Citation

[L.S. Cousins]

Dear Patrick,

I would guess it is an abbreviated version of a stock passage. In Pali 
we have:

/puna caparaṃ, bhikkhave, tathāgato dibbena cakkhunā visuddhena 
atikkantamānusakena satte passati cavamāne upapajjamāne hīne paṇīte 
suvaṇṇe dubbaṇṇe, sugate duggate yathākammūpage satte pajānāti/

This is found at AN III 418; V 35f.; 38; Paṭis II 175; cf. MN I 70; Vibh 
344. The sequence occurs elsewhere with various speakers and addressees, 
but here the honorific /tathāgato/ is equivalent to /ahaṃ/. The sequence 
occurs also in abbreviated forms; so a citation as /puna caparaṃ, 
bhikkhave, tathāgato dibbena cakkhunā ... pe ... sugate duggate 
yathākammūpage satte pajānāti/ would not be surprising.

The stock passage occurs in Sanskrit also e.g. in the Saṃghabhedavastu:
MSV IV 221: /sa evaṃ samāhite citte ... divyena cakṣuṣā 
viśuddhenātikrāntamānuṣyakena satvān paśyati cyavamānān upapadyamānān 
api suvarṇān api durvarṇān api hīnān api praṇītān api sugatim api 
gacchato durgatim api yathākarmopayogān satvān yathābhūtaṃ prajānāti//
/
and in various Mahāyāna contexts, but something closer to the Pali 
version probably existed in /sūtras/ that are no longer extant. Indeed, 
a longer search might find a closer parallel in surviving fragments 
somewhere.

Lance Cousins

> Friends:
>
> I have what appears to be a citation from a Buddhist work by Medhātithi, the great commentator of Manu. On Manu 2.6 (Jha's ed. p. 57) he cites: "paśyāmy ahaṃ bhikṣave divyena cakṣuṣā sugatiṃ durgatiṃ ca."
>
> Jha reads "bhikṣūṇāṃ", but this is probably an error. I have emended it following five manuscript readings given in the Gharpure edition.
>
> Thanks for any leads. Best,
>
> Patrick