Parimittajāla Sutta is now available in
Pāḷi, English, and Czech language. For commenting:
For printing:
The great master Venerable Webu Sayadaw of Myanmar recommended reciting this Pali discourse for protection and success in life. We know that Venerable Webu Sayadaw, an Arahant, lived a very successful life and passed into Nibbāna.
In addition to reading, you can also listen to the explanation (in Burmese) given by the great master Webu Sayadaw:
In this recording the great master Venerable Webu Sayadaw explains that the Buddhas from the past 99 aeons (Buddha Gotama would have appeared in this, 99th aeon), and even many more, praised reciting this sutta, as it may provide protection from natural disasters and enmity from visible and invisible beings, as well as sudden death, providing long lifespan. It is as powerful as reciting the 84 000 parts of Dhamma Teachings and paying respect to all Buddhas. Gods love the recitors of this discourse and the four protectors of the world (four lokapālā - the Great Four kings: Dhataraṭṭha, the king of gandhabbas, Virūḷhaka, the king of kumbhaṇḍas, Virūpakkha, the king of dragons, and Vessavaṇa, the king of ogres) will protect the recitors. Webu Sayadaw further explains, that reciting this discourse, even just listening to someone else’s reciting of this discourse, brings even larger merit than a donation of all treasures of 100 000 world systems. It is possible to count the waters in the ocean drop by drop, but it is not possible to count the merit of reciting this discourse. Webu Sayadaw then encourages us to recite this discourse.
Note, that even though this discourse is in Pāli language, it is not included in any of the Pāli scriptures, main text, Commentaries, or Subcommentaries approved by the historical Six Buddhist Council. Also, until publishing of this document that you have now freely available to you, this discourse was not at all searchable through Google - even though it is included in Pali and English translation in the book “How to Live as a Good Buddhist, vol.1” by U Han Htay, published in Yangon in 2002, in pages 188-191 and recorded as recited by Webu Sayadaw in YouTube (link given above).
I experienced very interesting unexpected luck and success upon reciting this discourse several times.
May you all be happy and healthy,
Jansen
I wonder if in Myanmar this is called as “sutta.” It seems to me this can only lead to confusion. In Sri Lanka there are all sorts of paracanonical/midievil/classical sets of verses but they would never be referred to as “sutta.” Usually something like this would be called a “paritta” or simply “gatha.”
It’s called sutta, you can check the book How to be a good Buddhist, vol. 1, where it is so called. That book is actually a translation from Burmese. Webu Sayadaw in the video provided also calls it sutta.
Sutta means that venerable Ananda has heard it. Suta means heard, sutta is a thread, i.e., a thread that helps maintain the Buddha’s teachings like a thread that binds a bouquet of flowers helps maintain them together (a simile given by the Buddha in the introductory story called Verañjakaṇḍa of Pārājika Pāḷi). So, if this discourse is important for maintaining the Buddha’s Teachings, then it is rightly called sutta, whether it was taught by the Buddha or not. As we know from the Four Great Standards, if we hear someting as taught by the Buddha (and Parimittajāla Sutta is believed to be taught by the Buddha Himself and even recited during the First Buddhist Council ?!), we are ordered to accept it as the Buddha’s word as long as it is in accordance with the Buddha’s main teachings (described in Gotamī Sutta).
But I guess we all have our own brains and will believe whatever we decide to believe, based on our prior knowledge, customs, social situation, and mental capabilities.
Thanks. I’ve never heard anyone call something a sutta that was not included in the Nikayas. Usually a text will have some sort of provenance, even if the specific author is not known.
I guess my question is simply “by whom?” It’s not an illegitimate question. Has nothing to do with my brain.
I am sorry if my answer did not come out as respectfully as I intended. Not at all, I believe we all have the capacity to understand the truth. At the same time, apart from the Four Noble Truths which are completely comprehended by Arahants, only the Buddha can understand the truth of other things - such as how did Parimittajāla came about and whether or how much is it valuable as an original or at least reliable Buddhist Teaching. In other words, when I was referring to the brain capacity, I did not mean to estimate yours or even mine. The Buddha’s capacity to understand the value and veracity of certain things is unequalled.
