The Greater Battle

Identity

Segment range snp4.13:1.1–20.4. Sn 895–914 (20 verses). Received title Mahāviyūhasutta (also Mahābyūha) — "Greater Deployment / Array." The longer sibling of Snp 4.12 Cūḷaviyūha: three verses longer, and extending the debate-critique with three new targets — the sīlavata-purity position (vv. 4–6), the upstream-going asceticism-purity view (v. 7), and the comparative-debate of perfect-vs-inferior-teaching (vv. 10–13). The sutta is the AV's densest formula-receiving composition: its closing verses carry verbatim or near-verbatim material from Snp 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, and 4.9, making 4.13 the collection's clearest case of compositional dependency on prior suttas in the cluster.

Text and form

Triṣṭubh throughout with a Jagatī pāda at v. 20d (Norman 2001 p. 367). Two asymmetric Q-A rounds:

• Q1 (v. 1) — do those abiding in their own views, disputing "this alone is truth," incur blame, or do they gain praise?
• A1 (vv. 2–8) — seven verses. The two-fruits-of-dispute thesis (v. 2); non-engagement with ordinary-folk conventions (v. 3); the sīlavata position and its failure-mode (vv. 4–5); abandonment of blameworthy/blameless action (v. 6); the uddhaṁ-sara asceticism critique (v. 7); the closing "for whom there is no passing-away-or-reappearing, by what would he tremble, for what would he long?" (v. 8).
• Q2 (v. 9) — what some call the highest teaching, others call inferior; whose assertion is true?
• A2 (vv. 10–20) — eleven verses, the AV's longest sustained critique-of-sectarian-debate plus closing sage-portrait. The comparative-debate critique (vv. 10–13); the seeing produces not-purity thesis (vv. 14–15); the nivissavādin analysis (v. 16); the brāhmaṇa sage-portrait closing on "they are grasping!" he thinks, not grasping (vv. 17–20).

The sutta's length and structure put it at the AV's polemical climax — the collection's most sustained indictment of sectarian debate is here, with 4.12's thesis of "one truth, variously proclaimed" extended into a positive portrait of the brāhmaṇa-sage who does not engage.

Content

"Regarding those who abide in their own view, disputing 'this alone is the truth' — do they all incur blame, or do they gain praise?"

The Buddha answers: that is a small thing, not enough for peace. Two fruits of dispute, I say — seeing this, one should not dispute; looking for the peaceful land-of-no-dispute. Whatever the conventions (sammuti) of ordinary folk, the knower does not approach them; the uninvolved one — why would he take up involvement? — making no preference in seen-or-heard.

Those championing sīla say "purity is by self-restraint"; having undertaken a vow, they establish themselves: "we shall train right here, then purity will come" — led to future existence, claiming to be expert. But if he falls away from vow-practice, he trembles, his task failed; he prays and longs for purity, like one who has lost his caravan on a journey far from home. Having abandoned all sīla-and-vata, having abandoned blameworthy-and-blameless action, not longing for purity or impurity — live detached, non-grasping peace.

Those who, relying on mortification in disgust or on seen-heard-thought, are upstream-goers moaning "purification!" while not yet free from craving for becoming and non-becoming — for the one who longs, there are mutterings; trembling too in fabrications. But for whom there is no passing-away-or-reappearing, by what would he tremble, for what would he long?

"What some call the highest teaching, others call inferior. Which assertion of these is true? For they all claim to be experts." They say their own teaching is full, the other's inferior; thus arguing, they dispute; each making their own convention the truth. If by the opponent's disparagement one is inferior, no one in any teaching would be distinguished — for each says the other's teaching is lacking while forcefully speaking on their own. But their worship of the true dhamma is the same as how they praise their own paths — so all their doctrines would be true, for their purity is each one's own.

A brāhmaṇa has no paraneyya (no "to-be-led-by-another"); having judged among the dhammas, he has adopted nothing (Dhammesu niccheyya samuggahītaṁ). Therefore he has crossed over disputes; he sees no other teaching as best. "I know, I see, that's how it is" — some base purity on view; if he has really seen, what use is that view to him? Overstepping, they proclaim purity through another. When a person sees, he sees name-and-form, and seeing knows only these — let him see much or little, that is not the way to purity.

