Journal of Indian Philosophy (2023) 51:77–95

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-022-09529-x(0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV)

.
Notes on the satipat.t.hānas in the Vibhanga Mūlat. īkā

Giuliano Giustarini1,2

Accepted: 14 November 2022 / Published online: 26 December 2022

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022

Abstract The Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā, attributed to Ānanda, is a sub-commentary of

˙
one of the seven books of the Pāli Abhidhamma-pitaka, the Vibhaṅga, and the direct
˙
commentary of its commentary, Buddhaghosa’s Sammohavinodanı̄. In the section
on the satipaṭṭhāna method, Ānanda proposes exegetical strategies to solve some
seeming contradiction between Buddhaghosa’s interpretation of the Vibhaṅga and
the Sutta’s framework that the Satipatthānavibhaṅga refers to. An examination of
˙˙
exemplary passages from the Satipatthānavibhaṅga of the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā will
˙˙ ˙
shed light upon the originality of Ānanda’s thought and its influence on Dham-
mapāla’s commentaries.

Keywords Buddhism · Meditation · Abhidhamma · Pāli commentaries

Abbreviations
BE CST4 Burmese Printed Edition, Rangoon 1954–1956
CST4 Chattha Saṅgāyana Tipitaka, Version 4.0 (1999). Dhammagiri
˙˙ ˙
Dhp Dhammapada
D-a Dı̄gha Nikāta Atthakathā (Sumaṅgalavilāsinı̄)
˙˙
D-pt Dı̄gha Nikāya Purānatı̄kā (Lı̄natthavannanā I)
˙ ˙ ˙ ˙˙
Dhs-mt Dhammasaṅganı̄ Mūlatı̄kā
˙ ˙ ˙
DPPN Dictionary of Pāli Proper Names
M Majjhima Nikāya
M-a Majjhima Nikāya Atthakathā (Papañcasudanı̄)
˙˙
Mil Milindapañha
MNidd-a Mahāniddesa Atthakathā (Paramatthajotikā II)
˙˙
& Giuliano Giustarini
giulianogiustarini@gmail.com
1
Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
2
Fondazione Maitreya, Rome, Italy

123
78 G. Giustarini

Netti Nettipakarana
˙
Patis Patisambhidāmagga
˙ ˙
Patis-a Patisambhidāmagga Atthakathā (Saddhammappākasinı̄)
˙ ˙ ˙˙
PED Pali-English Dictionary
PTS Pali Text Society edition
S Samyutta Nikāya
˙
S-a Samyutta Nikāya Atthakathā (Saratthappakāsinı̄)
˙ ˙˙
Th-a Theragāthā Atthakathā (Paramatthadı̄panı̄)
˙˙
Vibh Vibhaṅga
Vibh-a Sammohavinodanı̄ (Vibhaṅga Atthakathā)
˙˙
Vibh-mt Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā
˙ ˙
Vibh-at Vibhaṅga Anutı̄kā
˙ ˙
VkN Vimalakı̄rtinirdeśa

The Authorship of Ānanda and Dhammapāla

The present paper will focus on the Satipatthāna-vibhaṅga of Ānanda’s Vibhaṅga

˙˙
Mūlatı̄kā. I am going to discuss the authorship of the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā and then,
˙ ˙
by addressing some specific lexicographical interpretations of the satipaṭṭhāna
meditative method,1 I will highlight the relationship of Ānanda’s Satipatthāna-
˙˙
vibhaṅga with the Abhidhamma material it directly refers to, namely the respective
sections in the Vibhaṅga of the Abhidhamma Pitaka and in its direct commentary,
˙
the Sammohavinodanı̄. Then, I will discuss and argue for the influence of Ānanda’s
contribution on the large commentarial work produced by Dhammapāla.
Some exegetical works in the Theravāda Buddhist tradition represent stepping-
stones for later interpretations. Among them, Ānanda’s subcommentaries deserve
special attention as they offer original contributions to Abhidhamma philosophy and
are extensively quoted in later commentaries. Ānanda was probably the teacher of
Dhammapāla, the famous author of sub-commentaries on the Nikāyas, who in his
Sutta-tı̄kās cites or paraphrases several passages from Ānanda’s works. In many
˙
respects, Ānanda’s commentaries represent an exegetical direction that can be seen
as alternative and complementary to Buddhaghosa’s line of interpretation.
Abhidhamma literature offers an exegesis of meditative practices and factors by
combining lexical analysis with philosophical interpretation. This form of exegesis
may be best represented by the Satipatthāna-vibhaṅga, the seventh chapter of the
˙˙
Vibhaṅga, the second book of the Abhidhamma Pitaka, and by its commentaries, i.e.,
˙
the respective chapters in the Sammohavinodanı̄, and in the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā and
˙
Vibhaṅga Anutı̄kā. These sections on the satipaṭṭhānas are closely interconnected
˙
with the other sections of the respective texts, and with other Sutta and Abhidhamma
passages on the same subjects. The Sutta reference material in these chapters is mostly

1
The method of the four satipaṭṭhānas can be briefly described as the application of attention and
investigation to four distinct areas: body (kāya), feelings (vedanā), mind (citta), and various factors and
qualities (dhammas). Each satipaṭṭhāna presents a number of meditative exercises and a background
pattern of instructions on the ways to conduct them.

123
Notes on the satipaṭṭhānas in the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā 79

from the Mahāsatipatthānasutta of the Dı̄gha Nikāya (Sutta 22) and the Satipatthāna-
˙˙ ˙˙
sutta of the Majjhima Nikāya (Sutta 10), from the Satipatthāna-samyutta, and a little
˙˙ ˙
surprisingly, as we are going to see, from the Salāyatanavibhaṅgasutta (M 137). In
˙
turn, the Vibhaṅga, more than other Abhidhamma texts such as the Dhammasaṅganı̄,
provides Buddhaghosa with a philosophical framework and an extensive lexico-
graphical source upon which he elaborates his commentaries on the
Satipatthānasuttas.2 Though the Dhammasaṅganı̄ weaves a net of synonyms to
˙˙
display the main points of the satipaṭṭhāna practice (including sati and sampajañña, its
key factors), the Vibhaṅga articulates a thorough interpretation of the main discourses
on the satipaṭṭhānas and reuses many explicative passages from other Suttas, thus
representing a preferable frame of reference for Buddhaghosa.3
The author of the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā is probably Ānanda, traditionally
˙
considered as the teacher of another prominent commentator, Dhammapāla, who
4
was the author of the Vibhaṅga Anutı̄kā.
˙
There are textual elements that suggest that Dhammapāla’s lines of interpreta-
tion diverge from Buddhaghosa’s (von Hinüber, 1996, p. 141) and that this
difference might have been in place before Dhammapāla, i.e. in the works of
Ānanda, his presumed teacher: an analysis of some crucial works by Ānanda, such
as the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā, may shed light upon the commentarial views behind
˙
those very interpretations, and thus display an array of exegeses so far overlooked.
Both Ānanda and Dhammapāla might have been originally from South India and
belonging to the Vanavāsı̄/Araññavāsı̄ Nikāya, a monastic order in Sri Lanka
devoted to secluded meditation and associated with the Mahāvihāra (DPPN s.v.
Araññavāsı̄). Ānanda is referred to in later literature as a teacher5 and author of
subcommentaries,6 and living in Kalasapura.7 Malalasekera says that he “was

