiance, and be usable as fire, and not the fire produced by the low class people with poor quality wood?”

Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, yo evaṁ nu kho so khattiyakulā brāhmaṇakulā rājaññakulā uppannehi sākassa vā sālassa vā salaḷassa vā candanassa vā padumakassa vā uttarāraṇiṁ ādāya aggi abhinibbatto, tejo pātukato, so eva nu khvāssa aggi accimā ceva vaṇṇavā ca pabhassaro ca, tena ca sakkā agginā aggikaraṇīyaṁ kātuṁ;*vaṇṇavā → vaṇṇimā (sya-all, km, pts1ed, mr) | ceva → ca (bj, pts1ed) | evaṁ nu kho so → yo ca nu kho (sya-all, km, pts1ed, mr) yo pana so caṇḍālakulā nesādakulā venakulā rathakārakulā pukkusakulā uppannehi sāpānadoṇiyā vā sūkaradoṇiyā vā rajakadoṇiyā vā eraṇḍakaṭṭhassa vā uttarāraṇiṁ ādāya aggi abhinibbatto, tejo pātukato svāssa aggi na ceva accimā na ca vaṇṇavā na ca pabhassaro, na ca tena sakkā agginā aggikaraṇīyaṁ kātun”ti?*svāssa → so cassa (bj, pts1ed); sopassa (sya-all)

What do you think, Assalāyana? Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, Would only the fire produced by the high class people with good quality wood have flames, color, and radiance, and be usable as fire, yo evaṁ nu kho so khattiyakulā brāhmaṇakulā rājaññakulā uppannehi sākassa vā sālassa vā salaḷassa vā candanassa vā padumakassa vā uttarāraṇiṁ ādāya aggi abhinibbatto, tejo pātukato, so eva nu khvāssa aggi accimā ceva vaṇṇavā ca pabhassaro ca, tena ca sakkā agginā aggikaraṇīyaṁ kātuṁ;*vaṇṇavā → vaṇṇimā (sya-all, km, pts1ed, mr) | ceva → ca (bj, pts1ed) | evaṁ nu kho so → yo ca nu kho (sya-all, km, pts1ed, mr)and not the fire produced by the low class people with poor quality wood?” yo pana so caṇḍālakulā nesādakulā venakulā rathakārakulā pukkusakulā uppannehi sāpānadoṇiyā vā sūkaradoṇiyā vā rajakadoṇiyā vā eraṇḍakaṭṭhassa vā uttarāraṇiṁ ādāya aggi abhinibbatto, tejo pātukato svāssa aggi na ceva accimā na ca vaṇṇavā na ca pabhassaro, na ca tena sakkā agginā aggikaraṇīyaṁ kātun”ti?*svāssa → so cassa (bj, pts1ed); sopassa (sya-all)

“No, worthy Gotama. The fire produced by the high class people with good quality wood would have flames, color, and radiance, and be usable as fire, and so would the fire produced by the low class people with poor quality wood. For all fire has flames, color, and radiance, and is usable as fire.”*A similar argument is made regarding consciousness at MN 93:11.5.

“No hidaṁ, bho gotama. Yopi hi so, bho gotama, khattiyakulā brāhmaṇakulā rājaññakulā uppannehi sākassa vā sālassa vā salaḷassa vā candanassa vā padumakassa vā uttarāraṇiṁ ādāya aggi abhinibbatto, tejo pātukato svāssa aggi accimā ceva vaṇṇavā ca pabhassaro ca, tena ca sakkā agginā aggikaraṇīyaṁ kātuṁ;*Yopi hi so → yo so (bj, pts1ed); yopi so (sya-all) yopi so caṇḍālakulā nesādakulā venakulā rathakārakulā pukkusakulā uppannehi sāpānadoṇiyā vā sūkaradoṇiyā vā rajakadoṇiyā vā eraṇḍakaṭṭhassa vā uttarāraṇiṁ ādāya aggi abhinibbatto, tejo pātukato, svāssa aggi accimā ceva vaṇṇavā ca pabhassaro ca, tena ca sakkā agginā aggikaraṇīyaṁ kātuṁ. Sabbopi hi, bho gotama, aggi accimā ceva vaṇṇavā ca pabhassaro ca, sabbenapi sakkā agginā aggikaraṇīyaṁ kātun”ti.

“No, worthy Gotama. “No hidaṁ, bho gotama. The fire produced by the high class people with good quality wood would have flames, color, and radiance, and be usable as fire, Yopi hi so, bho gotama, khattiyakulā brāhmaṇakulā rājaññakulā uppannehi sākassa vā sālassa vā salaḷassa vā candanassa vā padumakassa vā uttarāraṇiṁ ādāya aggi abhinibbatto, tejo pātukato svāssa aggi accimā ceva vaṇṇavā ca pabhassaro ca, tena ca sakkā agginā aggikaraṇīyaṁ kātuṁ;*Yopi hi so → yo so (bj, pts1ed); yopi so (sya-all)and so would the fire produced by the low class people with poor quality wood. yopi so caṇḍālakulā nesādakulā venakulā rathakārakulā pukkusakulā uppannehi sāpānadoṇiyā vā sūkaradoṇiyā vā rajakadoṇiyā vā eraṇḍakaṭṭhassa vā uttarāraṇiṁ ādāya aggi abhinibbatto, tejo pātukato, svāssa aggi accimā ceva vaṇṇavā ca pabhassaro ca, tena ca sakkā agginā aggikaraṇīyaṁ kātuṁ. For all fire has flames, color, and radiance, and is usable as fire.”*A similar argument is made regarding consciousness at MN 93:11.5.Sabbopi hi, bho gotama, aggi accimā ceva vaṇṇavā ca pabhassaro ca, sabbenapi sakkā agginā aggikaraṇīyaṁ kātun”ti.

“Then what is the source of the brahmins’ certainty and forcefulness in this matter that they make this claim?”

“Ettha, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ kiṁ balaṁ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo; brāhmaṇova sukko vaṇṇo, kaṇho añño vaṇṇo; brāhmaṇāva sujjhanti, no abrāhmaṇā; brāhmaṇāva brahmuno puttā orasā mukhato jātā brahmajā brahmanimmitā brahmadāyādā’”ti?