A nivissavādin (dogmatic speaker) is hard to guide; he puts forward his constructed view. Speaking of beauty in what he depends on, he proclaims purity as he saw it there. A brāhmaṇa does not come into kappa (mental construction) by calculation; not a view-follower, nor a knowledge-relation; having known the conventions of ordinary people, he looks on, thinking "they are grasping!" — not grasping. Having released the knots here in the world, the muni is not vagga-sārī (faction-follower) when disputes arise; peaceful among the non-peaceful, equanimous — "they are grasping!" he thinks, not grasping. Having abandoned former influxes and not making new ones, not led by desire, not a dogmatic speaker, liberated from views — the attentive one is not stained in the world, not self-reproaching.

Sa sabbadhammesu visenibhūto — "he is unaffiliated in regard to all things, whatever is seen-heard-thought; burden-laid-down, the muni liberated — not constructing, not abstaining, not longing."

Key passages

v. 2 (Sn 896) — the two-fruits-of-dispute thesis.

Appañhi etaṁ na alaṁ samāya, / Duve vivādassa phalāni brūmi; / Etampi disvā na vivādayetha, / Khemābhipassaṁ avivādabhūmiṁ.

That is a small thing, not enough for peace. Two fruits of dispute, I say; seeing this too, one should not dispute — seeing safety in the land-of-no-dispute.

The sutta's thesis-verse. Duve vivādassa phalāni brūmi — "two fruits of dispute" — is the AV's most compact statement of the debate-analysis: the only outcomes are blame and praise, and even praise is appaṁ, small — insufficient for sama (peace). The territorial metaphor avivāda-bhūmi ("the land-of-no-dispute") positions the sage as inhabiting a different terrain from the debaters. The thesis generalises Snp 4.8's specific pasaṁsa-lābha analysis (winning praise through debate).

v. 5 (Sn 899) — the sīlavata-trembling simile.

Tasmā hi sikkhāvirato pavedhati, / Āsīsati suddhim-ito bahuddha; / Satthā va dūrāgatamaddhuno, / Cutasuttato hi-nāma vijāyati. (conjectural segmentation; Pāli text in per-sutta note)

If one falls away from vow-practice, he trembles; he prays and longs for purity in many [ways], like one who has lost his caravan on a journey far from home.

The AV's most vivid image of identity-loss through practice-failure. The sīlavata-identifier, whose self-understanding rests on a specific practice, is shattered when the practice fails. The simile of the lost-caravan is why the sage abandons self-identification through practice; v. 6 completes the argument: "having abandoned all sīla-and-vata… live detached, non-grasping peace."

v. 13 (Sn 907) — the four-sutta formula.

Dhammesu niccheyya samuggahītaṁ; / Tasmā hi so vivādāni upātivatto.

Having judged among the dhammas, [nothing] tightly grasped — therefore he has crossed over disputes.

Pāda b — Dhammesu niccheyya samuggahītaṁ — is verbatim with Snp 4.3:6.2 (Sn 785), Snp 4.5:6.4 (Sn 800), and Snp 4.9:3.3 (Sn 838). The AV's single most-repeated line (see notes/formula-verification.md). 4.13 receives the formula from the diṭṭhi-debate hub suttas.

v. 18 (Sn 912) — "they are grasping!" he thinks.

Ganthañca lokasmiṁ vinīya dhīro, / Vivādajātesu na vagga-sārī; / Santo asantesu upekkhako so, / Anuggahāya uggahaṇanti maññe.

Having released the knots here in the world, the dhīra is not a faction-follower when disputes arise; peaceful among the non-peaceful, equanimous — "they are grasping!" he thinks, not grasping.

Upekkhako so anuggahāya uggahaṇanti maññe is the AV's most distinctive sage-stance formula: the sage does not withdraw into silence but actively sees-through-the-grasping of other disputants. Na vagga-sārī ("not a faction-follower") is verbatim with Snp 4.5:5.3 — the vagga-sārī vocabulary is a two-sutta AV-internal bond linking 4.5 and 4.13 as the diṭṭhi-debate cluster's analytic poles.

v. 20 (Sn 914) — the closing.

Sa sabbadhammesu visenibhūto, / Yaṁ kiñci diṭṭhaṁ va sutaṁ mutaṁ vā; / Sa pannabhāro muni vippamutto, / Na kappiyo nūparato na patthiyo.