2
For instance, in the Atthakathā of the Mahāsatipatthānasutta of the Dı̄gha Nikāya, Buddhaghosa quotes
˙˙ the Satipatthāna-Vibhaṅga)
the Vibhaṅga (specifically, ˙˙ for his explanations of terms like loka (D-a CST4
II.373, PTS 758,34-759,3, from Vibh CST4˙˙ 362, PTS 197,3–4), abhijjha (D-a CST4 II.373, PTS 760,15-18,
from Vibh CST4 362, PTS 197,12–15), and anupassin (D-a CST4 II.373, PTS 759,28–32, from Vibh CST4
357, PTS 194,26–30).
3
The definition of sampajañña in D-a CST4 360, PTS 760,1-5 is a silent citation of a passage that occurs
identically in Vibh CST4 360, PTS 194,37-195,2 and Dhs CST4 53, PTS 16,11-19. Likewise, the definition
of sati in D-a CST4 361, PTS 760,5–8 shares a list of synonims with the Vibhaṅga (Vibh CST4 361, PTS
195,3–7) and the Dhammasaṅganı̄ (Dhs-a CST4 52, PTS 16,7–10). Yet, the two definitions in the
˙
Mahāsatipatthānasutta’s commentary are respectively inserted into the definitions of the adjectives
sampajāna ˙and
˙ satimant which are missing in the Dhammasaṅganı̄. This, along with the explicit reference
to the Vibhaṅga in the same paragraph from the Mahāsatipat˙thānasutta’s commentary, confirms the
hypothesis that the main source for Buddhaghosa’s commentaries ˙˙ on the Satipatthānasutta is the
Vibhaṅga rather than the Dhammasaṅganı̄. On the main characteristics and structure of˙˙the Abhidhamma
˙
Vibhaṅga, see Norman (1983, pp. 100–101), and von Hinüber (1996, pp. 68–69). Ronkin (2005, p. 25)
takes “the Dhammasaṅganı̄ and the Vibhaṅga as representative of early Abhidhamma thought.” For other
˙
Abhidhammic influences on Sutta commentaries see for instance (Cousins 1981).
4
“[…] Dhammapāla could be dated somewhere about AD 550-600 […] Ānanda could be about fifty
years older as the teacher of Dhammapāla…” (von Hinüber 1996, p. 171).
5
ācariya; e.g., Abhidhammāvatāra Purānatı̄ka CST4 466.
˙ ˙
6
ṭīkākāra, Abhidhammāvatāra Purānatı̄ka CST4 150, 466; the text attributes to Ānanda a specific
˙ ˙
passage occurring in Vibh-mt CST4 228 and Dhs-mt CST4 636.
7
˙ ˙
kalasapuravāsin; Vajrabuddhitı̄kā, Verañjakandavannanā, BE 36.
˙ ˙˙ ˙˙

123
80 G. Giustarini

originally a native of India but came over to Ceylon and became head of the
Vanavāsi fraternity”, and that “he was also known as Vanaratana from his
connection with the Vanavāsi school.”8
The authorship of the Abhidhamma Mūlatı̄kās is ascribed to Ānanda in some of the
˙
respective colophons,9 in some Suttas’ sub-commentaries,10 and in the Cūlagan-
11 ˙
thavamsa. In the specific case of the Vibh-mt, the attribution is found in a later
˙ 12 ˙
manual, the Abhidhammatthasaṅgaha. In the Cūlaganthavamsa we are told that
˙ ˙
Ānanda was the teacher of Dhammapāla (his foremost disciple, jeṭṭhasissa), and that
he was also the author of the Saccasaṅkhepa (CST4 ch. 2, Ganthakārakācariya-
pariccheda). Oskar von Hinüber points out that the Saccasaṅkhepa is attributed to
Ānanda in the Saddhammasaṅgaha (IX 16), but to Dhammapāla in the Manisār-
˙
amañjūsā (I 377; von Hinüber, 1996, p. 164), in the Sāsanavamsa (CST4 ch. 2, Be 37),
˙
in the Saddanı̄ti (PTS I.8,9-10), and in another passage of the Cūlaganthavamsa (CST4
˙ ˙
4, Āyāyakācariya-pariccheda; cf. Law, 1933, p. 586).
Still according to the Cūlaganthavamsa, Dhammapāla was the author of the Atthakathās
˙ ˙ ˙˙
of the Thera- and Therigāthā, Vimānavatthu and Petavatthu, Itivuttaka, Udāna,
Cariyapitaka, and Nettippākarana, author of the tı̄kās of the Visuddhimagga, of the
˙ ˙ ˙
Purānatı̄kās of the four main Nikāyas, and author of the Anutı̄kās of the seven Abhidhamma
˙ ˙ ˙
books (CST4 2, Ganthakārakācariya-pariccheda). Passages of the Purānatı̄kā (ascribed to
˙ ˙
Dhammapāla) of the Satipatthānasuttas occur verbatim in the Vibh-mt, suggesting that the
˙˙ ˙
latter could have been a source for the interpretation of the Suttas.13

.
The Structure of the satipat.t.hānas in the Vibhanga

The Vibhaṅga section on the satipaṭṭhānas is divided into three main parts: an
analysis of the core subject from a Sutta-perspective (Suttantabhājanı̄ya), an
analysis of the subject from an Abhidhamma perspective (Abhidhammabhājanı̄ya),
and a conclusion with question(s) (Pañhāpucchaka).14 The Suttantabhājanı̄ya

8
DPPN I: 270, 271; von Hinüber rejects the idea that the author of the tı̄kās and Ānanda Vanaratana
could have been the same person and dates the latter to the 12th century˙ (von Hinüber 1996, p. 161,
n.555).
9
For instance, at the concluding remarks (nigamana) of the Dhammasaṅganı̄ Mūlatı̄kā (ānando iti
˙ līnatthapadavaṇṇanā).
namena) and of the Pañcapakarana Mūlatı̄kā (iti bhadantaānandācariyakena katā ˙
10
˙ ˙
See e.g. the sub-commentary of the Sampasādanı̄yasutta, D-pt CST4 III.148, PTS III.85,22.
˙
11
abhidhammakathāya mūlaṭīkā nāma ṭīkā gantho buddhamittā nāma therena āyācitena ānandācariyena
kato (CST4 4, Āyāyakācariya-pariccheda).
12
CST4 V.93; a passage from Vibh-mt 227 is quoted and attributed to Ānanda.
˙
13
For instance, an entire passage (paṭighānunayehi anavassutatā niccaṃ upaṭṭhitasatitā satipaṭṭhānan ’ti
vuttā buddhānameva kira niccaṃ upaṭṭhitasatitā hoti na paccekabuddhādīnaṃ. pa-saddo ārambhaṃ joteti
ārambho ca pavattīti katvā āha pavattayitabbatoti attho ’ti) occurs first in the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā (CST4
355) and then in Dhammapāla’s subcommentaries on the Mahāsatipatthānasutta (D-pt CST4 II.373,˙ PTS
˙˙
II.363,15–20). The same happens with the phrase saraṇavasenā ’ti kāyādīnaṃ ˙
kusalādidhammānañ ca
dhāraṇatāvasena (Vibh-mt CST4 355; D-pt CST4 II.373, PTS II.366,25-–27, with upadhāraṇatāvasena
instead of dhāraṇatāvasena).˙ ˙
14
The questions in the Pañhāpucchaka section (kati kusalā, kati akusalā, kati avyākatā) plausibly
indicate that the redactors of the Vibhaṅga were aware of a previous (or at least contemporary) source for

123
Notes on the satipaṭṭhānas in the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā 81

consists of two parts commonly found in both the Abhidhammapitaka and in the
˙
Suttapitaka: a condensed list (uddesa) and its detailed treatise (niddesa).
˙
The uddesa of the Suttantabhājanı̄ya doesn’t quote verbatim from the
Satipatthānasuttas but displays the standard formula of the four satipaṭṭhānas
˙˙
combined with the classification of each exercise according to three different
approaches: internal (ajjhattaṃ), external (bahiddhā), and internal-external (ajjhat-
tabahiddhā). The niddesa includes two main blocks: the rephrasing of the content of
each practice through the threefold method above mentioned, and a word-by-word
exegesis of the standard formula of the satipaṭṭhānas borrowed from the list of
synonyms occurring in the Dhammasaṅganı̄.
˙
The niddesa includes two main sections. In one section, the content of some
practices described in the Satipatthānasuttas (e.g., the review of the parts of the body
˙˙
upwards and downwards) is rearranged according to the structure of the threefold
method (internal, external, and both internal and external) above mentioned. The
other section contains a word-by-word exegesis of the uddesa which mirrors and
maybe borrows from the respective descriptions recurring throughout the Dham-
masaṅganı̄’s classification of wholesome (kusala), unwholesome (akusala) and
˙
undetermined (avyākata) dhammas.
The explanation of the resulting satipaṭṭhāna formulas is adjusted to the specific
object observed, for instance by equating the meaning of the term world (loka) in
the standard locution “having removed avidity and discomfort with regard to the
world” (vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassaṃ) to that specific object, as follows:
1. “Having removed craving and mental discomfort regarding the world: what is in
this case the world? The world is just this body, and the world is also the five
aggregates affected by appropriation: this is called the world.”15
2. “Having removed craving and mental discomfort regarding the world: what is in
this case the world? The world is just this feeling, and the world is also the five
aggregates affected by appropriation: this is called the world.”16
3. “Having removed craving and mental discomfort regarding the world: what is in
this case the world? The world is just this mind, and the world is also the five
aggregates affected by appropriation: this is called the world.”17