“Then what is the source of the brahmins’ certainty and forcefulness in this matter that they make this claim?” “Ettha, assalāyana, brāhmaṇānaṁ kiṁ balaṁ, ko assāso yadettha brāhmaṇā evamāhaṁsu: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo; brāhmaṇova sukko vaṇṇo, kaṇho añño vaṇṇo; brāhmaṇāva sujjhanti, no abrāhmaṇā; brāhmaṇāva brahmuno puttā orasā mukhato jātā brahmajā brahmanimmitā brahmadāyādā’”ti?

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.”

“Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“Even though you say this, still the brahmins maintain their belief.” “Kiñcāpi bhavaṁ gotamo evamāha, atha khvettha brāhmaṇā evametaṁ maññanti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’”ti.

“What do you think, Assalāyana?*The complex question of intercaste children is usually governed by the assumption that the father supplies the “seed” which the mother merely incubates. Kauṭilya, however, notes a variety of opinions on this question (Arthaśāstra 3.7.1–3). | Assalāyana’s views do not agree with the more developed doctrine found in later texts. Suppose an aristocrat boy was to sleep with a brahmin girl, and they had a child.*Since the brahmins declared their own class the highest, such a union is considered to be pratiloma (“contrary to the natural order”). Arthaśāstra 3.7.28 says such a child is a sūta; Manusmṛti 10.11 agrees, adding that their livelihood is a charioteer (10.47). Would that child be called an aristocrat after the father or a brahmin after the mother?”

“Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, idha khattiyakumāro brāhmaṇakaññāya saddhiṁ saṁvāsaṁ kappeyya, tesaṁ saṁvāsamanvāya putto jāyetha; yo so khattiyakumārena brāhmaṇakaññāya putto uppanno, siyā so mātupi sadiso pitupi sadiso, ‘khattiyo’tipi vattabbo ‘brāhmaṇo’tipi vattabbo”ti?

“What do you think, Assalāyana?*The complex question of intercaste children is usually governed by the assumption that the father supplies the “seed” which the mother merely incubates. Kauṭilya, however, notes a variety of opinions on this question (Arthaśāstra 3.7.1–3). | Assalāyana’s views do not agree with the more developed doctrine found in later texts.“Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, Suppose an aristocrat boy was to sleep with a brahmin girl, and they had a child.*Since the brahmins declared their own class the highest, such a union is considered to be pratiloma (“contrary to the natural order”). Arthaśāstra 3.7.28 says such a child is a sūta; Manusmṛti 10.11 agrees, adding that their livelihood is a charioteer (10.47).idha khattiyakumāro brāhmaṇakaññāya saddhiṁ saṁvāsaṁ kappeyya, tesaṁ saṁvāsamanvāya putto jāyetha; Would that child be called an aristocrat after the father or a brahmin after the mother?” yo so khattiyakumārena brāhmaṇakaññāya putto uppanno, siyā so mātupi sadiso pitupi sadiso, ‘khattiyo’tipi vattabbo ‘brāhmaṇo’tipi vattabbo”ti?

“What do you think, Assalāyana? Suppose a brahmin boy was to sleep with an aristocrat girl, and they had a child.*Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra 1.9.17 says that the child of a brahmin father and aristocrat mother is a brahmin. Manusmṛti 10.6 admits the same, though due to the “defect” of the mother they are considered “like” a brahmin. Would that child be called an aristocrat after the mother or a brahmin after the father?”

“Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, idha brāhmaṇakumāro khattiyakaññāya saddhiṁ saṁvāsaṁ kappeyya, tesaṁ saṁvāsamanvāya putto jāyetha; yo so brāhmaṇakumārena khattiyakaññāya putto uppanno, siyā so mātupi sadiso pitupi sadiso, ‘khattiyo’tipi vattabbo ‘brāhmaṇo’tipi vattabbo”ti?

“What do you think, Assalāyana? “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, Suppose a brahmin boy was to sleep with an aristocrat girl, and they had a child.*Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra 1.9.17 says that the child of a brahmin father and aristocrat mother is a brahmin. Manusmṛti 10.6 admits the same, though due to the “defect” of the mother they are considered “like” a brahmin.idha brāhmaṇakumāro khattiyakaññāya saddhiṁ saṁvāsaṁ kappeyya, tesaṁ saṁvāsamanvāya putto jāyetha; Would that child be called an aristocrat after the mother or a brahmin after the father?” yo so brāhmaṇakumārena khattiyakaññāya putto uppanno, siyā so mātupi sadiso pitupi sadiso, ‘khattiyo’tipi vattabbo ‘brāhmaṇo’tipi vattabbo”ti?

“What do you think, Assalāyana? Suppose a mare were to couple with a donkey, and she gave birth to a mule. Would that mule be called a horse after the mother or a donkey after the father?”

“Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, idha vaḷavaṁ gadrabhena sampayojeyyuṁ, tesaṁ sampayogamanvāya kisoro jāyetha;*sampayojeyyuṁ → saṁyojeyya (mr) yo so vaḷavāya gadrabhena kisoro uppanno, siyā so mātupi sadiso pitupi sadiso, ‘asso’tipi vattabbo ‘gadrabho’tipi vattabbo”ti?

“What do you think, Assalāyana? “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, Suppose a mare were to couple with a donkey, and she gave birth to a mule. idha vaḷavaṁ gadrabhena sampayojeyyuṁ, tesaṁ sampayogamanvāya kisoro jāyetha;*sampayojeyyuṁ → saṁyojeyya (mr)Would that mule be called a horse after the mother or a donkey after the father?” yo so vaḷavāya gadrabhena kisoro uppanno, siyā so mātupi sadiso pitupi sadiso, ‘asso’tipi vattabbo ‘gadrabho’tipi vattabbo”ti?

“It’s a mule, as it is a crossbreed. I see the difference in this case, but not in the previous cases.”

“Kuṇḍañhi so, bho gotama, assataro hoti.*Kuṇḍañhi so → vekurañjāya hi so (bj, pts1ed); so kumāraṇḍupi so (sya-all, km); vekulajo hi so (?) Idaṁ hissa, bho gotama, nānākaraṇaṁ passāmi; amutra ca panesānaṁ na kiñci nānākaraṇaṁ passāmī”ti.