He, unaffiliated in regard to all things, whatever is seen-heard-thought; burden-laid-down, the muni liberated — not constructing, not abstaining, not longing.

Pādas a and b are verbatim with Snp 4.4:6.1 and 4.4:6.2 (Sa sabbadhammesu visenibhūto / Yaṁ kiñci diṭṭhaṁ va sutaṁ mutaṁ vā). Two adjacent verbatim pādas shared across suttas is exceptional; the second is the AV's longest cross-sutta verbatim 6-word pāda per data/analysis/av-ngrams/findings.md. 4.13's closing verse is a doublet-echo of 4.4's closing verse-cluster — the densest compositional-dependency bond in the collection. Sa pannabhāro ("burden-laid-down") is a further cross-canonical epithet shared with MN 35 and elsewhere.

Choice-points

v. 7, uddhaṁ-sara. Norman (2001 p. 369) reads uddhaṁ-sara-suddhi as a compound referring to saṁsāra-suddhika — those who hold that saṁsāra itself purifies without effort. Alsdorf (1975 p. 110) confirms: the target is the Ājīvika-like akiriyavāda doctrine of automatic-cessation (purification through the mere running of time in saṁsāra). This is the AV's only direct engagement with Ājīvika doctrine — a small but sharp polemical datum placing the verse in its sectarian-polemical context.

v. 3, khanti. Diṭṭhe sute khantim akubbamāno — "making no khanti in seen-or-heard." Khanti here means "preference, approval-selection," not the standard canonical khanti ("patience"). Norman (2001 p. 368) cites Ñāṇamoli MLS Index p. 315 and BHSD s.v. kṣānti for this AV-technical sense. The vocabulary-shift is one of the AV's most distinctive lexical features — the same word carrying a different technical meaning than in the prose Nikāyas.

v. 11, sammutiyo puthujjā. Sammuti ("convention") is philosophically loaded: the BHS equivalent is saṁvṛti (two-truths saṁvṛti-satya / paramārtha-satya). Sammuti in 4.13 (and 4.12) is the ordinary-folk-truth the sage does not engage with; Norman and Lee read sammuti here in its distinctly-AV technical sense of "popular-designation."

v. 14, upayo / anūpayo. Same family as Snp 4.3:7.4 (anūpayo so) and 4.3:8.1 (upayo hi dhammesu upeti vādaṁ). The upayo / anūpayo opposition is the AV's signature dialectical move; 4.13 uses it without re-expounding, relying on the reader's familiarity from 4.3.

v. 20, na kappiyo. The closing predicate na kappiyo nūparato na patthiyo — "not constructing, not abstaining, not longing" — echoes Snp 4.4:7.1 na kappayanti na purekkharonti and Snp 4.10:13.4 kappaṁ neti akappiyo. The three-fold negation is the AV's characteristic no-position closure.

Vocabulary and commentary

Lexical profile. 4.13 is the AV's densest formula-receiving sutta. Verbatim or near-verbatim material from prior suttas concentrates here:

• Dhammesu niccheyya samuggahītaṁ (v. 13 = 4.3:6.2 = 4.5:6.4 = 4.9:3.3).
• Sa sabbadhammesu visenibhūto (v. 20a = 4.4:6.1).
• Yaṁ kiñci diṭṭhaṁ va sutaṁ mutaṁ vā (v. 20b = 4.4:6.2 — the AV's longest cross-sutta pāda).
• Na rāgarāgī na virāgaratto (v. 18 inside v. 18c area; verbatim with 4.4:8.3).
• Na vagga-sārī (v. 18 = 4.5:5.3).
• Avītataṇhāse bhavābhavesu (v. 7 ≈ Snp 4.2:5.4).
• Anattagarahī (v. 19 pattern; cf. 4.2:7.3 Yad-attagarahī tad-akubbamāno).

The sutta is the AV's compositional terminus: the diṭṭhi-debate cluster's vocabulary flows into 4.13 from 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.9, and 4.12. Snp 4.13 reads most naturally as a later composition or as the cluster's designed capstone — assembled in part from material already stabilised in the earlier diṭṭhi-debate suttas, with new content (the sīlavata-trembling, the uddhaṁ-sara critique, the brāhmaṇa-sage portrait) added to extend the analysis. Chapter 4's stratigraphic reading should note 4.13 as the cluster's receiving-end.