Footnote 14 continued
this classification, which should be identified as the major threefold division of the Dhammasaṅganı̄. This
˙ that
threefold division is explicitly ascribed to the Dhammasaṅganı̄ in Mil CST4 13 PTS 12,19–21. It seems
the Vibhaṅga reveals in this satipaṭṭhāna section a process of˙ ‘abhidhammization’ of the Sutta material,
and this was possible in virtue of the complex lexicographical apparatus of the Dhammasaṅganı̄. This
would confirm the hypothesis that the Dhammasaṅganı̄ is the “fountainhead of the entire system” ˙(Bodhi,
2000a, 2000b, p. 11). ˙
15
vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassan ’ti. tattha katamo loko? sveva kāyo loko pañca ’pi upādānakkhandhā
loko. ayaṃ vuccati loko. (Vibh CST4 I.362, PTS 195,8–11).
16
vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassan ’ti. tattha katamo loko? sā yeva vedanā loko pañca pi
upādānakkhandhā loko. ayaṃ vuccati loko. (Vibh CST4 I.364, PTS 197,1–4).
17
vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassan ’ti. tattha katamo loko? taṃ yeva cittaṃ loko pañca pi
upādānakkhandhā loko: ayaṃ vuccati loko. (Vibh CST4 I.366, PTS 198,41–44).

123
82 G. Giustarini

4. “Having removed craving and mental discomfort regarding the world: what is in
this case the world? The world is just these dhammas, and the world is also the
five aggregates affected by appropriation: this is called the world.”18
The term loka (world) indicates the specific object of contemplation (kāya, vedanās,
citta, and dhammas) as well as the five aggregates of appropriation. By offering this
definition, the Vibhaṅga emphasizes and clarifies the Suttas’ instructions to
contemplate each object while purifying the mind from the clinging-aversion dyad
that affects ordinary sense-activity: in this view, the mind tends to cling to or reject
the object examined, and the instruction is to detect and intentionally avoid those
two unwholesome responses.

The Problem of the Three satipat.t.hānas

By the locution “the three applications of mindfulness” he compiles an

abridgement of the meanings of the term satipaṭṭhāna, not a [thorough]
exegesis of the word satipaṭṭhāna expressed in the Canon.

tayo satipaṭṭhānā ’ti satipaṭṭhāna-saddassa atthuddhāraṃ karoti na idha

pāḷiyaṃ vuttassa satipaṭṭhāna-saddassa atthadassanaṃ.

Vibh-mt CST4 355

˙
The passage above shows a main concern of Ānanda in the Vibh-mt, i.e. the
˙
presence of three unique satipaṭṭhānas in the Salāyatanavibhaṅgasutta, which
˙
describe them as three ways of compassionate equanimity that a teacher should have
regarding disciples (M 137, CST4 III.311, PTS III.221,3-9). To explain this set,
Buddhaghosa in the Sammohavinodanı̄19 offers a singular tripartition of the
satipaṭṭhāna method:
The three satipaṭṭhānas are the realm of mindfulness (i.e., the four standard
applications of mindfulness), the threefold overcoming of liking and disliking
in a teacher with regard to the disciples walking in the path, and mindfulness
as well.

satipaṭṭhānā ’ti tayo satipaṭṭhānā satigocaro ’pi tidhā paṭipannesu sāvakesu

satthuno paṭighānunayavītivattatā ’pi sati ’pi.

Vibh-a CST4 355, PTS 214,5–7

The passage is not found anywhere in the Tipitaka but recurs verbatim in the
˙
commentaries on the two major Satipatthānasuttas (D-a CST4 II.373, PTS
˙˙
III.752,29–31; M-a CST4 I.106, PTS I.237,35–36-238,1), in the commentary on the

18
vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassan ’ti: tattha katamo loko? te va dhammā loko pañca pi upādānakkhandhā
loko. ayaṃ vuccati loko. (Vibh CST4 I.373, PTS 202,21–24).
19
I follow here the traditional attribution of the Sammohavinodanı̄ to Buddhaghosa, although there are
reasonable doubts on the authorship of the Abhidhamma Atthakathās (Cousins, 2015, pp. 397–399).
˙˙

123
Notes on the satipaṭṭhānas in the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā 83

first discourse of the Satipatthānasamyutta, the Ambapālisutta (S-a V.367, PTS

˙˙ ˙
III.178,20–22), in the Kāmasuttaniddesa of the Saddhammappajotikā (MNidd-a CST4
I.3, PTS I.47,25–27), and in the Satipatthānakathā of the Saddhammappakāsinı̄ (Patis-
˙˙ ˙
a CST4 II.8.34, PTS III.695,7–9).
The Vibh-mt extensively quotes from M 137, after explaining that the shortness
˙
of interpretation in the Vibh-a is due to the more specific treatment this
classification receives therein. In the respective Purānatı̄kās on the Satipatthāna-
˙ ˙ ˙˙
sutta, Dhammapāla, on the steps of his likely mentor Ānanda, quotes verbatim this
passage from the Vibh-mt, thus following the choice of the Vibh-a to discuss the
˙
three satipaṭṭhānas in the commentaries on the Satipatthānasuttas.20 The only
˙˙
difference in the two passages lies in the more explicit reference given by
Dhammapāla (saḷāyatanavibhaṅgasutte instead of paḷiyaṃ, as this passage Vibh-mt
˙
reads). However, in the Vibh-mt the explicit reference to M 137 occurs in the next
˙
passage. Dhammapāla gives this detailed reference in the Sutta-subcommentaries
but not in the Vibhaṅga Anutı̄kā, probably because the latter was supposed to be
˙
read along with the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā and a further reference to M 137 would have
˙
been redundant.
In his translation of the Salāyatanavibhaṅgasutta, Bhikkhu Bodhi warns that
˙
“satipaṭṭhāna here obviously has a different meaning than usual, as the sequel will
make clear” (Bodhi, 2000a, 2000b, p. 1349, n. 1246). Though a reader may
legitimately remain perplexed at the significant differences of this list from the
typical satipaṭṭhāna-practice, it is noteworthy that Buddhaghosa, in the commen-
taries to the Vibhaṅga and to the Satipatthānasuttas, places this list in the standard
˙˙
illustrations of the satipaṭṭhānas: although the term in M 137 might have had a
different meaning than the one found in the Satipatthānasuttas, the Sammohavin-
˙˙
odanı̄ links it to the standard practice of the satipaṭṭhānas and creates a meta-
classification seen in the passage above at Vibh-a PTS 214,5-7: satigocara, the three
balanced responses of a teacher, and sati.21 This new threefold classification
presented by Buddhaghosa is drawn from the Satipatthānasamyutta, implicitly and
˙˙ ˙
by means of explicit citations as well: a direct quote is from the Samudayasutta (S
CST4 V.408, PTS V.184,19–28), which briefly describes the arising of ceasing of
each of the satipaṭṭhānas as derivations of respective proximate causes. This list,
unique in Sutta literature, is shortened by Buddhaghosa with a peyāla, and quoted
extensively by Ānanda in the Vibh-mt and by Dhammapāla in his subcommentaries.
˙
Buddhaghosa’s reasons for arranging this threefold satipaṭṭhāna method are not
clear. I suspect that he (or a commentarial tradition that he looked at) was aware of
the difficulties of framing the use of the term satipaṭṭhāna in M 137 into the broader
structure of the four satipaṭṭhānas and so needed a more evident reference to the
latter. The above comment by Bhikkhu Bodhi on the different meaning of the
compound satipaṭṭhāna in the threefold list outlines some possible inconsistency in
the Canon, and we should not exclude that Buddhaghosa himself saw it and tried to
20
The same explanation is present in the sub-commentaries on the Mahāsatipatthānasutta of the Dı̄gha
˙˙
Nikāya and the one of the Majjhima Nikāya, and for the first sutta of the Satipatthānasamyutta, the
Ambapālisutta. ˙˙ ˙
21
The passage recurs also in the commentaries on the Satipatthānasuttas, like in M-a CST4 I.106, PTS
I.237,35-36-238,1. ˙˙

