Studies in the Origins of Buddhism c9.91

c9.91

Saccaka Nigaṇṭhaputta is represented as implicitly accepting this fivefold analysis of the Purisapuggala, only asserting the "Attahood" of the khandhas. This even remotely fails to connect with what we know of the Nigaṇtha views of soul and mind. Either, then, the whole situation is merely a literary device to reassert the banal catechism on the Three Marks as applied to the Five Khandhas;⁴⁹ or the redactor was so steeped in the latter theory that he could present nothing better than a very garbled version of the Nigaṇṭhaputta’s view. The second alternative is in fact suggested by a closer examination of Saccaka’s statement. He begins promisingly with the simile "Seyyathāpi bho Gotama ye kecime bījagāmabhūtagāmā vuḍḍhiṃ virūdhiṃ vepullam āpajjanti sabbe te paṭhavim nissāya paṭhaviyaṃ patiṭṭhāya seyyathāpi....ye kecime balakaraṇā kammantā karīyanti sabbe paṭhvim nissāya paṭhaviyaṃ patiṭṭhāya...."⁵⁰ This at once brings before the mind the view that regarded Rūpa as the Nissaya or Patiṭṭhā of Viññāṇa. But what actually follows is much less coherent and to the point "Evameva...rūpattāyam purisapugalo rūpe patiṭṭhāya....viññāṇattā...."⁵¹ These lines appear to have usurped the place of some more fitting sequel. There are other instances also of similar aggrandizement by the Five Khandha formula.