“It’s a mule, as it is a crossbreed. “Kuṇḍañhi so, bho gotama, assataro hoti.*Kuṇḍañhi so → vekurañjāya hi so (bj, pts1ed); so kumāraṇḍupi so (sya-all, km); vekulajo hi so (?)I see the difference in this case, Idaṁ hissa, bho gotama, nānākaraṇaṁ passāmi; but not in the previous cases.” amutra ca panesānaṁ na kiñci nānākaraṇaṁ passāmī”ti.

“What do you think, Assalāyana? Suppose there were two young students who were brothers who had shared a womb. One was an educated reciter, while the other was not an educated reciter.*“Shared a womb” is sodariya, the only occurrence of this term in early Pali. | This thought experiment anticipates the modern method of studying twins to eliminate variables in development. Who would the brahmins feed first at an offering of food for ancestors, an offering of a dish of milk-rice, a sacrifice, or a feast for guests?”

“Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, idhāssu dve māṇavakā bhātaro sodariyā, eko ajjhāyako upanīto eko anajjhāyako anupanīto. Kamettha brāhmaṇā paṭhamaṁ bhojeyyuṁ saddhe vā thālipāke vā yaññe vā pāhune vā”ti?

“What do you think, Assalāyana? “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, Suppose there were two young students who were brothers who had shared a womb. One was an educated reciter, while the other was not an educated reciter.*“Shared a womb” is sodariya, the only occurrence of this term in early Pali. | This thought experiment anticipates the modern method of studying twins to eliminate variables in development.idhāssu dve māṇavakā bhātaro sodariyā, eko ajjhāyako upanīto eko anajjhāyako anupanīto. Who would the brahmins feed first at an offering of food for ancestors, an offering of a dish of milk-rice, a sacrifice, or a feast for guests?” Kamettha brāhmaṇā paṭhamaṁ bhojeyyuṁ saddhe vā thālipāke vā yaññe vā pāhune vā”ti?

“They’d first feed the young student who was an educated reciter. For how could an offering to someone who is not an educated reciter be very fruitful?”

“Yo so, bho gotama, māṇavako ajjhāyako upanīto tamettha brāhmaṇā paṭhamaṁ bhojeyyuṁ saddhe vā thālipāke vā yaññe vā pāhune vā. Kiñhi, bho gotama, anajjhāyake anupanīte dinnaṁ mahapphalaṁ bhavissatī”ti?

“They’d first feed the young student who was an educated reciter. “Yo so, bho gotama, māṇavako ajjhāyako upanīto tamettha brāhmaṇā paṭhamaṁ bhojeyyuṁ saddhe vā thālipāke vā yaññe vā pāhune vā. For how could an offering to someone who is not an educated reciter be very fruitful?” Kiñhi, bho gotama, anajjhāyake anupanīte dinnaṁ mahapphalaṁ bhavissatī”ti?

“What do you think, Assalāyana? Suppose there were two young students who were brothers who had shared a womb. One was an educated reciter, but was unethical, of bad character, while the other was not an educated reciter, but was ethical and of good character. Who would the brahmins feed first?”

“Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, idhāssu dve māṇavakā bhātaro sodariyā, eko ajjhāyako upanīto dussīlo pāpadhammo, eko anajjhāyako anupanīto sīlavā kalyāṇadhammo. Kamettha brāhmaṇā paṭhamaṁ bhojeyyuṁ saddhe vā thālipāke vā yaññe vā pāhune vā”ti?

“What do you think, Assalāyana? “Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, assalāyana, Suppose there were two young students who were brothers who had shared a womb. One was an educated reciter, but was unethical, of bad character, while the other was not an educated reciter, but was ethical and of good character. idhāssu dve māṇavakā bhātaro sodariyā, eko ajjhāyako upanīto dussīlo pāpadhammo, eko anajjhāyako anupanīto sīlavā kalyāṇadhammo. Who would the brahmins feed first?” Kamettha brāhmaṇā paṭhamaṁ bhojeyyuṁ saddhe vā thālipāke vā yaññe vā pāhune vā”ti?

“They’d first feed the young student who was not an educated reciter, but was ethical and of good character. For how could an offering to someone who is unethical and of bad character be very fruitful?”

“Yo so, bho gotama, māṇavako anajjhāyako anupanīto sīlavā kalyāṇadhammo tamettha brāhmaṇā paṭhamaṁ bhojeyyuṁ saddhe vā thālipāke vā yaññe vā pāhune vā. Kiñhi, bho gotama, dussīle pāpadhamme dinnaṁ mahapphalaṁ bhavissatī”ti?

“They’d first feed the young student who was not an educated reciter, but was ethical and of good character. “Yo so, bho gotama, māṇavako anajjhāyako anupanīto sīlavā kalyāṇadhammo tamettha brāhmaṇā paṭhamaṁ bhojeyyuṁ saddhe vā thālipāke vā yaññe vā pāhune vā. For how could an offering to someone who is unethical and of bad character be very fruitful?” Kiñhi, bho gotama, dussīle pāpadhamme dinnaṁ mahapphalaṁ bhavissatī”ti?

“Firstly you relied on birth, Assalāyana, then you switched to education, then you switched to abstemious behavior.*Here tape (“fervent austerity”) stands for ethical conduct, hence I translate “abstemious behavior”. Some manuscripts omit it, but I think it is required by the sense. Now you’ve come around to believing in purification for the four classes, just as I advocate.” When he said this, Assalāyana sat silent, dismayed, shoulders drooping, downcast, depressed, with nothing to say.

“Pubbe kho tvaṁ, assalāyana, jātiṁ agamāsi; jātiṁ gantvā mante agamāsi; mante gantvā tape agamāsi; tape gantvā cātuvaṇṇiṁ suddhiṁ paccāgato, yamahaṁ paññapemī”ti. Evaṁ vutte, assalāyano māṇavo tuṇhībhūto maṅkubhūto pattakkhandho adhomukho pajjhāyanto appaṭibhāno nisīdi.