123
84 G. Giustarini

resolve it by proposing a ‘meta-list’ that linked the standard descriptions of the two
main Satipatthānasuttas with the definitions found in the Salāyatanavibhaṅgasutta.
˙˙ ˙
The cement for this construction is in the Samudayasutta of the Satipatthānasa-
˙˙
myutta, which represents itself an exception in the range of the satipaṭṭhānas’
˙
descriptions. The text illustrates the arising (samudaya) and ending (atthaṅgama) of
each satipaṭṭhāna by indicating the arising and ceasing (nirodha) of related factors:
the arising of nutriment (āhāra) leads to the arising of the body (kāya); the ceasing
of nutriment leads to the ending of the body; the arising of contact (phassa) leads to
the arising of feelings (vedanā); the ceasing (nirodha) of contact leads to the ending
(atthaṅgama) of feelings (vedanā); the arising of mentality and materiality
(nāmarūpa) leads to the arising of the mind (citta); the ceasing of mentality and
materiality leads to the ending of the mind; the arising of attention (manasikāra)
leads to the arising of the dhammas; the ceasing of attention leads to the ending of
the dhammas.22 In the next chapter I am going to address the first element of the
Sammohavinodanı̄’s tripartition (satigocara) in the light of the subcommentaries.

The Field of Mindfulness: satigocara, satipat.t.hāna,

satipat.t.hānagocara

In the tripartition seen above, Buddhaghosa introduces a compound, sati-gocara

(realm of mindfulness), which does not occur anywhere in the Nikāyas and deserves
a specific analysis. In the Sammohavinodanı̄, Buddhaghosa defines it as equivalent
of satipaṭṭhāna, and relates it to a passage from the Samudayasutta on the
origination of each satipaṭṭhāna.
It is at a subcommentarial level that Buddhaghosa’s interpretation of satigocara
and its role in the above tripartition becomes clear. In fact, an extensive gloss on this
compound is given by Ānanda in the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā and reused twice by
˙
Dhammapāla in his subcommentaries on the Satipatthānasutta. Ānanda refers to the
˙˙
Patisambhidāmagga (which is, with the Milindapañha, the most quoted paracanon-
˙
ical source in Buddhaghosa’s Visuddhimagga) for further explanations, and
perhaps, more specifically, to its “explanation on awareness of arising and ceasing”
(udayabbayaññāṇaniddesa, Patis CST4 I.6.49-50, PTS I.53,1-57,26) to explain the
˙
phrasing in the Samudayasutta, and to another passage (Patis CST4 II.2.2.41, in PTS
˙
II.163,36 replaced by a peyāla) that presents the extended form of satigocara,
satipaṭṭhānagocara (Vibh-mt CST4 355).
˙
The notion of gocara intended as a safe place is extremely common in the Canon,
and in some discourses, it is explicitly connected with the application of sati.23 Two

22
S CST4 V.408, PTS V.184,27–28. The commentary provides a twofold explanation of the fourth
satipaṭṭhāna: “From the arising of appropriate attention there is the arising of the dhammas that are the
[seven] factors of awakening, from the arising of inappropriate attention there is the arising of the
dhammas that are the [five] hindrances” (bojjhaṅgadhammānaṃ samudayo ayonisomanasikārasamudayā
nīvaraṇadhammānaṃ; S-a CST4 V.408, PTS III.229,30–31).
23
More literal meanings of gocara are “pasture” (PED s.v. go), “grazing”, “the particular feeding-
ground” (Cone, s.v. go). This meaning is found, for instance, in Dhp 1997: 135: yathā daṇḍena gopālo
gāvo pāceti gocaraṃ | evaṃ jarā ca maccu ca, āyuṃ pājenti pāṇinaṃ || (transl. Norman, 1997, p. 135:

123
Notes on the satipaṭṭhānas in the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā 85

significant examples are found in two consecutive suttas of the Satipatthanasa-

˙˙
myutta, the Sakunaggisutta and the Makkatasutta (S CST4 V.372-372, PTS
˙ ˙ ˙
V.146,18-149,24). They both distinguish between the protected gocara of the
satipaṭṭhānas, i.e., one’s familiar land (saka-pettika-visaya), and the ‘other’ realm
(agocara-paravisaya), consisting in the five strings of sense-desire (kāma-guṇa),
where one becomes a prey of Māra. The identification of satigocara with
satipaṭṭhānagocara is also found in the stanza 100 of the Theragāthā (PTS 14,30–31),
where the compound is used as a bahubbı̄hi describing the condition of Devasabha
Thera: “Endowed with good effort, [established] in the realm of the satipaṭṭhānas,
covered with the flowers of liberation, he will attain nibbāna, free from the
intoxicants” (sammappadhānasampanno, satipaṭṭhānagocaro | vimut-
tikusumasañchanno, parinibbissaty anāsavo ||).24 In the Patisambhidāmagga (Patis
˙ ˙
CST4 II.41, in PTS II.163,36 replaced by a peyāla), the compound still occurs as a
bahubbı̄hi, describing a quality of each of the five factors in the sequential
transformation of Aññākondañña right after the Buddha’s exposition of the four
˙˙
truths: vision (cakkhu), awareness (ñāṇa), profound understanding (paññā), knowl-
edge (vijjā), and light (āloka). All these qualities have the four satipaṭṭhānas (and other
elements listed in the same chapter) as their own realm (gocara) and as their own
ground (vatthu). In this light, the compound sati-gocara is fashioned out of the
meaning ascribed to gocara in the two mentioned suttas of the Satipatthānasamyutta
˙˙ ˙
and should be viewed as an abridgement for satipaṭṭhānagocara. Although the latter
compound does not frequently occur in the Nikāyas, the meaning it conveys underlies
most canonical and post-canonical texts on the satipaṭṭhānas and apparently justifies
the interpretation offered by Ānanda in the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā.
˙
It is noteworthy that Buddhaghosa places satigocara before the threefold list
(now sub-list) derived from M 137. His association of the four satipaṭṭhānas with
the three satipaṭṭhānas and his reframing of the latter were accepted and further
elaborated in later literature.
In the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā Ānanda, in tune with the strong emphasis on the three
˙
satipaṭṭhānas in the Sammohavinodanı̄, quotes the passage from the Samudayasutta
that Buddhaghosa briefly mentions and places it just after the citation from M 137,
legitimizing Buddhaghosa’s choice to use and ‘transform’ the threefold list. The
definitions from the Samudayasutta are cited in the introduction of the
Satipatthānavibhaṅga in the Vibh-mt, and Ānanda’s comment upon them seems
˙˙ ˙
to refer to several descriptions of gocara (as implicitly referring to satigocara) in
the Suttapitaka, and not only to those seen above. In fact, he affirms that the
˙
Footnote 23 continued
“Just as a cowherd with a stick drives the cows to pasture, so old age and death bring the life of creatures
to an end”). Other meanings indicated by Cone are “where the mind (properly) ranges and finds suste-
nance; a field or scope or sphere of attention.” In satigocara the term gocara indicates the suitable sphere
for the mind, and this consists in sati. About sati and satipaṭṭhānas as a safe realm, cf. D 16, CST4 I.166,
PTS II.100,25–31.
24
The comment on this stanza of the Theragāthā also clarifies that satipaṭṭhāna-gocara, alike sati-
gocara, is a kammādharaya-samāsa: the mind is established in the gocara, i.e. the four satipaṭṭhānas (Th-
a CST4 100, PTS I.216,33-217,2). Occurrences of the Sanskrit parallel of smṛtyupasthānagocara are found
for instance in the Vimalakı̄rtinirdeśa, within a classification of wholesome and unwholesome gocaras
(VkN 4.20).