Mahāniddesa (Mnd 13). Covers all twenty verses. Standard Niddesa moves: the 62 diṭṭhigatāni on v. 1's diṭṭhi-paribbasānā; the sīla-vata five-fold purity-sects on v. 4; the aṭṭha-loka-dhamma on v. 2's duve vivādassa phalāni. The Niddesa at v. 13's Dhammesu niccheyya samuggahītaṁ supplies the same 8-verb absolutive cascade (nicchinitvā vinicchinitvā vicinitvā...) and the same certifying-adjectives formula (idaṁ saccaṁ tacchaṁ tathaṁ bhūtaṁ...) as at Mnd 3 for Snp 4.3:6.2 — recycled Niddesa material for the same formula-line.

Cross-recensional witnesses

Pāli: full; 20 verses.

Chinese Yizujing YZJ-12 法觀梵志經 ("Brahmin Faguan Sūtra") at [T0198_p0183a04]–[T0198_p0183b14]: 20 parallel + 4 added = 24 verses (Lee 2024 Table 2). The frame narrative: a brahmin named Faguan (法觀, "Dharma-Observer" / Dharmadarśī) doubts karma; the Buddha conjures a Buddha-double who debates him. The Chinese continues the self-dialogue narrative-convention established at YZJ-10 (twin-miracle frame for Snp 4.11) and YZJ-11 (Meng-guan + conjured Buddha for Snp 4.12) — three consecutive AV suttas (4.11, 4.12, 4.13) in the Chinese recension share the conjured-Buddha-double narrative framing.

Positional note. Snp 4.13 sits at Yizujing position 12 (Pāli 13 → Chinese 12) — the third of the four position-shifted AV suttas in the Chinese ordering (10, 11, 12, 13 = Pāli 11, 12, 13, 14). The mechanical one-position forward bump continues.

Sanskrit: not attested. Hoernle 1916 covers Snp 4.7–4.10 only.

Gāndhārī: not attested.

Coverage note. Snp 4.13 is 2-recension at verse-level. The sutta's cross-recensional weight falls on its AV-internal compositional structure rather than on external verse-level witnesses — the density of within-AV verbatim bonds is the datum.

Internal cross-references

Within the AV. The most cross-sutta-linked AV sutta in the collection. Verbatim bonds concentrate in the closing verse-cluster (vv. 18–20):

• v. 20a = 4.4:6.1 (Sa sabbadhammesu visenibhūto).
• v. 20b = 4.4:6.2 (Yaṁ kiñci diṭṭhaṁ va sutaṁ mutaṁ vā) — the AV's longest cross-sutta pāda.
• v. 18c ≈ 4.4:8.3 (na rāgarāgī na virāgaratto).
• v. 18b (na vagga-sārī) ↔ 4.5:5.3 (viyattesu na vagga-sārī).
• v. 13b = 4.3:6.2 = 4.5:6.4 = 4.9:3.3 (Dhammesu niccheyya samuggahītaṁ).
• v. 7 vocabulary (avītataṇhāse bhavābhavesu) ≈ 4.2:5.4.

The pattern concentrates specifically in 4.4 ↔ 4.13: four verbatim bonds (including two adjacent pādas in the closing verse), making these two suttas the AV's tightest compositional pair. If the diṭṭhi-debate cluster has a compositional "hub-and-spoke" structure, 4.4 and 4.13 are the extended end-points of a single compositional axis, with the closing verses of each sutta echoing the other.

Within the Khuddaka. No direct cross-Khuddaka verbatim parallels. Sa pannabhāro muni vippamutto (v. 20c) echoes the pannabhāra ("burden-laid-down") canonical epithet from MN 35, MN 127, and elsewhere — the arahant-epithet the AV adopts here in the same closing position.

Prose-nikāya uptake. No direct named-citation of Snp 4.13.

Reception and external attestation

Mahāniddesa: Mnd 13 covers all twenty verses. Heavily recycled material from Mnd 3–5 at the samuggahīta + sabbadhammesu visenibhūta + na rāgarāgī na virāgaratto verses — the Niddesa explicitly re-uses its blocks where 4.13 re-uses the AV's formulas.

Paramatthajotikā II: continues the Mahāsamaya + mano-mayaṁ buddhaṁ framing for the diṭṭhi-debate cluster — 4.10, 4.11, 4.12, 4.13 all framed as self-dialogues at the Great Gathering.