“Firstly you relied on birth, Assalāyana, “Pubbe kho tvaṁ, assalāyana, jātiṁ agamāsi; then you switched to education, jātiṁ gantvā mante agamāsi; then you switched to abstemious behavior.*Here tape (“fervent austerity”) stands for ethical conduct, hence I translate “abstemious behavior”. Some manuscripts omit it, but I think it is required by the sense.mante gantvā tape agamāsi; Now you’ve come around to believing in purification for the four classes, just as I advocate.” tape gantvā cātuvaṇṇiṁ suddhiṁ paccāgato, yamahaṁ paññapemī”ti. When he said this, Assalāyana sat silent, dismayed, shoulders drooping, downcast, depressed, with nothing to say. Evaṁ vutte, assalāyano māṇavo tuṇhībhūto maṅkubhūto pattakkhandho adhomukho pajjhāyanto appaṭibhāno nisīdi.

“Once upon a time, Assalāyana, seven brahmin seers settled in leaf huts in a wilderness region. They had the following harmful misconception:*The “seven brahmin seers” (Sanskrit saptarṣi, (eg. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 13.8.1.9, Atharva Veda 4.11.9c, Vājasaneyi Saṁhitā 13.26b) were renowned sages to whom the Vedic lineages (gottā) were attributed As the sutta’s conclusion will show, they are introduced here to demonstrate that the fallacy of geneology has been there since the beginning. | A similar practice of living in wilderness is described at MN 25:9.5, SN 11.9, DN 23:21.3, DN 3:2.3.3, and DN 27:22.9. Chāndogya Upaniṣad 5.10.1–5 compares the forest contemplatives destined for the Brahmā realm with the ritualists who are reborn on the moon before returning to earth. ‘Only brahmins are the best class; other classes are inferior. Only brahmins are the light class; other classes are dark. Only brahmins are purified, not others.*Mahābhārata 12.181.5 says that brahmins are the white class, aristocrats red, peasants yellow, and menials black. Only brahmins are true-born sons of divinity, born from his mouth, born of divinity, created by divinity, heirs of divinity.’

“bhūtapubbaṁ, assalāyana, sattannaṁ brāhmaṇisīnaṁ araññāyatane paṇṇakuṭīsu sammantānaṁ evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ hoti: ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo … pe… brahmadāyādā’ti.

“Once upon a time, Assalāyana, seven brahmin seers settled in leaf huts in a wilderness region. They had the following harmful misconception:*The “seven brahmin seers” (Sanskrit saptarṣi, (eg. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 13.8.1.9, Atharva Veda 4.11.9c, Vājasaneyi Saṁhitā 13.26b) were renowned sages to whom the Vedic lineages (gottā) were attributed As the sutta’s conclusion will show, they are introduced here to demonstrate that the fallacy of geneology has been there since the beginning. | A similar practice of living in wilderness is described at MN 25:9.5, SN 11.9, DN 23:21.3, DN 3:2.3.3, and DN 27:22.9. Chāndogya Upaniṣad 5.10.1–5 compares the forest contemplatives destined for the Brahmā realm with the ritualists who are reborn on the moon before returning to earth.“bhūtapubbaṁ, assalāyana, sattannaṁ brāhmaṇisīnaṁ araññāyatane paṇṇakuṭīsu sammantānaṁ evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ hoti: ‘Only brahmins are the best class; other classes are inferior. ‘brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo … Only brahmins are the light class; other classes are dark. Only brahmins are purified, not others.*Mahābhārata 12.181.5 says that brahmins are the white class, aristocrats red, peasants yellow, and menials black.pe… Only brahmins are true-born sons of divinity, born from his mouth, born of divinity, created by divinity, heirs of divinity.’ brahmadāyādā’ti.

The seer Devala the Dark heard about this.*Asita Devala is probably meant to be the legendary seer known as Asita or Devala son of Kāśyapa who composed Rig Veda 9.5–24, although they seem to share little but the name. He is an example of the “dark hermit” archetype, irrupting within Brahmanical traditions to subvert from within, relying on his mysterious power of otherness. See also Asita Kaṇhasiri (or Kāladevala, Snp 3.11:1.1), Kaṇha (DN 3:1.23.6), Kaṇhadīpāyana (Cp 31:1.2), and Sāma (Cp 33:1.1). Such encounters show how the contention between Vedic ritualism and native contemplatives challenged and elevated both traditions. In this way they invert the stereotype of Brahmanical colorism, paving the way for the ascension of the dark god Krishna. So he did up his hair and beard, dressed in magenta robes, put on his lined sandals, grasped a golden staff, and appeared in the courtyard of the seven brahmin seers.*His behavior is disrespectful, like that of Vepacitti, and unlike that of Sakka at SN 11.9. But the context is different, for there the seers were of good character and deserving of respect, whereas here they embrace wrong views. Then he wandered about the yard saying, ‘Where, oh where have those brahmin seers gone? Where, oh where have those brahmin seers gone?’

Assosi kho, assalāyana, asito devalo isi: ‘sattannaṁ kira brāhmaṇisīnaṁ araññāyatane paṇṇakuṭīsu sammantānaṁ evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ— brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’ti. Atha kho, assalāyana, asito devalo isi kesamassuṁ kappetvā mañjiṭṭhavaṇṇāni dussāni nivāsetvā paṭaliyo upāhanā āruhitvā jātarūpamayaṁ daṇḍaṁ gahetvā sattannaṁ brāhmaṇisīnaṁ patthaṇḍile pāturahosi.*paṭaliyo → aṭaliyo (bj, pts1ed); agaliyo (sya-all, km) Atha kho, assalāyana, asito devalo isi sattannaṁ brāhmaṇisīnaṁ patthaṇḍile caṅkamamāno evamāha: ‘handa ko nu kho ime bhavanto brāhmaṇisayo gatā;*gatā → gantā (sya-all, km, mr) handa ko nu kho ime bhavanto brāhmaṇisayo gatā’ti?