No idea where the sutta comes from. Webu Sayadaw would probably argue that it comes directly from the Buddha. It is available in Burmese texts, such as the chanting book Sirimangala Paritta and several other Paritta books published by the Ministry of Religious Affairs in Myanmar. I have quite a good collection of Burmese books, so I looked at the distribution of this sutta among the books I have. I find it in 7 different chanting books, of which publication year ranges from 2015 to 1982. I have it in one chanting book that does not seem to contain its publishing year.
In one book I can see a clear mention, that this sutta was taught by the Buddha himself:
“ဘုရားဟော သုတ်တော်ဖြစ်၍ ဗုဒ္ဓဘာသာဝင် မိသားစုများ ယုံကြည် လေးနက်စွာ ဖြင့် ညစဉ် ဘုရားဝတ်တက် ရွတ်ဆိုသင့်ကြပါသည်။”
My simplified translation would be: “Because it is a sutta (သုတ်) of the Buddha, it would be suitable that families recite (it) while paying respect to the Buddha each night, faithfully and respectfully.”
(The book is “အခြေခံဗုဒ္ဓဘာသာ အိမ်တွင်းသာသနာပြု မိသားစုလက်စွဲ” /A handbook for families that propagate the Buddha’s Teachings at homes as basic Buddhism/, written by မင်းသူရိန် [Min-Thu-Yein], published by ကဝိရတနာစာပေတိုက် [Kawiyadanar Publishing House] in ရန်ကုန်မြို့ [Yangon], in 1985. It has 181 pages and the quote is in page 117.)
Webu Sayadaw lived 1896-1977, so even if he decided to acknowledge this sutta later in his life, it would still be somewhere around mid 20th century. At this moment I am not able to get any older historical record of this sutta being recited or at least known.
Wikipedia contains an article exclusively in Burmese which discusses the origin of this sutta.
According to this article, the famous professor master Venerable Nandamalabhivamsa suggests, that because the sutta is not in Pali Tipitaka, it comes from Mahayana. The equivalent Mahayana sutta is however not given, so I would not rush to assert the sayadaw’s opinion.
I’d love to know from anyone here in this forum any further evidence or clear pointer to the origin or historicity of this “sutta”.
Yeah, that doesn’t seem to be a valid argument. At least on the Sinhala side there are lots of Pali texts that are Theravada but not found in the “canon.”
This text seems almost to be an abbreviated version of the Āṭānātiya sutta. Which could certainly come in handy considering how long the Āṭānātiya is.
(BTW, looks like you have an extra blank page in the pdf)
Hello Sir, thank you for posting this. I will definitely learn this sutta. I wonder if there are more suttas or texts that might not be in the pali canon but might be real. The Visuddhimagga also provides some citations that I can’t find in the pali canon such as breaking a rule as a monk leads to hell or animal realm if it’s not confessed.
This constitutes a deviation from the traditional teachings. The “claims” within a text cannot serve as a standard; this is a ludicrous and empty justification. Even if that were the case, we would have to accept the texts of many other sects. Moreover, a teaching “aligned” with the words of the Buddha does not equate to his actual words.
This reminds me of some attempts by some Mahayanists to pervert the meaning of Buddhavacana and dilute its essence. Given that the undeniable reality of their texts being spurious and fabricated has become a persistent thorn in their side, they resorted to attenuating the traditional Mahayana assertions, justifying that their texts are considered to align with the “Dharma” (in other words, they argue that it remains valid), rather than representing Buddhavacana (the Buddha’s utterance/word) in its literal and authoritative sense.
The matter is similar to what you stated, if you understand where it is heading.
This is not a sutta in the literal sense of the term; it is merely labeled as such.
The Parimittajāla Sutta; this contemporary text and non-canonical is included in the compendium of Burmese protective chants, known as the “Sirimaṅgalaparitta Pāḷi,” specifically as chant number 30. This particular paritta is chiefly utilized by lay practitioners as a potent safeguard against a range of worldly dangers, such as fire, floods, theft, oppressive rulers, and rogue heirs. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that this text does not enjoy widespread endorsement or practice among the scholarly monastic community. Typically, laypersons engage in its recitation twice daily, seeking personal protection and well-being. It is important to observe that this paritta does not hold a place within the Sri Lankan tradition; its usage is primarily confined to the Burmese tradition (It could be said that it forms part of the popular religious custom in Myanmar, something akin to a textual folklore, if such a term is appropriate), with only a limited degree of practice among certain Thai monks.