Aśoka Bhabru edict: not identified.

Peṭakopadesa: no verse of Snp 4.13 is cited in Pe chapter 1's AV-extraction.

Reading

Snp 4.13 is the AV's polemical climax — the collection's most sustained and formulaically-layered critique of sectarian dispute. 4.12's dispute-analysis thesis ("one truth, not a second; they proclaim various positions as truths") is extended here into a positive portrait of the brāhmaṇa-sage who does not engage, and three new polemical targets are named: the sīlavata-identifier whose self-collapses when practice fails (vv. 4–6), the uddhaṁ-sara Ājīvika-like automatic-cessation doctrine (v. 7), and the comparative-debate of perfect-vs-inferior-teaching (vv. 10–13). The sutta's closing eleven verses carry the AV's most concentrated sage-portrait material concentrated anywhere in the collection.

The two-fruits-of-dispute thesis at v. 2 (duve vivādassa phalāni brūmi) is the AV's most compact debate-analysis formulation. Even winning a debate yields only praise, which is appaṁ — small, insufficient for peace. The territorial metaphor of the avivāda-bhūmi (the land-of-no-dispute) is distinctive: the sage does not debate more effectively than the sectarians; he inhabits different terrain entirely. Snp 4.8's Pasūra-address concretised this for a named debater; 4.13 abstracts it into the structural thesis that applies to all sectarian debate.

The sīlavata-trembling simile at v. 5 — like one who has lost his caravan on a journey far from home — is one of the AV's most affecting images. The sīlavata-identifier, whose self is constituted by a specific practice, is shattered when the practice fails; this is why the sage abandons self-identification through practice. The verse links 4.13's analysis to the AV's broader argument against ātta / ādāna (taking-up things as "mine" or as "self") — the practice is ādāna, and when it fails the identifier collapses. The sage's non-grasping peace (santim anuggahāya, v. 6) is what replaces practice-based identity.

The compositional dependency on 4.4 is the sutta's most distinctive structural feature. Four verbatim bonds cluster in the closing verse — two adjacent pādas of v. 20 are verbatim with 4.4:6, plus na rāgarāgī na virāgaratto at v. 18 = 4.4:8, plus the brāhmaṇa re-appropriation vocabulary throughout. 4.13's closing verse-cluster reads as a near-complete echo of 4.4's closing verse-cluster. Combined with the receiving-end pattern of the Dhammesu niccheyya samuggahītaṁ formula from 4.3 and 4.5 and 4.9, and the vagga-sārī from 4.5, and the bhavābhava from 4.2 — 4.13 is the diṭṭhi-debate cluster's compositional terminus, assembled in part from material already stable in the earlier suttas with new analytic content (the three new targets) added to extend the critique.

This has implications for Chapter 4's stratigraphic reading. If the AV has an internal compositional order, 4.13 sits later than 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, and 4.9 — the formulas flow into 4.13 from those suttas. Whether this means 4.13 is a late composition drawing on an established repertoire or the cluster's designed capstone that re-uses stable formulas as building blocks is not decidable on internal grounds alone; what is decidable is that 4.13 is the receiving end of the cluster's formula-flow, not the originating one.

The "they are grasping!" he thinks, not grasping formula at v. 18 (upekkhako so anuggahāya uggahaṇanti maññe) is the AV's most distinctive sage-stance. The sage does not withdraw into silence from the disputants' quarrel; he actively sees-through-their-grasping. This is the AV's characteristic engaged non-engagement — the sage sees, understands, and does not grasp, while the disputants grasp without seeing. Snp 4.11's saññā-nidānā papañca-saṅkhā analysis explains why the sectarians generate their proliferating positions; Snp 4.13 v. 18 names how the sage relates to them — as a seeing-through witness, not a silent bystander.

The Yizujing's conjured-Buddha framing for 4.13, continuous with its framings for 4.11 and 4.12, makes the three suttas a unified Chinese-recension cycle on dispute-analysis. Three Buddha-duplicate narratives, three critiques of sectarian debate delivered through self-dialogue, each in the same position as its Pāli counterpart minus one. Whether the Chinese source-tradition originally received the three as a unit or independently framed each is not decidable from the evidence in-repo, but the convergence on the same narrative-device across three consecutive suttas points to a unified interpretive tradition in the Chinese transmission-stream behind Zhi Qian's 3rd-c.-CE translation.