The seer Devala the Dark heard about this.*Asita Devala is probably meant to be the legendary seer known as Asita or Devala son of Kāśyapa who composed Rig Veda 9.5–24, although they seem to share little but the name. He is an example of the “dark hermit” archetype, irrupting within Brahmanical traditions to subvert from within, relying on his mysterious power of otherness. See also Asita Kaṇhasiri (or Kāladevala, Snp 3.11:1.1), Kaṇha (DN 3:1.23.6), Kaṇhadīpāyana (Cp 31:1.2), and Sāma (Cp 33:1.1). Such encounters show how the contention between Vedic ritualism and native contemplatives challenged and elevated both traditions. In this way they invert the stereotype of Brahmanical colorism, paving the way for the ascension of the dark god Krishna.Assosi kho, assalāyana, asito devalo isi: ‘sattannaṁ kira brāhmaṇisīnaṁ araññāyatane paṇṇakuṭīsu sammantānaṁ evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ—brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo …pe… brahmadāyādā’ti. So he did up his hair and beard, dressed in magenta robes, put on his lined sandals, grasped a golden staff, and appeared in the courtyard of the seven brahmin seers.*His behavior is disrespectful, like that of Vepacitti, and unlike that of Sakka at SN 11.9. But the context is different, for there the seers were of good character and deserving of respect, whereas here they embrace wrong views.Atha kho, assalāyana, asito devalo isi kesamassuṁ kappetvā mañjiṭṭhavaṇṇāni dussāni nivāsetvā paṭaliyo upāhanā āruhitvā jātarūpamayaṁ daṇḍaṁ gahetvā sattannaṁ brāhmaṇisīnaṁ patthaṇḍile pāturahosi.*paṭaliyo → aṭaliyo (bj, pts1ed); agaliyo (sya-all, km)Then he wandered about the yard saying, Atha kho, assalāyana, asito devalo isi sattannaṁ brāhmaṇisīnaṁ patthaṇḍile caṅkamamāno evamāha: ‘Where, oh where have those brahmin seers gone? ‘handa ko nu kho ime bhavanto brāhmaṇisayo gatā;*gatā → gantā (sya-all, km, mr)Where, oh where have those brahmin seers gone?’ handa ko nu kho ime bhavanto brāhmaṇisayo gatā’ti?

Then those brahmin seers said, ‘Who’s this wandering about our courtyard like a village lout? Let’s curse him!’

Atha kho, assalāyana, sattannaṁ brāhmaṇisīnaṁ etadahosi: ‘ko nāyaṁ gāmaṇḍalarūpo viya sattannaṁ brāhmaṇisīnaṁ patthaṇḍile caṅkamamāno evamāha: “handa ko nu kho ime bhavanto brāhmaṇisayo gatā; handa ko nu kho ime bhavanto brāhmaṇisayo gatāti? Handa naṁ abhisapāmā”’ti.

Then those brahmin seers said, Atha kho, assalāyana, sattannaṁ brāhmaṇisīnaṁ etadahosi: ‘Who’s this wandering about our courtyard like a village lout? ‘ko nāyaṁ gāmaṇḍalarūpo viya sattannaṁ brāhmaṇisīnaṁ patthaṇḍile caṅkamamāno evamāha: “handa ko nu kho ime bhavanto brāhmaṇisayo gatā; handa ko nu kho ime bhavanto brāhmaṇisayo gatāti? Let’s curse him!’ Handa naṁ abhisapāmā”’ti.

So they cursed Devala the Dark, ‘Be ashes, lowlife!*See Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 6.6.3.10. Be ashes, lowlife!’ But the more the seers cursed him, the more attractive, good-looking, and lovely Devala the Dark became.*Compare SN 11.22:1.7.

Atha kho, assalāyana, satta brāhmaṇisayo asitaṁ devalaṁ isiṁ abhisapiṁsu: ‘bhasmā, vasala, hohi;*vasala → capalī (sya-all, km); vasalī (pts1ed); vasali (mr) bhasmā, vasala, hohī’ti. Yathā yathā kho, assalāyana, satta brāhmaṇisayo asitaṁ devalaṁ isiṁ abhisapiṁsu tathā tathā asito devalo isi abhirūpataro ceva hoti dassanīyataro ca pāsādikataro ca.

So they cursed Devala the Dark, Atha kho, assalāyana, satta brāhmaṇisayo asitaṁ devalaṁ isiṁ abhisapiṁsu: ‘Be ashes, lowlife!*See Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 6.6.3.10.‘bhasmā, vasala, hohi;*vasala → capalī (sya-all, km); vasalī (pts1ed); vasali (mr)Be ashes, lowlife!’ bhasmā, vasala, hohī’ti. But the more the seers cursed him, the more attractive, good-looking, and lovely Devala the Dark became.*Compare SN 11.22:1.7.Yathā yathā kho, assalāyana, satta brāhmaṇisayo asitaṁ devalaṁ isiṁ abhisapiṁsu tathā tathā asito devalo isi abhirūpataro ceva hoti dassanīyataro ca pāsādikataro ca.

Then those brahmin seers said, ‘Our fervor is in vain! Our spiritual path is fruitless! For when we used to curse someone to become ashes, ashes they became. But the more we curse this one, the more attractive, good-looking, and lovely he becomes.’

Atha kho, assalāyana, sattannaṁ brāhmaṇisīnaṁ etadahosi: ‘moghaṁ vata no tapo, aphalaṁ brahmacariyaṁ. Mayañhi pubbe yaṁ abhisapāma— bhasmā, vasala, hohi; bhasmā, vasala, hohīti bhasmāva bhavati ekacco. Imaṁ pana mayaṁ yathā yathā abhisapāma tathā tathā abhirūpataro ceva hoti dassanīyataro ca pāsādikataro cā’ti.

Then those brahmin seers said, Atha kho, assalāyana, sattannaṁ brāhmaṇisīnaṁ etadahosi: ‘Our fervor is in vain! Our spiritual path is fruitless! ‘moghaṁ vata no tapo, aphalaṁ brahmacariyaṁ. For when we used to curse someone Mayañhi pubbe yaṁ abhisapāma—to become ashes, bhasmā, vasala, hohi; ashes they became. bhasmā, vasala, hohīti bhasmāva bhavati ekacco. But the more we curse this one, the more attractive, good-looking, and lovely he becomes.’ Imaṁ pana mayaṁ yathā yathā abhisapāma tathā tathā abhirūpataro ceva hoti dassanīyataro ca pāsādikataro cā’ti.

