A Critical Look at the Kitāgiri Sutta: Resolving a Key Textual Discrepancy

 **A Critical Look at the Kitāgiri Sutta: Resolving a Key Textual Discrepancy**  

The Pāli Canon, the foundation of Theravāda Buddhism, offers profound insights into the stages of liberation. However, textual variations within the Canon sometimes reveal discrepancies that carry significant doctrinal implications. One such instance occurs in the **Kitāgiri Sutta** (MN 70), where a single word — the inclusion or exclusion of *na* ("not") — creates two opposing versions regarding noble disciples' attainment of "seeing with wisdom" (*paññāya cakkhuṃ*).  

By applying my **epistemological razors**, which prioritize direct experience, minimal assumptions, and doctrinal coherence, I have identified which version is utter most likely original and which reflects corruption. 

This post explores the issue, explains how one version aligns with the Dhamma, and critiques the influence of later commentarial frameworks like Buddhaghosa’s **Visuddhimagga**.

---

### **The Two Versions of the Kitāgiri Sutta**  

The **Kitāgiri Sutta** classifies noble disciples into groups, such as:  

-  Those who are "attained to view" 

-  Those who are "freed by faith" 

-  Those who are a "bodily-witness"

The textual discrepancy arises in whether these disciples have attained "seeing with wisdom" (*paññāya cakkhuṃ*):  

1. **Version 1 (with *na*):** Noble disciples, including the faith-liberated and attained-to-view, have **not attained seeing with wisdom**.  This is the Sri Lankan Pali version.

2. **Version 2 (without *na*):** Noble disciples have **attained seeing with wisdom**.  This is the Burmese version.

This single word dramatically alters the understanding of insight at different stages of realization.  

---

### **Determining the Corrupted Version**  

#### **1. Applying the Principle of Direct Experience**  

In Theravāda doctrine, noble attainments are defined by *ariyan knowing and seeing* — direct experiential insight into the Dhamma:  

- In **Version 2 (without *na*)**, all noble disciples possess *seeing with wisdom*. This aligns with the expectation that any noble attainment, from stream-entry onward, involves a direct realization of the Four Noble Truths.  

- In **Version 1 (with *na*)**, these same disciples are excluded from having *seeing with wisdom*, suggesting they lack experiential insight. This contradicts the suttas’ depiction of noble attainments as rooted in direct seeing and knowing.  

**Conclusion:** Version 1 (with *na*) is corrupted because it negates the defining characteristic of noble attainments.  

---

#### **2. Doctrinal Simplicity and Minimal Assumptions**  

The simpler and less assumption-laden reading is often closer to the original intent:  

- **Version 2 (without *na*)** acknowledges that all noble disciples possess insight appropriate to their stage, avoiding unnecessary distinctions.  

- **Version 1 (with *na*)** introduces an artificial separation between *paññāya cakkhuṃ* and the faith-liberated or attained-to-view. This complexity is likely a later addition designed to align the sutta with Buddhaghosa’s hierarchical framework in the **Visuddhimagga**.  

**Conclusion:** Version 1 (with *na*) is a later corruption that imposes a rigid, commentarial interpretation on the text.  

---

#### **3. Coherence with the Gradual Path**  

The Buddha’s teachings describe a gradual path (*visuddhi*), where each stage builds on direct experiential insight:  

- In **Version 2 (without *na*)**, even the faith-liberated (*saddhāvimutta*) and attained-to-view (*diṭṭhippatta*) possess insight (*paññā*), albeit in an initial form. This fits the suttas’ portrayal of the gradual path as inclusive and experiential.  

- In **Version 1 (with *na*)**, these disciples are denied insight, suggesting a rigid division between wisdom (*paññā*) and faith (*saddhā*). This doctrinal inconsistency likely reflects later editorial influence.  

**Conclusion:** Version 1 (with *na*) conflicts with the suttas’ portrayal of the path and represents a corrupted reading.  

---

### **The Role of the Visuddhimagga in Corruption**  

Buddhaghosa’s **Visuddhimagga** is a seminal Theravāda text that systematizes the path to liberation. However, it introduces a hierarchical framework that may deviate from the suttas:  

1. The **Visuddhimagga** reserves *paññāya cakkhuṃ* for advanced stages, aligning with Version 1 (with *na*). This reflects an interpretive overlay that prioritizes scholastic rigidity over experiential inclusivity.  

2. By contrast, the suttas often describe noble attainments in more flexible terms, consistent with Version 2 (without *na*).  

**Conclusion:** The **Visuddhimagga’s** influence likely contributed to the corruption of the Kitāgiri Sutta in Version 1 (with *na*).  

---

### **Final Analysis**  

1. **Corrupted Version:**  

   - Version 1 (with *na*) reflects later editorial influence, aligning the sutta with the rigid framework of the **Visuddhimagga**.  

   - This version introduces a doctrinal inconsistency by denying *paññāya cakkhuṃ* to noble disciples who must, by definition, possess insight.  

2. **Uncorrupted Version:**  

   - Version 2 (without *na*) is likely the original. It aligns with the suttas’ portrayal of noble attainments as experiential, inclusive, and grounded in direct seeing and knowing.  

---

### **Implications for the Dhamma**  

This analysis has profound implications for our understanding of Theravāda Buddhism:  

- It challenges the dominance of commentarial interpretations like the **Visuddhimagga**, which may misrepresent the suttas’ intent.  

- It reaffirms the primacy of direct experience (*ariya knowing and seeing*) as the foundation of noble attainments.  

- It highlights the need for careful textual analysis to preserve the authenticity of the Dhamma.  

By identifying the corrupted version and restoring the original intent of the **Kitāgiri Sutta**, we can return to the heart of the Buddha’s teachings: a path rooted in experiential insight and direct realization.  

---