Identity and Experience_Hamilton_1996

4 Identity and Experience
constitutes a common formula used throughout the Pali material to define
riipa, and is of considerably more interest to us here. We shall see in the
comprehensive descriptions of it that the term epa also refers to a general
category, described as 'external', suggesting an overlap between the 'form'
characteristics of the body (@pakkhandha) and those of visible objects in
general (rii!p@atana). But both types of analysis of riipa indicate that the term
primarily refers to the body, in accord with the Buddha's central concern
with the human being.
The context in which the first simple analysis is given in the aandha
Samyutta is when the Buddha is teaching that none of the five khandhas constitutes
anything that should be thought of as a permanent, unchanging
'self', in this life or in any previous life. Each of the khandhas in turn is
briefly defined, and then each is discussed in a way which illustrates their
impermanence. The riipakkhandha is defined as follows:
And why, bhikkhus, is it called body? It suffers, bhikkhus. That is why the
word 'body' is used. Suffers from what? Suffers from cold and heat, from
hunger and thirst, from contact with gnats, mosquitoes, wind and sun and
snakes. It suffers, bhikkhus. That is why it is called body.2
The verb I have translated here as 'suffers', in order to draw out the
meaning of this passage, is ruppati. It is because of the use of this verb here
that this description is repeatedly referred to by the commentarial tradition,
and by Buddhaghosa in his fiuddhimag;ga. Ruppati is taken by the tradition
as a pun on riipa, though etymologically ruppati has absolutely no
connection with riipa. And in spite of a similar lack of etymological link the
punning is also extended to ncma, which, as mentioned above, is frequently
found twinned with riipa in the compound niima~iipa.~ So in Pali the play on
words reads as follows: Namanalakkhayzm niimam . . . ruppanalakkhpam
Discussing ruppati, Woodward, the translator of the Xhandha Samyutta for the
Pali Text Society, suggests that rutpati as a pun on riipa could be taken to
mean that body is embodied, form is in-formed, shape is ~haped.~ Literally,
however, ruppati means 'to be destroyed', 'to be vexed' or 'to be oppressed'.
In Sanskrit, rupyate means 'to suffer violent pain', and by the r/l alternation
it is closely related to lupyate, 'to be broken' or 'to be de~troyed'.~ By extension
one can understand ruppati simply as 'suffers', being analogous with
dukkha (so the definition might better read: "It is characterised by unsatisfactoriness
(dukkha)"). This, surely, is the point that is being made by the use
of the verb: such etymologising was, typically, for didactic reasons. This
point has been completely missed by Mrs Rhys Davids, who suggests
translating ruppati as 'affected'. Woodward follows this, though he points
out in a footnote that he prefers 'afflicted'.' The latter is surely more
appropriate, being in accord with the fact that riipa is associated with
dukkha, which in turn is in accord with the Buddha's definition of duk-kha,
representing the individual's existence in sa~siira, as the khandhas. And