‘Gentlemen, your fervor is not in vain; your spiritual path is not fruitless. Please let go of your malevolence towards me.’

‘Na bhavantānaṁ moghaṁ tapo, nāphalaṁ brahmacariyaṁ. Iṅgha bhavanto, yo mayi manopadoso taṁ pajahathā’ti.

‘Gentlemen, your fervor is not in vain; your spiritual path is not fruitless. ‘Na bhavantānaṁ moghaṁ tapo, nāphalaṁ brahmacariyaṁ. Please let go of your malevolence towards me.’ Iṅgha bhavanto, yo mayi manopadoso taṁ pajahathā’ti.

‘We let go of our malevolence towards you. But who are you, sir?’

‘Yo bhavati manopadoso taṁ pajahāma. Ko nu bhavaṁ hotī’ti?

‘We let go of our malevolence towards you. ‘Yo bhavati manopadoso taṁ pajahāma. But who are you, sir?’ Ko nu bhavaṁ hotī’ti?

‘Have you heard of the seer Devala the Dark?’

‘Suto nu bhavataṁ— asito devalo isī’ti?

‘Have you heard of ‘Suto nu bhavataṁ—the seer Devala the Dark?’ asito devalo isī’ti?

‘I am he, sirs.’ Then they approached Devala and bowed to him.

‘So khvāhaṁ, bho, homī’ti. Atha kho, assalāyana, satta brāhmaṇisayo asitaṁ devalaṁ isiṁ abhivādetuṁ upakkamiṁsu.

‘I am he, sirs.’ ‘So khvāhaṁ, bho, homī’ti. Then they approached Devala and bowed to him. Atha kho, assalāyana, satta brāhmaṇisayo asitaṁ devalaṁ isiṁ abhivādetuṁ upakkamiṁsu.

Devala said to them, ‘I heard that when the seven brahmin seers had settled in leaf huts in a wilderness region, they had the following harmful misconception:*This passage accurately conveys that caste was not just criticized by Buddhism, it was actively contested within Brahmanical circles. As just one of many examples, Yudhiṣṭhira said, “It is not by reason of family or study or learning that one is of high caste, but because of behavior alone” (Mahābhārata 3.297.61). “Only brahmins are the best class; other classes are inferior. Only brahmins are the light class; other classes are dark. Only brahmins are purified, not others. Only brahmins are true-born sons of divinity, born from his mouth, born of divinity, created by divinity, heirs of divinity.”’

Atha kho, assalāyana, asito devalo isi satta brāhmaṇisayo etadavoca: ‘sutaṁ metaṁ, bho, sattannaṁ kira brāhmaṇisīnaṁ araññāyatane paṇṇakuṭīsu sammantānaṁ evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ— brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo; brāhmaṇova sukko vaṇṇo, kaṇho añño vaṇṇo; brāhmaṇāva sujjhanti, no abrāhmaṇā; brāhmaṇāva brahmuno puttā orasā mukhato jātā brahmajā brahmanimmitā brahmadāyādā’ti.

Devala said to them, Atha kho, assalāyana, asito devalo isi satta brāhmaṇisayo etadavoca: ‘I heard that when the seven brahmin seers had settled in leaf huts in a wilderness region, they had the following harmful misconception:*This passage accurately conveys that caste was not just criticized by Buddhism, it was actively contested within Brahmanical circles. As just one of many examples, Yudhiṣṭhira said, “It is not by reason of family or study or learning that one is of high caste, but because of behavior alone” (Mahābhārata 3.297.61).‘sutaṁ metaṁ, bho, sattannaṁ kira brāhmaṇisīnaṁ araññāyatane paṇṇakuṭīsu sammantānaṁ evarūpaṁ pāpakaṁ diṭṭhigataṁ uppannaṁ—“Only brahmins are the best class; other classes are inferior. brāhmaṇova seṭṭho vaṇṇo, hīno añño vaṇṇo; Only brahmins are the light class; other classes are dark. brāhmaṇova sukko vaṇṇo, kaṇho añño vaṇṇo; Only brahmins are purified, not others. brāhmaṇāva sujjhanti, no abrāhmaṇā; Only brahmins are true-born sons of divinity, born from his mouth, born of divinity, created by divinity, heirs of divinity.”’ brāhmaṇāva brahmuno puttā orasā mukhato jātā brahmajā brahmanimmitā brahmadāyādā’ti.

‘But do you know whether your birth mother only had relations with a brahmin and not with a non-brahmin?’

‘Jānanti pana bhonto— yā janikā mātā brāhmaṇaṁyeva agamāsi, no abrāhmaṇan’ti?*janikā mātā → janimātā (sya-all, km); janīmātā (pts1ed)

‘But do you know ‘Jānanti pana bhonto—whether your birth mother only had relations with a brahmin and not with a non-brahmin?’ yā janikā mātā brāhmaṇaṁyeva agamāsi, no abrāhmaṇan’ti?*janikā mātā → janimātā (sya-all, km); janīmātā (pts1ed)

‘But do you know whether your birth mother’s mothers back to the seventh generation only had relations with brahmins and not with non-brahmins?’

‘Jānanti pana bhonto— yā janikāmātu mātā yāva sattamā mātumātāmahayugā brāhmaṇaṁyeva agamāsi, no abrāhmaṇan’ti?*janikāmātu → janimātu (sya-all, km); janīmātu (pts1ed)

‘But do you know ‘Jānanti pana bhonto—whether your birth mother’s mothers back to the seventh generation only had relations with brahmins and not with non-brahmins?’ yā janikāmātu mātā yāva sattamā mātumātāmahayugā brāhmaṇaṁyeva agamāsi, no abrāhmaṇan’ti?*janikāmātu → janimātu (sya-all, km); janīmātu (pts1ed)

‘But do you know whether your birth father only had relations with a brahmin woman and not with a non-brahmin?’