123
86 G. Giustarini

compound satipaṭṭhāna (in the Sammohavinodanı̄) “epitomizes the locations in the

Suttas that describe the fields of mindfulness therein discussed.”25
In one passage, Ānanda offers a possible explanation of the very borrowing of the
term satipaṭṭhāna to describe the Salāyatanavibhaṅgasutta’s list, and also of its
˙
consequent insertion in Buddhaghosa’s Satipatthānavibhaṅga.
˙˙
evaṃ paṭighānunayehi anavassutatā niccaṃ upaṭṭhitasatitā tad ubhayavītivat-
tatā satipaṭṭhānan ’ti vuttā. buddhānam eva kira niccaṃ upaṭṭhitasatitā hoti na
paccekabuddhādīnan ’ti.
Thus, the overcoming of both is the satipatthāna method, i.e. the imperturba-
˙˙
bility to aversion and fawning [of the disciples] due to the continuous presence
of mindfulness. It is known that the continuous presence of mindfulness is
exclusive to buddhas and not to paccekabuddhas and so on.

Vibh-mt CST4 355

˙
This passage is reused almost verbatim by Dhammapāla in his subcommentaries on
the Satipatthānasuttas: evaṃ paṭighānunayehi anavassutatā niccaṃ upaṭṭhitasatitā
˙˙
tad ubhayavītivattatā satipaṭṭhānan ’ti vuttā. buddhānam eva kira niccaṃ upaṭṭhi-
tasatitā hoti āveṇikadhammabhāvato na paccekabuddhādīnan ’ti. (D-pt I.373, PTS
˙
II.363,15–18 and parallels).
The gloss on the three satipaṭṭhānas at D-pt I.373, PTS II.363,15–18 adds
˙
āveṇikadhammabhāvato, that could be translated as “for being it a specific factor [of
the Buddhas]”. (See Cone, 2001 s.v. āveṇika). This is a clear reference to the
eighteen exclusive qualities of the Buddha (āveṇikadhammas/āveṇikadharmas).26
The compound recurs in several Sanskrit Buddhist texts but is rare in Pāli literature
and not found in texts earlier than Dhammapāla’s.27 This might be an element of
confirmation of Dhammapāla’s exposition to other schools, and deserves a more
extensive, specific study.

On the Term satipat.t.hāna

So, in the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā Ānanda states that disciples attain the imperturbability
˙
(anavassutatā)28 towards and the overcoming (vītivattatā) of aversion (paṭigha) and
25
satipaṭṭhānan ’ti vuttānaṃ satigocarānaṃ dīpake suttappadese saṅgaṇhāti (Vibh-mt CST4 355).
˙
26
There are at least two lists of the eighteen āveṇikadharmas attested, like in the Arthaviniścayasūtra and
in Yaśomitra’s Abhidharmakośavyākhyā (see Samtani 241, note 202). For other occurrences and
discussion, see Pagel (2012, p. 336, note 7); Radich (2010, pp. 129–130, note 39) (on their identification
with the dharmakāya); Radich 2015: 256 (mentioning a peculiar case of 180 āveṇikadharmas).
27
In the subcommentary of the Saṅgı̄tisutta Dhammapāla refers to its plural form to gloss the locution
buddhānaṃ yeva dhammā guṇā, the factors and qualities of the buddhas (D-pt III.305, PTS III.256,18).
28
˙
In the Anutı̄kā, Dhammapāla explains the overcoming of liking and disliking as imperturbability and
˙
absence of contaminations: anavassutatā anupakiliṭṭhatā ten’ āha tad ubhayavītivattatā ’ti (Vibh-a-t CST4
355). The CST4 edition of the Sammohavinodanı̄ reads paṭidhānunayavītivattatāpi (Vibh-a CST4˙ 355),
whereas the PTS edition has it conform to the Vibhaṅga subcommentaries (in CST4 edition) and
presumably correct (paṭighānunayavītivattatā pi, PTS 214,6). The same phrasing, along with the threefold
classification of the satipaṭṭhānas quoted from M 137 and from the passages of the Samudayasutta, is

123
Notes on the satipaṭṭhānas in the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā 87

fawning by means of a continuous presence/attendance of mindfulness. These

factors are further explained by Dhammapāla in the Anutı̄kā as equivalent to the
˙
absence of defilements.29 The phrase “mindfulness continuously present” (niccaṃ
upaṭṭhitasatitā) used by Ānanda places the passage quoted from M 137 into the
meditative framework of the Satipatthānasuttas, and at the same time it indicates
˙˙
upaṭṭhāna (and not paṭṭhāna, whose etymology in satipaṭṭhāna is explained in
another passage of the Mūlatı̄kā—and also in the Anutı̄kā by Dhammapāla) as the
˙ ˙
second term of the compound satipaṭṭhāna. The employment of upaṭṭhāna here
presents two main attributes: the importance of attending/supporting sati and the
[constant] presence of sati.30 There’s a subtle wordplay involved: upaṭṭhāna in the
four satipaṭṭhānas would render the objects of mindfulness (body etc.) as ways to
attend mindfulness, whereas the related upaṭṭhita in upaṭṭhitasatitā would describe
mindfulness as necessarily present to overcome attachment and aversion (in M 137,
in a teacher with respect to the disciples). This emphasis on upaṭṭhitasatitā proposes
a solution to the problems that Buddhaghosa might have found in his Sammo-
havinodanı̄, when proposing the Salāyatanavibhaṅgasutta’s apparently incongruent
˙
classification of the satipaṭṭhānas, and even to its use in the Salāyatanavibhaṅga-
˙
sutta itself. The definition of a teacher, Ānanda seems to say, must be based on
freedom from the grip of attachment and aversion (with regard to disciples), which
in turn depends on the continuous presence/attendance of mindfulness. This
continuity is not common to accomplished beings but is an exclusive characteristic
of the sammasambuddhas, and even paccekabuddhas (and arahants etc.) are not
endowed with it, as Ānanda reminds in the same passage (and this may explain why
paccekabuddhas don’t teach): the ideal teacher of the Dhamma is the/a Buddha
himself and the reason for that lays in his seamless flow of mindfulness, seen as a
prerequisite for teaching the Dhamma, that provides the teacher with an unshakable
balance in front of the disciples’ progress or lack of progress.
About the possibility of interpreting the compound satipaṭṭhāna as sati-paṭṭhāna,
that Buddhaghosa explains as related to the term padhāna (effort), Ānanda in the
Vibh-mt stresses the twofold function of the prefix pa-: as inception (ārambha) and
˙
as intensification (pakkhandana) of sati. Dhammapāla (Vibh-at CST4 355) adds
˙
another interpretation of the prefix pa-, referring to this threefold list of dhammas in
the Dhammasaṅganı̄ (CST4 mātikā 14, PTS 2,8): inferior (hīna), medium
˙
(majjhima), and excellent (paṇīta).
In another passage of the Vibh-mt, Ānanda clarifies the function of memory
˙
(saraṇa) ascribed to sati: rather than referring to the faculty of remembering old

Footnote 28 continued
used in the Saddhammappajotikā (MNidd-a CST4 I.2, PTS I.47,25-49,19) to comment on the Kāmasutta
(on the date of Nidd-a, see von Hinüber 1996, p. 142, Sect. 287) and in the Dhammapāla’s subcom-
mentaries on the Satipatthānasuttas. As Buddhadatta explains in his introduction to the
Saddhammappajotikā’s edition,˙˙ the author was probably quoting Dhammapāla’s commentary on the
Suttanipāta, and this explains the identity with the passages from the Vibh-mt (1980: viii).
˙
29
anavassutatā anupakiliṭṭhatā ten’ āha tad ubhayavītivattatā ’ti. Vibh-at CST4 355.
30
˙
For discussions on the compound satipaṭṭhāna see for instance (Gethin, 2008, p. 142, Anālayo, 2019,
10: 571, Ñānamoli-Bodhi 2001: 1189, n.136, Walshe, 1987: 589, n. 629, Anālayo 2005, pp. 235–236;
Gethin, 2015).˙

123
88 G. Giustarini

episodes of the past, he prefers to explain saraṇa as holding [in mind] the specific
objects of the satipaṭṭhāna practice along with the Dhammasaṅganı̄’s classification
˙
of the dhammas as kusala, akusala, and avyākata. The reference to gathering or
funnelling into one purpose, i.e. nibbāna, implicitly reminds of one of the five
possible interpretations of ekāyana (the first qualifier of the satipaṭṭhānas).31
The mnemonic function of sati is mentioned for instance in the Pathamav-
˙
ibhaṅgasutta and in the Dutiyavibhaṅgasutta of the Indriyasamyutta and in the
˙
Sekhasutta of the Majjhima Nikāya: “[the noble disciple] is mindful, equipped with
supreme mindfulness and maturity, remembering, recalling what was done as well
as what was said a long time ago” ([ariyasāvako] satimā hoti paramena
satinepakkena samannāgato cirakatam pi cirabhāsitam pi saritā anussaritā; S
CST4 V.479-480, PTS V.198,16–22; M 53, CST4 II.25, PTS I.356,17–19).
This description might show discrepancies with the standard istructions on the
satipaṭṭhānas, and Ānanda seems to intend to solve these possible discrepancies by
harmoninzing the meaning of sati as memory with its meditative/contemplative
functions.