In the Burmese context, you will encounter this chant in numerous publications, with books bearing texts that resemble its structure and content. While the precise origins of this paritta remain somewhat enigmatic, You may find some details here.
[…] This paritta, i.e. protective chanting, does not appear in the Sinhalese collections of chanting. I have discussed its history with Sayadaw U Vajirapāṇībhivaṃsa. Sayadaw explained to me, that at the time when the Burmese were in war with Thailand, the Burmese people saw Thais how they chant their protective chantings, and inspired by their texts, the Burmese people copied those texts for themselves. The chanting itself doesn’t seem to contradict any Pāḷi scripture in terms of its contents, however we need to consider the beginning – which refers to an actual place and situation during the Buddha’s life. If this sutta is authentic, why wouldn’t it be contained in the main Pāḷi scripture? Sayadaw suggested, that it might be an abridged version for the famous Āṭānāṭiya Sutta of Dīgha Nikāya 32, which contains this information in much expanded form, and also occurred in the Gijjhakūṭa Pabbata (Vultures’ Peak), in Rājagaha. The original Āṭānāṭiya Sutta is very long, and I therefore assume that this is a short, devotional version of the original chanting, prepared to be suitable for lay people, easy to memorize and remember.
Sayadaw U Vajirapāṇībhivaṃsa also told me, that it is not chanted during public occasions, nor is it a favorite chanting of monks. I learned that many scholar monks in fact reject this chanting and do not suggest their disciples to memorize it. However, it is commonly chanted by devoted lay people, once in the morning before leaving home – when going to work, and once again in the evening, before going to bed. The main benefit expected from this chanting is “protection” (there are five worldly dangers to protect oneself from, namely protection from dangers of fire, flood, thieves, kings, and mischievous heirs).
It lacks any historical provenance (Although i see attaching this word to it is a trivial); it is more akin to a local folklore tale. Furthermore, one should be cognizant that spurious texts are prevalent across numerous regions.
It is also worth noting the presence a nother text from the sisters of the first within the Burmese corpus of protective chants, namely the Chādisāpāla Sutta (Sirimaṅgalaparitta no. 28).
For those interested, the text of other chants like this can be found independently, sourced from the Sirimaṅgalaparitta, 1990 edition of Yangon, Myanmar.
What the Sayadaw pointed out is highly reasonable. The supplication for protection from celestial beings is a prominent feature in Mahāyāna, especially within Tibetan and Chinese traditions. The issue is more centered on the infiltrating ideas. I can elaborate on this if needed.
It is unfortunate that a monk of Webu Sayadaw’s stature would recite such a text. Unwittingly, it is derived and fabricated from popular nonsense and has no relation to the canon. I perceive this a relevant example of why one should exercise caution when regarding certain individuals as Arahants. I find it difficult to believe that someone of such profound realization would endorse something like this.
Additional note: Regarding the audio recording of Webu Sayadaw (mentioned by @jansen), this may be useful for those who are not proficient in the Burmese language: Webu Sayadaw: Parimittajāla Sutta
If you read what was mentioned earlier, I don’t think you would approve of something like this.
I believe there is something regarding this matter within the Vinaya. But generally speaking, some citations are derived from the Mūla-Aṭṭhakathā, which was brought to Sri Lanka by the Arahant Ven. Mahinda Thera (which, unfortunately, has been lost). When making any assertions within the commentaries, including the Visuddhimagga, the commentator (in this case, Bhadantācariya Buddhaghosa Thera) explicitly cites the sources from which they were drawn.
Which translation do you rely on? Notes in the margins of the pages gives some informations.
This reminds me of, by way of illustration, if memory serves me correctly, there is a well-known rule for those who fall into hell, particularly concerning monks who accept money (I suppose it is within a sub-commentary). Many morally compromised monks (who do not even deserve this status) really don’t like this, and I think the reasons are clear: notably, they are hypocrites and sinners.