‘Jānanti pana bhonto— yo janako pitā brāhmaṇiṁyeva agamāsi, no abrāhmaṇin’ti?*janako pitā → janipitā (sya-all, km); janīpitā (pts1ed)

‘But do you know ‘Jānanti pana bhonto—whether your birth father only had relations with a brahmin woman and not with a non-brahmin?’ yo janako pitā brāhmaṇiṁyeva agamāsi, no abrāhmaṇin’ti?*janako pitā → janipitā (sya-all, km); janīpitā (pts1ed)

‘But do you know whether your birth father’s fathers back to the seventh generation only had relations with brahmins and not with non-brahmins?’

‘Jānanti pana bhonto— yo janakapitu pitā yāva sattamā pitupitāmahayugā brāhmaṇiṁyeva agamāsi, no abrāhmaṇin’ti?*janakapitu → janipitu (sya-all, km); janīpitu (pts1ed)

‘But do you know ‘Jānanti pana bhonto—whether your birth father’s fathers back to the seventh generation only had relations with brahmins and not with non-brahmins?’ yo janakapitu pitā yāva sattamā pitupitāmahayugā brāhmaṇiṁyeva agamāsi, no abrāhmaṇin’ti?*janakapitu → janipitu (sya-all, km); janīpitu (pts1ed)

‘But do you know how an embryo is conceived?’

‘Jānanti pana bhonto— yathā gabbhassa avakkanti hotī’ti?

‘But do you know ‘Jānanti pana bhonto—how an embryo is conceived?’ yathā gabbhassa avakkanti hotī’ti?

‘We do know that, sir. An embryo is conceived when these three things come together—the mother and father come together, the mother is in the fertile phase of her menstrual cycle, and the virile spirit is ready.’*The gandhabba (normally “centaur”, here “virile spirit”) is, per the commentary, the being to be reborn. He represents the element of male sexuality in procreation. He is “father, begetter, kinsman”, by whose knowledge one becomes the “father’s father” (Arthavaveda 2.1.2–3). He is said to guard (Rig Veda 9.83.4) or steal (Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 3.2.4) or actually be (Rig Veda 9.86.36) the vitalizing liquid Soma, who is extracted on an altar as semen is extracted in the vagina (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 6.4.3). He thus lies within the waters (Rig Veda 9.86.36, 10.10.4) or within the womb (Rig Veda 10.177.2). It seems that, since semen is “a man’s essence” (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 6.4.1, Aitareya Upaniṣad 2.1), the seed of past lovers—curses against whom are helpfully provided (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 6.4.9–12)—remains in the womb. This is why the gandhabba possesses women (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.7.1, 3.3.1) and, unless placated with proper worship, might become a “hairy one” who devours embryos (Artharva Veda 8.6.23, see 8.6.18–19). To ward against such risks, in the rites of marriage and procreation, the gandharva king Viśvāvasa, a playboy and deadbeat father, is asked to “rise up” out of the woman (Rig Veda 10.85.21–22, Atharva Veda 14.2.33–6, Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 6.4.19) and find his pleasures with another, so that the husband may father the child. This contrasts with the Pali passage, where the gandhabba “is ready” for conception; in other words, a being is driven by their karma to be born there.

‘Jānāma mayaṁ, bho— yathā gabbhassa avakkanti hoti. Idha mātāpitaro ca sannipatitā honti, mātā ca utunī hoti, gandhabbo ca paccupaṭṭhito hoti; evaṁ tiṇṇaṁ sannipātā gabbhassa avakkanti hotī’ti.

‘We do know that, sir. ‘Jānāma mayaṁ, bho—yathā gabbhassa avakkanti hoti. An embryo is conceived when these three things come together—the mother and father come together, the mother is in the fertile phase of her menstrual cycle, and the virile spirit is ready.’*The gandhabba (normally “centaur”, here “virile spirit”) is, per the commentary, the being to be reborn. He represents the element of male sexuality in procreation. He is “father, begetter, kinsman”, by whose knowledge one becomes the “father’s father” (Arthavaveda 2.1.2–3). He is said to guard (Rig Veda 9.83.4) or steal (Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 3.2.4) or actually be (Rig Veda 9.86.36) the vitalizing liquid Soma, who is extracted on an altar as semen is extracted in the vagina (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 6.4.3). He thus lies within the waters (Rig Veda 9.86.36, 10.10.4) or within the womb (Rig Veda 10.177.2). It seems that, since semen is “a man’s essence” (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 6.4.1, Aitareya Upaniṣad 2.1), the seed of past lovers—curses against whom are helpfully provided (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 6.4.9–12)—remains in the womb. This is why the gandhabba possesses women (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.7.1, 3.3.1) and, unless placated with proper worship, might become a “hairy one” who devours embryos (Artharva Veda 8.6.23, see 8.6.18–19). To ward against such risks, in the rites of marriage and procreation, the gandharva king Viśvāvasa, a playboy and deadbeat father, is asked to “rise up” out of the woman (Rig Veda 10.85.21–22, Atharva Veda 14.2.33–6, Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 6.4.19) and find his pleasures with another, so that the husband may father the child. This contrasts with the Pali passage, where the gandhabba “is ready” for conception; in other words, a being is driven by their karma to be born there.Idha mātāpitaro ca sannipatitā honti, mātā ca utunī hoti, gandhabbo ca paccupaṭṭhito hoti; evaṁ tiṇṇaṁ sannipātā gabbhassa avakkanti hotī’ti.

‘But do you know for sure whether that virile spirit is an aristocrat, a brahmin, a peasant, or a menial?’*Chāndogya Upaniṣad 5.10.3–7 details the “path of the fathers” after death; they follow a winding path to the moon Soma, only to return as rain, grow as plants, be eaten, and ultimately be emitted as semen, thus determining the caste of the child. It seems from this passage, however, that this doctrine, convincing as it may seem, was not sufficient to allay male anxiety over paternity. Indeed, the very baroqueness of these conceptions show the doctrinal and ritual lengths required to fix paternity.