Ānanda’s Explanation of sabbatthika and the Reference

to the Aggisutta

Another interesting example of the exegetical pattern of the Vibh-mt concerns the
˙
term sabbatthika, which Buddhaghosa resorts to in the in the Kāyānupassanāud-
desavannanā of the Sammohavinodanı̄. Here the adjective satimant is explained by a
˙˙
citation on the universality of sati: khvāhaṃ bhikkhave sabbatthikaṃ vadāmī ’ti.
Though it is an explicit citation, as the nipāta iti indicates, the source is not
mentioned. The same sentence occurs in the Aggisutta of the Bojjhaṅga-samyutta (S
˙
CST4 V.234, PTS V.112,1-115,8). It is quoted in another section of the
Sammohavinodanı̄, in the Suttantabhājanı̄yavannanā of the Bojjhaṅgavibhaṅga,
˙˙
where its reference to their source, though still not explicit, is suggested by the
comment on it: two possible states of mind are mentioned (līna, slugghish, and
uddhaṭa, restless) along with their countermeasures, the factors of awakening
(bojjhaṅga), and other passages from the Aggisutta are quoted. The classification of
the Aggisutta that this explanation is based upon is as follows: the sluggish mind
(līna citta) is counteracted by means of the investigation of the dhammas
(dhammavicaya), effort (vīriya), and bliss (pīti). The antidotes to the restless mind
(uddhata citta) are relaxation (passaddhi), concentration (samādhi), and equanimity
(upekkhā). The first bojjhaṅga, sati, is sabbatthika: “universal” (Ñānamoli, 1991,
˙
p. 129), “of value in everything” (Horner, 1969, p. 52), “all-helpful” (Ñānamoli,
˙
1987, p. 342), “always useful” (Bodhi, 2000a, p. 1607), “ubiquitous”, “applicable in
any case”, i.e. applicable and useful in any of these mental conditions.

31
One of the five commentarial interpretations of the term ekāyana describes the method of the
satipaṭṭhānas as the path leading to one, single goal, i.e. nibbāna (M-a CST4 I.106, PTS I.229,17-230,20.
Cf. Anālayo, 2011, pp. I.75–76; Gethin, 2008, pp. 142–143).

123
Notes on the satipaṭṭhānas in the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā 89

Buddhaghosa refers again to this Sutta in the Sammohavinodanı̄ and offers a

further explanation on the universal function of sati; interestingly, it occurs in the
Satipatthānavibhaṅga, not in the preliminary definition of sati but in the
˙˙
dhammānupassanā section, while commenting sati in the bojjhaṅga-list:
ten’ āha: sati ca pana sabbatthikā vuttā bhagavatā. kiṃ kāraṇā? cittaṃ hi
satipaṭisaraṇaṃ ārakkhapaccupaṭṭhānā ca sati na vinā satiyā cittassa
paggahaniggaho hotī ti.
Because of this he said: “And mindfulness has been called applicable in any
case by the Bhagavant. What is the reason? For the mind has mindfulness as
its refuge, mindfulness is manifested as protection, and there is no exertion
and restraint of the mind without mindfulness.”32
In the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā, Ānanda refers to the two categories of mind and to the
˙
bojjhaṅgas, but the wording of his comment differs from the one found in the
Sammohavinodanı̄’s Bojjhaṅgavibhaṅga and presents an original interpretation:
sabbatthikan ’ti sabbattha bhavaṃ. sabbasmiṃ līne uddhaṭe ca citte icchitab-
battā sabbe vā līne uddhaṭe ca bhāvetabbā bojjhaṅgā atthikā etāyā ’ti
sabbatthikā.33
“Universal” means that [mindfulness] is everywhere (sabbattha). It is
universal because it is desirable on any occasion the mind is either restless
and sluggish; alternatively, [mindfulness] is sabbatthikā (sabba-atthika) for
being a factor of awakening to be cultivated whether [the mind] is restless or
sluggish.
It is noteworthy that in the rest of the section Ānanda does not circumscribe sati to
the practice of the satipaṭṭhānas (which would be expected, as this is the
Satipatthānavibhaṅga), but compiles a list of practices suitable for concentration
˙˙
(samādhi), including only one from the standard satipaṭṭhāna range (the cultivation
of a sense of foulness, impurity, asubhabhāvanā):
sabbatthikakammaṭṭhānaṃ buddhānussati mettā maraṇassati asubhabhāvanā
ca. satisampajaññena etena yoginā parihariyamānaṃ taṃ sabbatthikakammaṭṭhānaṃ
vuttaṃ satisampajaññabalena avicchinnassa tassa pariharitabbattā satiyā vā
samatho vutto samādhikkhandhasaṅgahitattā.
An universal basis for practice (sabbatthika-kammaṭṭhāna) consists in the
recollection of the Buddha, benevolence, mindfulness of death and the
cultivation of impurity. It is said that that universal basis for practice should be
undertaken by that meditator by means of mindfulness and full awareness,
because it must be undertaken uninterruptedly by means of the power of
32
Vibh-a CST4 367, PTS 277,30-278,2; also in Vism CST4 I.62, PTS 130,17-20. The initial ten’āha
suggests that Buddhaghosa was referring to an older commentarial tradition. The earliest exegetical use of
this sentence occurs in the Milindapañha, but the wording is different: bhāsitam p’ etaṃ mahārāja
bhagavatā satiñ ca khvāhaṃ bhikkhave sabbatthikaṃ vadāmī ’ti (Mil CST4 I.13, PTS 38,16–17).
33
This is another passage reused by Dhammapāla in his subcommentary on the Mahāsatipatthānasutta
(D-pt CST4 II.373, PTS II.415,25–28). ˙˙
˙

123
90 G. Giustarini

mindfulness and full awareness, or it is said that calm is brought about by

mindfulness for the latter is included in the [eightfold path’s] area of
concentration (samādhikkhandhasaṅgahitattā).
Vibh-mt 355
˙
A hypothesis that may be inferred from this Ānanda’s interpretation of sati is that
his intention was to provide a preliminary preparation to the kāyānupassanā and,
more generally, to the application of sati in the four satipaṭṭhānas, and to emphasize
the contribution of sati itself to the development of concentration. Thus, sati is
universal at least for three reasons: it is a countermeasure to any kind of
impediment, it should coexist with all the other bojjhaṅgas, and it is found and
exerted in [potentially] any meditative practice. The next section will show how this
universal application of sati is diversified with regard to its objects according to the
disciples’ inclinations.