‘Jānanti pana bhonto— taggha, so gandhabbo khattiyo vā brāhmaṇo vā vesso vā suddo vā’ti?*taggha → yagghe (bj, sya-all, km, pts1ed)

‘But do you know ‘Jānanti pana bhonto—for sure whether that virile spirit is an aristocrat, a brahmin, a peasant, or a menial?’*Chāndogya Upaniṣad 5.10.3–7 details the “path of the fathers” after death; they follow a winding path to the moon Soma, only to return as rain, grow as plants, be eaten, and ultimately be emitted as semen, thus determining the caste of the child. It seems from this passage, however, that this doctrine, convincing as it may seem, was not sufficient to allay male anxiety over paternity. Indeed, the very baroqueness of these conceptions show the doctrinal and ritual lengths required to fix paternity.taggha, so gandhabbo khattiyo vā brāhmaṇo vā vesso vā suddo vā’ti?*taggha → yagghe (bj, sya-all, km, pts1ed)

‘We don’t know that.’

‘Na mayaṁ, bho, jānāma— taggha so gandhabbo khattiyo vā brāhmaṇo vā vesso vā suddo vā’ti.

‘We don’t know that.’ ‘Na mayaṁ, bho, jānāma—taggha so gandhabbo khattiyo vā brāhmaṇo vā vesso vā suddo vā’ti.

‘In that case, sirs, don’t you know what you are?’

‘Evaṁ sante, bho, jānātha— ke tumhe hothā’ti?

‘In that case, sirs, don’t you know ‘Evaṁ sante, bho, jānātha—what you are?’ ke tumhe hothā’ti?

‘In that case, sir, we don’t know what we are.’

‘Evaṁ sante, bho, na mayaṁ jānāma— ke mayaṁ homā’ti.

‘In that case, sir, we don’t know ‘Evaṁ sante, bho, na mayaṁ jānāma—what we are.’ ke mayaṁ homā’ti.

Given that even those seven brahmin seers could not prevail when pursued, pressed, and grilled by the seer Devala on their own genealogy,*The syntax of this passage mirrors AN 6.18:4.12 and Kd 16:6.4.1. In each case, te hi nāma introduces a passage referring to events of the past whose outcome is framed in future tense (from the past point of view). how could you prevail now being grilled by me on your own genealogy when you and your tradition do not so much as pick up the last spoonful?”*Puṇṇo dabbigāho is a highly specific reference to a detail of the Sākamedha ritual that marks the beginning of winter. From the rice offering on the first day, a pot is set aside until the next morning, when the very last “full spoon” (pūrṇā darvi) is scraped up, with the invocation, “Full, O spoon, fly off, and fly back to us well filled!” (Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 2.5.3.16–17, Kauṣītaki Brāhmaṇa 5.6.20; invocation found at Atharva Veda 3.10.7c, Maitrāyaṇī Saṁhitā 1.10.2, Vājasaneyi Saṁhitā 3.49a). This ensures that present prosperity will be renewed after the barren cold season (just as life is renewed after death, or as last season’s grain is sown on the field). The implication is that present-day brahmins don’t even fulfill the rites of continuity in their own tradition, so how can they assert the continuity of caste over generations? | Yesaṁ refers back to te of the previous portion, i.e. the seven brahmin seers, whose tradition modern brahmins are supposed to continue.

Te hi nāma, assalāyana, satta brāhmaṇisayo asitena devalena isinā sake jātivāde samanuyuñjīyamānā samanuggāhīyamānā samanubhāsīyamānā na sampāyissanti; kiṁ pana tvaṁ etarahi mayā sakasmiṁ jātivāde samanuyuñjīyamāno samanuggāhīyamāno samanubhāsīyamāno sampāyissasi, yesaṁ tvaṁ sācariyako na puṇṇo dabbigāho”ti.

Given that even those seven brahmin seers could not prevail when pursued, pressed, and grilled by the seer Devala on their own genealogy,*The syntax of this passage mirrors AN 6.18:4.12 and Kd 16:6.4.1. In each case, te hi nāma introduces a passage referring to events of the past whose outcome is framed in future tense (from the past point of view).Te hi nāma, assalāyana, satta brāhmaṇisayo asitena devalena isinā sake jātivāde samanuyuñjīyamānā samanuggāhīyamānā samanubhāsīyamānā na sampāyissanti; how could you prevail now being grilled by me on your own genealogy when you and your tradition do not so much as pick up the last spoonful?”*Puṇṇo dabbigāho is a highly specific reference to a detail of the Sākamedha ritual that marks the beginning of winter. From the rice offering on the first day, a pot is set aside until the next morning, when the very last “full spoon” (pūrṇā darvi) is scraped up, with the invocation, “Full, O spoon, fly off, and fly back to us well filled!” (Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 2.5.3.16–17, Kauṣītaki Brāhmaṇa 5.6.20; invocation found at Atharva Veda 3.10.7c, Maitrāyaṇī Saṁhitā 1.10.2, Vājasaneyi Saṁhitā 3.49a). This ensures that present prosperity will be renewed after the barren cold season (just as life is renewed after death, or as last season’s grain is sown on the field). The implication is that present-day brahmins don’t even fulfill the rites of continuity in their own tradition, so how can they assert the continuity of caste over generations? | Yesaṁ refers back to te of the previous portion, i.e. the seven brahmin seers, whose tradition modern brahmins are supposed to continue.kiṁ pana tvaṁ etarahi mayā sakasmiṁ jātivāde samanuyuñjīyamāno samanuggāhīyamāno samanubhāsīyamāno sampāyissasi, yesaṁ tvaṁ sācariyako na puṇṇo dabbigāho”ti.

When he had spoken, Assalāyana said to him, “Excellent, worthy Gotama! … From this day forth, may the worthy Gotama remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge for life.”

Evaṁ vutte, assalāyano māṇavo bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: “abhikkantaṁ, bho gotama …pe… upāsakaṁ maṁ bhavaṁ gotamo dhāretu ajjatagge pāṇupetaṁ saraṇaṁ gatan”ti.

When he had spoken, Assalāyana said to him, Evaṁ vutte, assalāyano māṇavo bhagavantaṁ etadavoca: “Excellent, worthy Gotama! … “abhikkantaṁ, bho gotama …pe… From this day forth, may the worthy Gotama remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge for life.” upāsakaṁ maṁ bhavaṁ gotamo dhāretu ajjatagge pāṇupetaṁ saraṇaṁ gatan”ti.