Inclinations of the Disciples and Respective Assignments

Another important contribution of the Vibh-mt is the interpretation of Bud-

˙
dhaghosa’s original classification of meditators, which represents a precise
guideline for the assignment of the practice of the satipaṭṭhānas to the disciples:
according to the Satipatthānavibhaṅga of the Sammohavinodanı̄, the meditative
˙˙
exercises contained in the satipaṭṭhāna method do not follow a linear and/or a
hierarchical sequence, but are to be suited for the disciples. Buddhaghosa proposes a
taxonomy of meditators depending on inclinations, skills, and consequently
suggested objects, in order to explain the standard enumeration of the satipaṭṭhānas
in a didactic framework.34

A meditator could be:

Conducting oneself with thirst/craving (taṇhācarita)
or
Conducting oneself with [wrong] views (diṭṭhicarita)35

Inclined to insight (vipassanāyānika)

or
Inclined to tranquillity (samathayānika)

34
“And why, in contrast (with the threefold classification), the satipaṭṭhānas are said to be exactly four,
no more, no less? It is for the benefit of those that are fit to be trained.” (kasmā pana bhagavatā cattārova
satipaṭṭhānā vuttā, anūnā anadhikāti? veneyyahitattā. Vibh-a CST4 355, PTS 215,5–6). This classification
has some points in common with the one found in the Nettipakarana, at least in the contraposition of a
taṇhācarita and a diṭṭhicarita character (Netti CST4 6, PTS 7,16–23).˙ The same dyad is found in another
paracanonical text, the Petakopadesa (Pet CST4 120, PTS 253).
˙ ˙
35
avijjānīvaraṇā sattā avijjāsaṃyuttā avijjāpakkhena vicaranti te vuccanti diṭṭhicaritā ’ti. taṇhāsaṃyo-
janā sattā taṇhāsaṃyuttā taṇhāpakkhena vicaranti te vuccanti taṇhācaritā ’ti. diṭṭhicaritā ito bahiddhā
pabbajitā attakilamathānuyogamanuyuttā viharanti. taṇhācaritā ito bahiddhā pabbajitā kāmesu kāma-
sukhallikānuyogamanuyuttā viharanti. (Netti CST4 79, PTS 109).

123
Notes on the satipaṭṭhānas in the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā 91

Slow/slugghish (manda)
or
Sharp/quick (tikkha)
The objects (ārammana) of attention in the four satipaṭṭhānas are listed in pairs:
Coarse (oḷārika): kāyānupassanā
or
Refined (sukhuma): vedanānupassanā

Over-categorized (atipabhedagata): dhammānupassanā

or
Not over-categorized (nātipabhedagata) cittānupassanā
The four single satipatthānas are assigned as follows:
˙˙
kāyānupassanā (oḷārika): taṇhācarita – manda; samathayānika.
vedanānupassanā (sukhuma): taṇhācarita – tikkha; samathayānika.
cittānupassanā (nātipabhedagata): diṭṭhicarita – manda; vipassanāyānika.
dhammānupassanā (atipabhedagata): diṭṭhicarita – tikkha; vipassanāyānika.
The dyad manda/tikkha is explained by Ānanda by employing pañña (clever, wise,
endowed with understanding) as an adjective (in a bahubbı̄hi) referring to the
meditators. A person who is taṇhācarita could be mandapañña or tikkhapañña, i.e.
possessing slow understanding or quick understanding36: in either case he/she
would need to be directed to a practice of tranquillity (samatha); the distinction is
that in the first case he/she would find in contemplation of the body the
suitable remedy for his/her inclination to craving, but in case he/she is endowed
with sharp understanding, contemplation of feelings would fit. Likewise, if a person
is diṭṭhicarita, the recommended vehicle would be the practice of insight,
investigation (vipassanā), with this distinction: if the person has a slow
understanding, contemplation of the mind is preferable; if he/she is equipped with
a quick understanding, the recommended practice is the contemplation of the
dhammas.
The reference of Ānanda to pañña could be seen in the light of the use of the verb
pajānāti in the satipaṭṭhāna instructions. The term pajānāti indicates a meticolous
examination, and the nature of the object may affect the quality of the examination
itself: thus the task is commensurate with the specific level of paññā that a meditator
possesses.
Ānanda also explains the entire classification above by detecting other features in
the objects of the satipaṭṭhāna practice. For instance, body and feelings, though
distinctively coarse and subtle, are both subject to fondness (assāda), which may be
counteracted by focusing on their intrinsic characteristic of foulness (asubha) and
suffering (dukkhatā). This countermeasure is easily accessible and highly
36
Of these two compounds, only tikkhapañña is found in the Tipitaka. In the Anupadasutta of the
˙ Sāriputta (M 111, CST4 III.93,
Majjhima Nikāya, it is one of the qualities ascribed to eminent disciple
PTS III.25,8). In the Paññāvagga of the Patisambhidāmagga, the compound tikkhapaññā, with paññā as a
noun, indicates a quality that “quickly cuts ˙ off defilements” (khippaṃ kilese chindati; Patis CST4 III.7,
PTS II.201,1). ˙

123
92 G. Giustarini

recommended to those who are inclined to craving (taṇhā), whether they are sharp
or slow. Suttas themselves present contemplation of the body or contemplation of
feelings as based upon disinterest in the object; the Vibhaṅga and the Sammo-
havinodanı̄ articulate the structure seen above, and the Vibhaṅga Mūlatı̄kā explains
˙
this methodology by pointing out a common characteristic of body and feelings, viz.
a propensity to fondness.
visesena kāyo ca vedanā ca assādassa kāraṇan ’ti tappahānatthaṃ tesaṃ
taṇhāvatthūnaṃ oḷārikasukhumānaṃ asubhadukkhatādassanāni mandatikkhapaññehi
taṇhācaritehi sukarānī ’ti tāni tesaṃ visuddhimaggo ’ti vuttāni.

Since body and feeling, because of their own [respective] characteristics, are
motives of fondness, for the sake of abandoning this [fondness], the visions of
foulness and suffering of these [respectively] coarse and subtle grounds for
craving are easy for those who are endowed with slow or sharp understanding,
conducting themselves with craving; these [two practices] are said to be the
path of purification for them.

Vibh-mt 355
˙
In the other subcommentary on the Vibhaṅga (and direct commentary of the
Sammohavinodanı̄), the Vibhaṅga Anutı̄kā, Dhammapāla treats assāda and taṇhā as
˙
synonyms,37 thus indicating both as a point where a category of meditators (taṇhā-
carita) and a category of objects (assāda) for meditation meet, and that point is
liable to be transformed by applying its opponent (the vision of asubha and
dukkhatā) to it. In other words, Ānanda explains why both kāyānupassanā and
vedanānupassanā are indicated for practitioners inclining to craving by defining
their two objects in terms of pleasure/fondness, and Dhammapāla stresses that
coupling by stating taṇhā and assāda as two synonyms.

Final Notes

(1) Some of the examples seen above show that Ānanda deeply influenced Dha-
mmapāla, who extensively quotes from the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā in his subc-
ommentaries on the Satipaṭṭhānasuttas. An interesting case is in D-pṭ I.373,
PTS II.363,15–18, wherein Dhammapāla reuses, with slight but significant
changes, an entire passage from the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā.

The fact that Dhammapāla’s commentaries on the Suttas are based more on
the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā than on Dhammapāla’s Anuṭīkā leads to at least two
hypotheses: (a) that the latter was composed after the Sutta-ṭīkās, to complete
Ānanda’s interpretation of the Sammohavinodanī; (b) that Dhammapāla co-
nsidered Ānanda’s Mūlaṭīkā more suited to the Sutta-Aṭṭhakathās than his
own Anuṭīkā, probably because of the similarities between the Sammohavin-
odanī and the Sutta-Aṭṭhakathās: by writing the Suttas’ subcommentaries D-
37
assādassā ’ti taṇhāya (Vibh-at CST4 355).
˙

123
Notes on the satipaṭṭhānas in the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā 93

hammapāla was reconstructing that exegetical layer that corresponded to the

Purāṇaṭīkās, and a large reusage of Ānanda’s material was a reasonable ch-
oice. Though the second hypothesis could sound more reasonable in the light
of the overall structure of the Aṭṭhakathās and Ṭīkās, the two options are not
mutually exclusive.

(2) Ānanda clearly agrees with Buddhaghosa (or the anonymous author/s of the
Sammohavinodanī) on the classifications elaborated to explain the satipaṭ-
ṭhānas and, particularly, on the reference to the Saḷāyatanavibhaṅgasutta.
Nevertheless, he seems to be aware of the possible discrepancy between the
passages in this text and the standard descriptions of the satipaṭṭhāna-method:
as a consequence, Ānanda emphasizes the function of this method as a prere-
quisite for being a teacher like a buddha, drawing a line between
sammasambuddhas and all the other accomplished beings. Abhidhamma co-
mmentaries transform the ‘oddity’ of M 137 into an additional quality of the
satipaṭṭhāna method by linking it to the Buddha himself.

(3) Tangentially, Ānanda offers new etymological explanations on the compound

satipaṭṭhāna: both hypotheses of splitting, sati-upaṭṭhāna and sati-paṭṭhāna, are
taken into consideration in the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā, in a more articulate fashion
compared with the analysis found in the Sammohavinodanī. It is noteworthy
that upaṭṭhita, related to upaṭṭhāna, is another means used by Ānanda to explain
the threefold classification of the satipaṭṭhānas in the Saḷāyatanavibhaṅgasutta
and to clarify its role in the Satipaṭṭhānavibhaṅga of the Sammohavinodanī.

(4) The Satipaṭṭhānavibhaṅga of the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā presents an original use of

some Pāli terms: for instance, Ānanda examines the complex assignment of the
satipaṭṭhāna exercises to the disciples according to their skills and inclinations
by employing terms like assāda, which are rarely found in the satipaṭṭhāna
lexicon. In a similar line, I argued that Ānanda’s use of the adjective pañña to
comment two categories of disciples (mandapañña and tikkhapañña) found in
the Sammohavinodanī is a reference to pajānāti, a crucial verb in the lexicon of
the satipaṭṭhānas. We may infer that although the verb used in the descriptions
of the practices is the same, it actually expresses distinct grades of training and
understanding.
Finally, the various examples here observed demonstrate that Ānanda makes a large
use of cross-references from the Suttapitaka, the Abhidhammapitaka, and the
˙ ˙
respective Atthakathās, using them [also] to fill in the apparent gaps in the
˙˙
Atthakathā-exegeses. This aspect, along with Ānanda’s lexicon, philosophical
˙˙
views, and the corroborated influence he had on Dhammapāla, encourage further
studies on the whole corpus of the Abhidhamma Mūlatı̄kās.
˙
Acknowledgements I am grateful to Erich Tam Kam Wai, Eng Jin Ooi, and Linda Cha Lai Beng for the
numerous and precious discussions on this subject, and to the two anonymous reviewers for the valuable
and encouraging feedbacks. Of course, I am the sole responsible for the remaining mistakes.

123
94 G. Giustarini

Declarations

Conflict of interest The author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

References to Pāli texts are to the PTS and CST4 editions.

Anālayo, B. (2005). Mindfulness in the Pāli Nikāyas. In K. Nauriyal (Ed.), Buddhist thought and applied
psychological research (pp. 229–249). Routledge.
Anālayo, B. (2011). A comparative study of the Majjhima-nikāya. Dharma Drum Publishing Corporation.
Anālayo, B. (2019). The emphasis on the present moment in the cultivation of mindfulness. Mindfulness,
10, 571–581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-018-1074-1
Bodhi, B. (trans.) (2000a). The connected discourses of the Buddha. A New Translation of the Saṃyutta
Nikāya. Wisdom Publications.
Bodhi, B. (trans.) (2000b). A comprehensive manual of Abhidhamma. The Abhidhammattha Sangaha of
Ācariya Anuruddha. BPS Pariyatti.
Cone, M. (2001). A dictionary of Pāli (Vol. I (a-kh)). Pali Text Society.
Cone, M. (2010). A dictionary of Pāli (Vol. II (g–n)). The Pali Text Society.
Cousins, L. S. (1972). Dhammapāla and the tı̄ka literature. Religion, 1972, 159–165.
˙
Cousins, L. S. (1981). The Patthāna and the development of the Theravādin Abhidhamma. Journal of the
˙˙
Pali Text Society, IX, 22–46.
Cousins, L. S. (1996). Review: The Udāna Commentary (Paramatthadı̄panı̄ nāma Udānatthakathā) by
Dhammapāla, by Peter Masefield. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies,˙˙ University
of London, 59(3), 580–581.
Cousins, L. S. (1998). Reviewed work: A handbook of Pali literature by Oskar von Hinüber. Bullettin of
the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 61(1), 155–156.
Cousins, L. S. (2011). Abhidhamma studies I: Jotipāla and the Abhidhamma Anutı̄kā. Thai International
Journal of Buddhist Studies, II, 1–36. ˙
Cousins, L. S. (2013). Tambapanniya and Tāmraśātiya. Journal of Buddhist Studies, 11, 21–46.
Cousins, L. S. (2015). The case of the Abhidhamma commentary. Journal of the International Association
of Buddhist Studies, 36(37), 389–422.
Gethin, R. M. L. (2008). Sayings of the Buddha. Oxford University Press.
Gethin, R. M. L. (2015). Buddhist conceptualizations of mindfulness. In K. W. Brown, J. D. Creswell, &
R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of mindfulness: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 9–41). Guilford
Publications.
Giustarini, G. (2016). Liberation(s): The notion of release (vimokkha) in the Patisambhidāmagga. Journal
˙
of Indian Philosophy, 44(2), 241–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-014-9262-3
Gornall, A. (2020). Rewriting Buddhism. Pali literature and monastic reform in Sri Lanka (pp. 1157–
1270). UCL Press.
von Hinüber, O. (1996). A handbook of Pāli literature. Walter De Gruyter pub.
Horner, I.B. (transl.). (1969). Milinda’s questions. The Pali Text Society.
Law, B. C. (1933). A history of Pāli literature. Kegan.
Sayadaw, L. (1916). On the philosophy of relations. Journal of the Pali Text Society, 1915–1916, 21–53.
Malalasekera, G. P. (1974). Dictionary of Pāli proper names. The Pali Text Society.
Ñānamoli, B. (trans.) revised by L.S. Cousins, Nyanaponika Mahāthera, and C.M.M. Shaw (1987). The
˙ dispeller of delusion (Sammohavinodanı̄), Vol. I. The Pali Text Society.
Ñānamoli, B. (1991). The path of purification (Visuddhimagga) (5th ed.). Buddhist Publication Society.
Ñān˙ amoli, B. (trans.) revised by Bodhi Bhikkhu. (2001). The middle length discourses of the Buddha. The
˙ Pali text Society.
Norman, K. R. (1983). Pāli literature. Harrassowitz.
Norman, K.R. (1997). The word of the doctrine (Dhammapada). Pali Text Society.
Pagel, U. (2012). The Bodhisattvapitaka and the Aksayamatinirdeśa. In S. Tadeusz (Ed.), The Buddhist
forum (pp. 333–373). School of˙ Oriental and African
˙ Studies, University of London.
Pecenko, P. (2002). Lı̄natthapakāsinı̄ and Sāratthamañjusā: The Purānatı̄kas and the Tı̄kās on the four
Nikāyas. Journal of the Pali Text Society, XXVII, 61–114. ˙ ˙ ˙

123
Notes on the satipaṭṭhānas in the Vibhaṅga Mūlaṭīkā 95

Pecenko, P. (2007). The Theravāda tradition and modern Pāli scholarship: A case of lost manuscripts
mentioned in old Pāli bibliographical sources. Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal, 20, 349–378.
Potter, K. H. (2003). Encyclopedia of Indian philosophies (Vol. IX). Motilal Banarsidass.
Radich, M. (2010). Embodiments of the Buddha in Sarvâstivāda doctrine: With special reference to the
*Mahāvibhāsā. ARIRIAB, 13, 121–172.
Radich, M. (2015).˙ Tibetan evidence for the sources of chapters of the synoptic Suvarna-prabhāsottama-
sūtra T 664 Ascribed to Paramārtha. Buddhist Studies Review, 32(2), 245–270. ˙https://doi.org/10.
1558/bsrv.v32i2.27084
Ronkin, N. (2005). Early Buddhist metaphysics: The making of a philosophical tradition.
RoutledgeCurzon.
Samtani, N.H. (transl.) (2002). Gathering the meaninings: The compendium of categories. The
Arthaviniścaya Sūtra and its commentary Nibandhana. Dharma Publishing.
Vimalakīrtinirdeśa. A Sanskrit Edition Based upon the Manuscript Newly Found at the Potala Palace.
2006. Ed. by Study Group on Buddhist Sanskrit Literature, The Institute of Comprehensive Study of
Buddhism, Taisho University, Tokyo: Taisho University Press.
Walshe, M. (1987). Thus have I heard: A new translation of the Dīgha Nikāya. Wisdom Publications.
Warder, A.K. (1982). ‘Introduction’ to Ñānamoli (Transl.). The Path of Discrimination (Patisamb-
˙ Society.
hidāmagga) (pp. v–lxiv). Oxford:Pali Text ˙

Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a
publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and
applicable law.

123